<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cuil &#8211; the New Search Engine &#8211; Issues</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/</link>
	<description>from technology to family life (and lots in between)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:48:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karlonia - Quotes About Power</title>
		<link>http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/comment-page-1/#comment-2045</link>
		<dc:creator>Karlonia - Quotes About Power</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:09:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/?p=189#comment-2045</guid>
		<description>Apparently Cuil was not quite ready for launch during the first day or two - many medium long tail queries did not return results at all, and even general queries returned way fewer results than they should have considering Cuil&#039;s claims of having indexed so many pages already. They did improve somewhat afterward, however, and seem to be picking up more results and increasing relevance as more people have been testing out the engine. 

In the long run, I hope they get things together and perform well enough to compete with the major search engines and then maybe do some advertising. I would like to see more serious competitors to Google in order to hold their power in check and encourage more transparency overall.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently Cuil was not quite ready for launch during the first day or two &#8211; many medium long tail queries did not return results at all, and even general queries returned way fewer results than they should have considering Cuil&#8217;s claims of having indexed so many pages already. They did improve somewhat afterward, however, and seem to be picking up more results and increasing relevance as more people have been testing out the engine. </p>
<p>In the long run, I hope they get things together and perform well enough to compete with the major search engines and then maybe do some advertising. I would like to see more serious competitors to Google in order to hold their power in check and encourage more transparency overall.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Natali</title>
		<link>http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/comment-page-1/#comment-2044</link>
		<dc:creator>Natali</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:12:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/?p=189#comment-2044</guid>
		<description>The new visual search engine already exists, it is only for kids))
http://www.aga-kids.com/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new visual search engine already exists, it is only for kids))<br />
<a href="http://www.aga-kids.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.aga-kids.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Schellack</title>
		<link>http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/comment-page-1/#comment-2043</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Schellack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/?p=189#comment-2043</guid>
		<description>Six results on the first page for one site does sound a bit excessive :-).
I&#039;ve noticed, too, that I&#039;m not the only one seeing problems with Cuil.  Time&#039;s web site has a &lt;a href=&quot;http://time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1827331,00.html?imw=Y&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;decent article&lt;/a&gt; about it, also explaining the source for at least some of the hype behind the new search engine</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Six results on the first page for one site does sound a bit excessive <img src='http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> .<br />
I&#8217;ve noticed, too, that I&#8217;m not the only one seeing problems with Cuil.  Time&#8217;s web site has a <a href="http://time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1827331,00.html?imw=Y" rel="nofollow">decent article</a> about it, also explaining the source for at least some of the hype behind the new search engine</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Esoomllub</title>
		<link>http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/2008/07/29/cuil-the_new_search_engine-issues/comment-page-1/#comment-2042</link>
		<dc:creator>Esoomllub</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:32:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schellack.net/jonathan/?p=189#comment-2042</guid>
		<description>I checked out Cuil and most of the same reactions as you.  I need to dig around it a little more to see all of the features (I actually prefer a more textual result).  For one of my primary traffic sites it was great... 6 results on the first page alone, although even I thought that a little excessive.  If I can just get 60% of the search market to use Cuil, then that site will rock and roll!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I checked out Cuil and most of the same reactions as you.  I need to dig around it a little more to see all of the features (I actually prefer a more textual result).  For one of my primary traffic sites it was great&#8230; 6 results on the first page alone, although even I thought that a little excessive.  If I can just get 60% of the search market to use Cuil, then that site will rock and roll!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
