Yahoo! Continues to Defend Index Size

15 comments
Source Title:
Of Course Size Matters!
Story Text:

The debate over Yahoo's index size just won't die will it? Frankly, it bores the shit out of me, but this post by Yahoo's Jeremy Zawodny is worth a look.

It's pretty funny, in that Jeremy is clearly exasperated with the Slashdot "Googlehugging" mentality:

I knew it was going to be one of those days when the NCSA results got linked on Slashdot. As I expected, the slashdot herd jumped for joy at the chance to prove Yahoo wrong and hold Google up as the reigning champ of web search and all things non-evil

He then goes on to point out, as did Tim Mayer here at TW SethF's post refuting the NCSA study's data as outdated, and farcical.

And according to TallTroll here

Right. So you are using 7 year old ideas to measure todays Yahoo? That's the rough equivalent of using Newtons work to check results from a super-collider. Pointless. We've moved on

Jeremy finishes by saying size does indeed matter:

Index size matters, but it's not all that matters. Big index is a necessary but not sufficient condition for getting search right. Good algorithms for finding relevant documents do the heavy lifting required to find the right matches for each query

Personally, i wish they'd all just shut the fuck up about it now, it's boring. Let's move on...

Comments

Looks like both Yahoo! and Google have a bad case

Of Also-Ran-Fear syndrome. If Microsoft could get its pants on straight, they could shake both trees.

Oh well.

Index size matters

and so do fast cars and hot chicks..

Or fast chicks and hot

Or fast chicks and hot cars...

Still sounds like a playground argument. My dad is bigger than your dad. Yeah, well, my dad knows Karate. Yeah, well, he better go get him, cuz he's gonna need help...

Did you *read* the post?

It sounds like not, since you're focusing on size. Did I not clearly enough make the point that size is not the ultimate goal here?

Despite the title, you went

Despite the title, you went to great pains to defend the point.

Did you read it? heh..

>>It sounds like not, since

>>It sounds like not, since you're focusing on size.

from your blog: Of Course Size Matters! and: many people are suddenly crying "size doesn't matter!" and: We all know that number is bullshit anyway, right? and: It seems odd to me that size became irrelevant right about the time that Yahoo! comes out witch a much larger number and: All that aside, how can you argue that size doesn't matter?

Takes you quite awhile to get to: Index size matters, but it's not all that matters.

Which no one gives a rip about, because it has been said before. Many times. In reference to Google long before anyone mentioned it in connection with Yahoo!.

Long-winded way of getting to "my schwartz is bigger than your schwartz, and because it is bigger, it might be better.

And the bone of contention is of course, that Yahoo's index isn't any bigger than Google's, it may be smaller. And still, no one cares, because it is about relevancy and people have been yammering about parity for months now. So why all the discussion about size? Because Yahoo published some numbers that apparently, many people think are suspect.

>>Did I not clearly enough make the point that size is not the ultimate goal here?

Point has been made before. Long before I heard YOU mention it. So now the point is rather backhanded. It's not about size, but ours is bigger. Nanner-nanner and some other playground taunts.

lets be fair

the original Yahoo announcement was fairly tongue in cheek, was only half a para in the middle of a post and we had all been talking about how many more pages seemed to have been indexed for a week.

Yes it's kiddy time, but Yahoo (and even Google I don't think, although some comments suggest they are making a huge deal of it) are not the people blowing this out of proportion - we all commented on it a week or so ago and now Nicks favourite BlogPuppies are making it a big deal.

and I reckon if we worked for Yahoo (or Google) we'd be joining in too.

Yahoo ... are not the people

Quote:
Yahoo ... are not the people blowing this out of proportion

I had the same thought. Google's resounding whine of "is Not!" and then everybody yelling "Fight! Fight!" (cos it is a slow news month) is what is blowing it all out of proportion.

>>Slash dotters

Of course nothing causes a bigger lemming frenzy than a nearby cliff.

Yet...

"Methinks thou does protest too much" applies here.

I don't read /. Trying to find information there is like trying to find fly shit in a pile of pepper.

If Yahoo wants to end the speculation the answer is simple. Publish the protocol they used to determine index size. Pretty easy eh? The protocol for the rebuttal was pathetic.

dam you all

I can't bring myself to defend jeremy zawodny.. :) so i wouldn't I sat with Tim Mayer from yahoo, and after 30 - 45 mins he turned me into a believer.. thats all I'm going to say. I know Tim has done this twice before.. jumped Google in serp size.. with the combination of 3 Search engines .. don't you just think that Yahoo could Pull this off.. I do.

DaveN

lies and damned lies.

lies and damned lies.

shame, yahoo!.

Fight! Fight!

I like that. Wish I'd thought of the comparison.

Darn.

Oh well. There's always the brouhaha over the pseudo-private discussion in the speakers room....

>>and I reckon if we worked

>>and I reckon if we worked for Yahoo (or Google) we'd be joining in too.

Yep! If i worked for either, i'd be milking that for all its worth.

Agree with Brad over Google, but also i think Yahoo! have made it worse by rising to the bait they laid down.

>>Oh well. There's always the brouhaha over the pseudo-private discussion in the speakers room....

We do seem to like a rumble here don't we :)

like trying to find fly shit in a pile of pepper

I love it! DG, can I steal that? Or is it public domain already?

Public Domain

I believe JFK gets the credit for that one.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.