MS Patent Applications Reveal Search Technology 87
eldavojohn writes, "In the roughly 90 patents they applied for on November 2, 2006, Microsoft reveals that it is apparently pushing its research in the search engine market. There are a few patents that reveal improved ranking methods and document classification but the real interesting ones revolve around linking related queries, optimizing search, identifying results that are spam, and using a Bayesian classifier to measure feedback from the user. If that's not enough, there's even a few I don't quite understand. Another notable Microsoft application for a patent is the model for assisting children in authoring stories so you can't accuse Microsoft of not thinking of the children. Microsoft regularly applies for many patents but never so many revolving around search."
Re: (Score:1)
Unless of course Google patented them first. Here to hoping they did
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Also charge a property tax on the patent (you're holding `property'!) that's proportional to how much the patent is "worth" by the corp's determination (ie: they can claim the patent is worth $1, and pay very little tax, but then they can't sue someone for millions for violation (or cha
Re: (Score:1)
Glancing at the first one quickly (Score:4, Interesting)
it would improve search results for future searchers, but I dunno if I like the idea of my search being tracked.
Not only do my searched probably already get tracked without my knowledge but I might be completely wrong about this patent as I only perused it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even then, Google would have to have access to the server the page is hosted on itself and forward the HTTP_REFERRER environment variable, which 99.9999% of the time won't happen.
Oh, and hey, if you're not willing to let Google know what you're searching for, why are you typing what you're searching for in their search box? At least troll with a good argument.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
then their server is set up to send an HTTP redirect message to your browser whenever you click on that link - you get to the page and don't even notice that your click was logged
yahoo does this all the time (and for whatever reason they redirect between their internal sites multiple times - a redirect inside another redirect.. *shrug*)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm pretty sure they do it for all search results, and they have done it for a long time.
If you search and examine the page source on the results page, you will find that Google actually redirects back to the main page with a '?url=' line, Google does/b> include what appears to be a random session id, and they have done this for quite a while.
They have just done a good job of making it not very obvious, by hiding the URL in a javascript onmousedown() event that returns a URL different from the on
Re: (Score:2)
I just verified this by going to google and doing a random search then right clicking on one of the results and selecting properties. All the search results link are actually links back to google that redirect you on the website in question.
Please check your info before you post, it has taken me longer to post this email than it would have taken you to make sure you weren't posting factually inaccurate drivel.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you looking at the "Google Cache" links?
Re: (Score:1)
OT: the "understand" link (Score:1, Informative)
And being on topic: everybody out there is already logging you, from your ISP, big brother, search engines, advertising sites/outlets, your various cards that give points at stores, you name it, you're being tracked. This is hardly worse. It's not like someone's going to sit there and manually check what you've clicked onto
Re: (Score:1)
Yes they are tracking me. that means that when i buy skippy peanut butter every time i am in there, and they scan my card, i get coupons for skippy peanut butter.
point being: its like targeted advertising
staying on topic: i use google logged in. i don't care. i don't agree with aol released their data the way they did, because it was still personally identifiable. but i don't mind people inside google using my data to bet
MS' search page (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Reason being: to not use Google and support a large company's core-product that gives them their bread and butter of profit.
M$ has got too much cash.
However, using Microsoft search probably doesn't make a difference to them fiscally because it's scarcely used anyway: it's a side product for marketing that doesn't affect me.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That may be. But how many non-false hits were unintentional and thus serving useless search information to someone that just says "whoops, I meant to type in the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I should maybe clarify that. The results put too much weight on blogs and on on-page factors such as keywords in the URL or domain name. This has been a constant theme for MSN search properties. The results are certainly different from Google but they are not better quality.
Re: (Score:2)
I use it quite a bit. I can't tell the difference between MS's results and Google's results, and it's easier to get rid of the advertisements in MS's results.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I use it, although in all honesty, it's about the same as Google search for me. Results are good enough that I'm happy. However, I do like Live Image Search [live.com] far more than Google Image Search [google.com]. Live Image search has infinite scroll (no more clicking Next), the images are more relevant in my experience (try "Al Gore" on Live [live.com] and Google [google.com]), and it lists related people. It also has my favorite
Re: (Score:1)
Also, I failed to understand what you mean by the infinite scroll - at the bottom of the page on both was a link to more pages of pictures. Live Image had five numbers listed and Google had 10
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What browser are you using? I tried it with Firefox 2.0 today and it had infinite scroll. Downlevel browsers will revert to the standard page-by-page view.
Re: (Score:2)
Lately I've been using either wikipedia or a torrent search engine to find most what I am searching for.
Re: (Score:1)
Quite curious what kind of searches you do...
Re: (Score:2)
It's alright. Really, it's as good as google... except that I've been soaked into all the gApps. In fact, it's probably better since all the spam hasn't really hit there yet.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
I decided a couple weeks ago to try live.com after seeing some article about creating your own search engine using macros (haven't tried that yet). But so far, the results are no worse than google's (perhaps because linkfarms and content spamming and such is optimized to work on google? don't know for sure). They seem pretty motivated to improve the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There was no much noise in the introduction of live.com.
Still you can expect them to start eating over 30-40% of the market after IE7 and/or Vista spread wide enough.
Re: (Score:1)
Search Technology Center (Score:2)
Maybe it conincides with the opening of the Search Technology Center [microsoft.com] in China 1 year ago.
Some of the authors of the patent applications are listed as from Beijing, China.
Wow. (Score:1)
Another notable Microsoft application for a patent is the model for "assisting children in authoring stories so you can't accuse Microsoft of not thinking of the children."
