Comments on: Search for “uncle” on Google, and Yahoo shows up… http://www.timpeter.com/blog/2006/01/24/search-for-uncle-on-google-and-yahoo-shows-up/ Interactive marketing and e-commerce strategy blog for the local, mobile, social web Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:23:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: thinks » Blog Archive » Ready for an upgrade? http://www.timpeter.com/blog/2006/01/24/search-for-uncle-on-google-and-yahoo-shows-up/#comment-265 thinks » Blog Archive » Ready for an upgrade? Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:46:55 +0000 http://timpeter.dreamhosters.com/blog/?p=23#comment-265 [...] 2.0 said some nice things about me the other day, so I thought I’d give her some props, too. She’s definitely one [...] […] 2.0 said some nice things about me the other day, so I thought I’d give her some props, too. She’s definitely one […]

]]> By: Tim http://www.timpeter.com/blog/2006/01/24/search-for-uncle-on-google-and-yahoo-shows-up/#comment-24 Tim Fri, 27 Jan 2006 04:59:32 +0000 http://timpeter.dreamhosters.com/blog/?p=23#comment-24 As always, you raise an interesting point here, Anne. I can't take credit for the idea (I heard one conference or another last year), but few companies have ever enjoyed the market capitalization that Google does when the cost incurred by their customers switching to their competition is effectively zero. To your point, anyone can move to another search engine at any time. How do you think Google's shareholders would feel if, for instance, Yahoo suddenly hit upon a better algorithm (or more likely, leveraged the tagging and aggregation inherent in Flickr and del.icio.us) that suddenly drew everyone away from Google? I think the Web has taught us one thing more than ever: Getting to number 1 is one thing; staying there is quite another. As always, you raise an interesting point here, Anne. I can’t take credit for the idea (I heard one conference or another last year), but few companies have ever enjoyed the market capitalization that Google does when the cost incurred by their customers switching to their competition is effectively zero. To your point, anyone can move to another search engine at any time. How do you think Google’s shareholders would feel if, for instance, Yahoo suddenly hit upon a better algorithm (or more likely, leveraged the tagging and aggregation inherent in Flickr and del.icio.us) that suddenly drew everyone away from Google? I think the Web has taught us one thing more than ever: Getting to number 1 is one thing; staying there is quite another.

]]> By: Anne Zelenka http://www.timpeter.com/blog/2006/01/24/search-for-uncle-on-google-and-yahoo-shows-up/#comment-23 Anne Zelenka Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:23:14 +0000 http://timpeter.dreamhosters.com/blog/?p=23#comment-23 I think I overdid the underdoing a bit. There's great value in competing and aiming to be better than everyone else--we get better services and products that way. But deciding to use only "best of breed" services doesn't make sense to me. If the number one offering suits your needs, use it, but if another one fits better, what does it matter whether the company is gunning for number one or not? It's not like use of one particular search engine ties you in and leaves you adrift if that search engine should later go under. Anyway, thanks for the mentions. I'm enjoying your blog too... you have a really nice clean design here. I think I overdid the underdoing a bit. There’s great value in competing and aiming to be better than everyone else–we get better services and products that way. But deciding to use only “best of breed” services doesn’t make sense to me. If the number one offering suits your needs, use it, but if another one fits better, what does it matter whether the company is gunning for number one or not? It’s not like use of one particular search engine ties you in and leaves you adrift if that search engine should later go under.

Anyway, thanks for the mentions. I’m enjoying your blog too… you have a really nice clean design here.

]]>