Google is more of an avertising company than a search engine (at least considering the last few years.) Once they figure out more viable ways to sell advertising outside of traditional methods, they will let their search engine burn in hell. They are trying to go into print and radio advertising and even though they have not had much success yet, they have lots of time and money to find it. Also, it is widely speculated that the future of online media is video and Google had the largest market share after their YouTube acquisition. Once they figure out a way to extract the content of the videos and plaster contextual advertising all over them, they will contibue to lead. Video is something that Wiki-search won't do. Did I also mention that Google is in the process of scanning all books they can find? Can a Wiki come anywhere close to such large amount of information? Not likely. Hmm, I guess Google's search engine will be around for a long time still. Cheers!
guys stop the crap....wiki taking over google? wiki depends on google for most of its traffic....wiki has to ask for funds to stay alive...please...the reason why google rose to the number 1 search engine is because they have unbiased results...how can a human edit search engine beat google??? how are they going to decide who is number 1?
it would be interesting to know how much wiki was worth if it weren't nonprofit, I've seen Jimbo Wales quoted as saying that was the dumbest and the smartest thing he ever did. (maybe the smartest because that is the reason for its success?)
It is worth nothing. The day wiki makes a proffit will be the day content publishers line up in a queue to kick wiki. Many people have constantly complained (espically authors) of getting ripped off by wikipedia, people "google" for information and then copy/paste it onto wiki and "wiki fy" it. Wiki is "biased" and is authored by teenagers. Encylopedia Britanica is authored by a review board, with written permission from original authors. And please dont give me this crap about "britanica has as many errors as wikipedia" blah blah blah. An acedemic will not trust a master thesis baised on wikipedia articles no matter how many you cross reference. Besides why do we need wiki? Google indexes what we write on the internet, just like whats written on wikipedia. Not only that your not limited to one perspective but thousands of them, google provides access to forums with debate, blogs with articles about the topic, pod casts, videos of thoes subjects and pictures. The only reason to have wikipedia is that many people have read these articles and journalize them into a center database. Long live semantic web which has the ability to do just that automatically from thousands of already existing articles on the internet. So, wikiseek will never be a good search engine. Also how can you justify saying the search engine of a single website is better than having access to millions of other websites? Besides theres nothing interesting or different in wikiseek, they could of saved themselves the bother by making a google co-op search engine for wikipedia which ranks articles far better wikiseek. Pierce
I agree, that most of the content on wiki is copied from everywhere(or just original content rewrote by a hack writer losing relevant details and bungling facts), and I think its quite refreshing to see someone else who doesn't think wiki is the end all be of all websites.
Also, wikiseek is only for wikipedia itself or sites mentioned in wikipedia. It's not for any other website. So don't think it'll ever overtake google or any other search engine. Even doubt that it'll become something that a lot of people will use.
I can't even remember the silly name for the Wiki Search Engine - that's how well it's going to do. Pete
Diether is right...wikiseek is only a search engine for wikipedia content, so they're not even on the same playing field. The only reason why wikipedia grew so big is because of Google. Google is the king of search, and the only one that seems to show unbiased results. All the other search engines are too damn busy worrying about money and competition to get good results. My $.02
If this was true then DMOZ would be the top of the hill. True they don't have a SE but everything is human edited. It was hot for a while and everyone wanted it the directory, but how long has it been down( may be back up now) and nothing has really changed as a result. I don't see Googel going any where as a result of Wiki Search. Wiki Search will be useful, but I don't tihnk it will be everything. Plus lets think about something. Why is Wiki so popular anyway. Is it because its just great or is it because Google gives it top spots for a lot of Searches. One tweak of Google's index would totally take Wiki out of the public eye.
2 thing. 1> Yahoo is DEFINATLY not dead at all in anyway shape or form. 2>Do you work for wiki as it seems that way
Rubbish! There's not one search engine within a million miles of providing quality results and referrals that Google provides. MSN & Yahoo are a waste of time, with their pathetic attempt at a search engine.
I don't think google's search engine will be "shut down" or over-powered or anything like that soon. Google is one of the most used search engines, and people won't just stop using it just because there's a new Human-edited search engine coming out soon. However, I do beleive that Google just being known as a search engine to regular everyday people is numbered.
acually google is advancing and is going to stay around for a long time Google teams with scientists building telescope to get real-time space images that they will be offering to there search