Prev: Mud Wrestling Mother's Day '10
Next: "SpaceShipTwo could be single stage to SUBorbit"
From: Robert Clark on 10 May 2010 13:08
The take over by Google of the Usenet archive was first seen as a
godsend. However, its horrendous search function on past and current
Usenet posts has lead many Usenet readers to wish Google would just
give up the job to someone who actually wants to do it.
Google claims they are working to improve the search function:

Google’s Abandoned Library of 700 Million Titles (UPDATED)
* By Kevin Poulsen
* October 7, 2009
* 12:34 pm
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/10/usenet/

Google Begins Fixing Usenet Archive.
* By Kevin Poulsen Email Author
* October 8, 2009
* 1:53 pm
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/10/usenet_fix/

But the length of time the search function has been this bad does not
inspire confidence they will fix it anytime soon.
Another example of why someone having an monopoly is a bad thing.



Bob Clark
From: dlzc on 10 May 2010 13:52
Dear Robert Clark:

On May 10, 10:08 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>  The take over by Google of the Usenet archive was
> first seen as a godsend. However, its horrendous
> search function on past and current Usenet posts
> has lead many Usenet readers to wish Google
> would just give up the job to someone who actually
> wants to do it.

It works fine from their "Advanced Search" dialog screen.
http://groups.google.com/groups/advanced_search?sitesearch=groups.google.com

It is the asymmetric search interfaces, and search performance /
behavior, that is maddening.

David A. Smith
From: Robert Clark on 10 May 2010 14:44
On May 10, 1:52 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> Dear Robert Clark:
>
> On May 10, 10:08 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >  The take over by Google of the Usenet archive was
> > first seen as a godsend. However, its horrendous
> > search function on past and current Usenet posts
> > has lead many Usenet readers to wish Google
> > would just give up the job to someone who actually
> > wants to do it.
>
> It works fine from their "Advanced Search" dialog screen.http://groups.google.com/groups/advanced_search?sitesearch=groups.goo...
>
> It is the asymmetric search interfaces, and search performance /
> behavior, that is maddening.
>
> David A. Smith


I haven't found that to be so. For instance I searched using the
Advanced Search for the word "bimese" restricting the search to this
year and got no results. I however I did send a post to
sci.space.policy discussing this idea on May 4th:

Newsgroups: sci.space.policy, sci.astro, sci.physics,
sci.space.history
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 10:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: A kerosene-fueled X-33 as a single stage to orbit vehicle
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/msg/eea2c9e8aaf61151?hl=en


Bob Clark
From: Martin Brown on 11 May 2010 03:11
dlzc wrote:
> Dear Robert Clark:
>
> On May 10, 10:08 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The take over by Google of the Usenet archive was
>> first seen as a godsend. However, its horrendous
>> search function on past and current Usenet posts
>> has lead many Usenet readers to wish Google
>> would just give up the job to someone who actually
>> wants to do it.
>
> It works fine from their "Advanced Search" dialog screen.
> http://groups.google.com/groups/advanced_search?sitesearch=groups.google.com
>
> It is the asymmetric search interfaces, and search performance /
> behavior, that is maddening.


Advanced dialogue screen doesn't exactly work fine. If you select search
on a specific author and date range it generates a command line syntax
that is usually invalid if you return to advanced search. eg

author:Martin author:Brown

mutates to

g:authorBrown author:Martin

and Google helpfully offers to "correct" it to

g:arthur Brown author:Martin

And under some circumstances - I think on the first search in a session
where no results are returned the date range is reset to current.

I have not seen it fail on modern posts by keyword at all.
I blame user error.

Regards,
Martin Brown
From: Robert Clark on 11 May 2010 08:42
On May 11, 3:11 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
....
>
> And under some circumstances - I think on the first search in a session
> where no results are returned the date range is reset to current.
>
> I have not seen it fail on modern posts by keyword at all.
> I blame user error.
>
> Regards,
> Martin Brown

Do the search yourself:

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=bimese&btnG=Search&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=2010&as_maxd=11&as_maxm=5&as_maxy=2010&as_drrb=b&sitesearch=groups.google.com


Bob Clark
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Mud Wrestling Mother's Day '10
Next: "SpaceShipTwo could be single stage to SUBorbit"