tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6569681.post114322489555011215..comments2024-01-15T13:17:33.771-08:00Comments on Geeking with Greg: Search as a matching engineGreg Lindenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09216403000599463072noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6569681.post-1143739386525266532006-03-30T09:23:00.000-08:002006-03-30T09:23:00.000-08:00Just to be that constant thorn.. I mean.. reminder...Just to be that constant thorn.. I mean.. reminder..<BR/><BR/>Instead of personalizing the actual results, based on past behavior, the engine could also personalize the tools it offers to the user...both the type and the content of the tools. Again, just part of my mantra about personalization being great.. but personalization without user feedback being dangerous.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, the WSJ has a piece today about Ask's new tools. And the <A HREF="http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114367958939011763-7gXlBH7n4a2aoUllWZIDJWLsuqQ_20070329.html?mod=blogs" REL="nofollow">review is quite positive</A>. Oh, and I'm sure you saw the new <A HREF="http://battellemedia.com/archives/002448.php" REL="nofollow">Google jobs</A>. While only a minor tool, Google goes beyond the typical single text field input box, with a 2-3 word query, and instead opts for something with a little more user control: a series of boxes, some with pull-down menues. They could have easily just used a single text field, and parsed it out and/or "personalized" user intentionality, the way they do with Google maps. But nope. They chose to go with a more complicated tool. Not much more complicated. But a query refinement tool nonetheless.<BR/><BR/>Anyway.. < /soapbox>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com