This shouldn't be too surprising. (Score:2)
Also, it seems like advances in searching algorithms might be easily applicable to a lot of existing Microsoft products without even going into Google country.
And, hey. Microsoft likes to
Hook `em young (Score:2)
They also design their gui with children in mind, or maybe children design their gui, one or the other
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
They tend to design guis with ease-of-use in mind, especially aiming for the least-common-denominator, which oftentimes happens to be kids. For Joe Non-Techie, it's easier to understand a dog asking questions about searching, than a bunch of tickyboxen with technical descriptions. (Personally, I hate that animated character, but my Grandfather finds it easier to use and makes the computer seem friendlier.
Re: (Score:2)
suuuuuuuure it was 'clippys' fault sir
Microsoft and SIGIR 2006 (Score:2)
Software patents must go, period (Score:5, Insightful)
I decided to post this under EVERY article about software patents, because no matter how good or bad example is, truth usually is that this patent will be never used in it's meant way. Can call me a troll, but after all sharade of Microsoft/Novell deal, after EU/EC fiasco, after all copyright extentions I have enough.
I call for political change in this field. Like it or not, guys, we must fight. And no more arguing that some software patents must be good, otherwise such silly concept would be never put into realisation, right?
And no more buts and "ohhs" and "but lobbies are too strong". I have never seen sysadmins and other IT people marching and protesting about ANY issue. We just wine and cry and when everything is happening in bad way, we all say "I told you so."
Not any more. At least, for me. Let's do it guys. Let's work for a change. You can support fight in Europe (http://swpat.ffii.org/ [ffii.org]) or you can try to build consensus and inform people in your home. Inform people in polite way about the issue, don't force point of view. Describe what consequences are here for all that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In many ways I agree with you because I think the average person feels so powerless in the face of Mega/Giga dollars that companies like Microsoft wield to push through patents in software that to people in the field feel are trivial and obvious.
I am very anti software patents because they are based on maths and logic which should not (IMHO) be patenta
Re: (Score:2)
Patent law is set by Congress.
Imagine your Linux user group showing up every two years to man the phones and install the computers at the campaign of the most friendly candidate. You will get attention like someone with a huge check would get attention. If you're in South Dakota where there are only 425,000 registered voters only a fraction of which turn out, you'll have enough power that your Senators will be oddly passionate about eliminating algorit
Re: (Score:2)
http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/quotes/index.en.html [ffii.org]
Very interesting read even Bill Gates seems to come out in favour of abolishing software patents. Of course that was in 1991. I guess he must have done a 180.
Re: (Score:1)
What are software patents, anyway?
Don't be mistaken, I am a software developer, and I don't like patents. However, I cannot see enough reasons why there must be a clear boundary around software. To take a no-so-good example, ClearType (I know that it was Woz [grc.com] who invented a similar technology more than twenty years ago). It is about sub-pixel font rendering. Is it a software patent? I suppose people will s
Don't teach kids to draw! (Score:2)
That's what computers are for, silly!
That's another way to take on Google... (Score:1)
On the other hand, can trade secrets (I'm thinking Google's algorithms) be used to show prior art without exposing such secrets to the general publ
Charity gone wrong (Score:1)
I mean have no right to prevent people from doing stuff because "you thought of it first", this is the adult way of saying "I saw it first then it's mine"!
I think innovation is screwed in the US.
Down with patents
MS patents = We can't beat Google. (Score:2)
stages (Score:2)
Prior Art (Score:4, Interesting)
What Happening in Microsoft (Score:1)
Why Microsoft can't produce better code than OSS, Google ?
When some one success some where Microsoft respond via Patents, Copyrights and other pesky lawyer methods.
Is Microsoft a software house or what ?
Why any IT Media person doesn't ask this to Ballmer or Gates ?
Re:What Happening in Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean the "look" of the image search site or the content returned? I see very little difference in the content returned. But the look of the site sucks. It's much more data-intensive, and thus slower, even over a broadband connection. And who the hell needs images that expand in an animated manner when you mouse over them or flashy menubars? The only thing that M$N search might have going for it is the search macros feature that allows for the creation of more customized searches. Google, OTOH, is fast and viewable on any (even ancient) browsers. M$N search seems like more bloatware from a company that specializes in it.
-b.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. (Score:1)
Correction to Story (Score:2)
How Many did Google File? (Score:1)
copycats as usual, prior art on slashdot (Score:2)
Btw, since i can document i had the idea first, the patent should not apply to my friggin' projects too. Friggin' patents.
My God, they patented Nanson's method (Score:2)
A unique system and method that facilitates improving the ranking of items is provided. The system and method involve re-ranking decreasing subsets of high ranked items in separate stages. In particular, a basic ranking component can rank a set of items. A subset of the top or high ranking items can be taken and used as a new training set to train a component for improving the ranking among these high ranked documents. This process can be repeated on an arbitrary number of successive high
Re: (Score:2)
NOT non-obvious; I am evolving such a thing, and (Score:2)
This is such bs. (So far from what I am reading), a bunch of techno-mumbo-jumbo used as a wrapper to disguise the obviousness or actual pre-existence of software and hardware that only need cobbling together, not unlike taking a door off the hinges and using it as a snow mobile ski in an emergency and then finding it has real-world application, but is still NOT non-obvi
Re: (Score:1)
"System...forcing query plan" comments. (Score:1)
Oracle implented an ability to embed "hints" within a query that forced the query optimizer to make some basic assumptions (such as requiring that a certain index be used, for example), in the 90's.
Another, less well known database, Ingres (now FOSS), already had a statistical optimizer in the early
Re: (Score:1)