Random Thoughts – Randocity!

Why Google’s search engine secretly sucks

Posted in Android, botch by commorancy on October 24, 2013

While Google touts its speed in returning results, and indeed the speed is impressive, it’s not the speed that matters. What matters is quality of the results and this is why Google’s search secretly sucks.  Let’s explore.

Google circa 1998

When Google first began in the late 90s, it fumbled to make a significant impact in search. It couldn’t quite figure out how to make searching that much better than what was already in place. From those early days until about 2005 and through many man hours of work, Google’s speed and results have improved. But, those improvements pretty much abruptly ended approximately 2005-2007. You know, right around the time that Android was a twinkle in someone’s eye.  Since then, all we have pretty much seen is stagnation in search technology. Search hasn’t improved in recent years, and even Google acknowledges this because instead of spending time improving search, now Google spends its copious free time creating Android, Gmail, Google Apps, Google Chrome, ChromeOS, Chrome tablets, Google Play, Google Docs, Google Maps, YouTube and the list goes on.  These are diversionary tactics to keep you from seeing just how bad Google search quality really is.

Searching Google Today

While Google’s search technology is still the fastest available and is still better than most other engines, it’s really become stagnant.  So stagnant, in fact, that the quality of the search results really matter very little to Google. For example, I would say that at least 1-2 links out of every search I have performed in the last year is dead.  Basically, it displays results for sites that are either down, sites that lead to placeholder pages or sites that lead to 404 or other unusable content.

I mean, what’s the point in that? I don’t want to look back in time at links that may have had revelance in 1998 or even 2003, I want to find links that are relevant to me today. It’s clear that while Google says they are doing quality optimizations, what they claim and what’s actually coming up in the search results is entirely different. Something about this situation isn’t working.

Dead Links

Really? I mean, come on Google. What’s the point in placing a completely dead link in the top 3 search results? What purpose does that really serve? What this says is that Google has so much cruft and garbage inside their database that’s now becoming dominant during search results. If that’s where we are today, it’s only going to get progressively worse, not better. Note, I’m finding it’s not just one link that’s bad, but several on the same set of results.

This issue is completely preventable. But, it’s going to take automation to fix this. Google needs to scour its indexed links and validate whether or not a site is actually providing the data it’s supposed to be providing. Instead, it appears Google found a page there some years ago, indexed it and that’s the way it has stayed. In reality, this cruft needs to be regularly cleaned out.  If search results had index dates stamped near the results stating when the information was originally indexed, I could simply avoid clicking a link that was last indexed 5 years ago. In fact, with the right UI, I could even request it to include only results that have been indexed in the last 12 months, perhaps even in the last 3 months. Maybe this is there in the ‘advanced search area’? It’s certainly not there in the basic search results.

Fresh Content

By knowing when an indexed link was created in Google and by allowing exclusion of old links, I can then tailor my search results to the most recent and freshest content. Granted, Google should automatically be doing this on my behalf, but they aren’t. Instead, it’s just all manner of random old garbage that gets thrown up in search results… and this is exactly the reason Google’s search secretly sucks.

Can it be fixed? Yes. Will Google ever really fix this? Probably not. It’s not really worth their time at this point. They’re too interested in screwing over SEO, invading privacy in Android and doing other projects unrelated to search.  All of those projects are far more attractive and cool to ever consider spending time doing ugly old janitorial work to clean up the mess they created in the first place. No one likes having to clean up a mess. Cleanup work never involves using cool new technologies, but yet it still has to get done. Unfortunately, this is the very real, very ugly secret why Google’s search sucks. It’s also the secret that Google doesn’t want you to know.

Advertisements
Tagged with: , ,

What’s wrong with Vista / Windows?

Posted in microsoft, tanking, windows by commorancy on July 6, 2009
This post comes from a variety of issues that I’ve had with Vista (specifically Vista 64 Home Premium).  And, chances are, these problems will not be resolved in Windows 7.  Yet, here they are in all their glory.
Memory Leaks
Vista has huge and horrible memory leaks.  After using Vista for a period of time (a week or two without a reboot) and using a variety of memory intensive 3D applications (Daz Studio, Carrara, The Gimp and Poser.. just to name a few), the system’s memory usage goes from 1.69GB to nearly 3GB in usage.  To answer the burning question… yes, I have killed all apps completely and I am comparing empty system to empty system.  Worse, there is no way to recover this memory short of rebooting.  If you had ever wondered why you need to reboot Windows so often, this is the exact reason.  For this reason alone, this is why Windows is not considered ‘stable’ by any stretch and why UNIX outperforms Windows for this reason alone.
Startup and Shutdown
Microsoft plays games with both of these procedures.
On Startup, Microsoft’s engineers have tricked you into thinking the system is functional even when it isn’t.  Basically, once the desktop appears, you think you can begin working.  In reality, even once the desktop appears, you still cannot work.  The system is still in the process of starting up the Windowing interface on top of about 100 background services (on many of which the windowing interface relies).  This trick makes Windows appear snappier to start up than it really is.  In fact, I would prefer it to just ready the system fully, then present the Windowing interface when everything is 100% complete.  I don’t want these tricks.  When I see the windowing interface, I want to know I can begin using it immediately… not before.
On Shutdown, we have other issues.  With Vista, Microsoft Engineers have done something to this process to make it, at times, ridiculously slow.  I have seen 8-15 minute ‘Shutting Down’ screens where the hard drive grinds the entire time.  I’m sorry, but shutdown time is not housekeeping time.  That needs to be done when the system is running.  It should not be done during shutdown procedures.  A shutdown should take no more than about 1-2 minutes to complete flushing buffers to disk and killing all processes.  If it can’t be done in 1-2 minutes, shut the system down anyway as there is nothing that can be done to finish those tasks anyway.
Windows Updates
Microsoft was supposed to eliminate the need to shutdown/reboot for most Windows updates.  For some updates, this is true.  For the majority of Windows updates, this is still not true.  In fact, Microsoft has, once again, made this process multistep and tediously slow in the process.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful that they are now at least verbose in, sort of, what’s going on.. but that doesn’t negate the fact that it’s horribly slow.  The steps now are as follows:
Windows installation process (downloading and installation through the Windows dialog box).  You think it’s over when you..
Restart the system and it goes through finishing Step 2 of this process during shutdown… and then you think it’s over again when
The system starts back up and goes through Step 3 of the update process.
Ok, I’m at a loss.  With Windows XP, we had two steps.  Those first during Windows updater and the second when the system starts back up.   Now with Vista, we have to introduce another step?
Windows Explorer
For whatever reason, Windows Explorer in Vista is horribly broken.  In Window XP, you used to be able to configure your Windows how you liked then lock it in with Tools->Folder Options  and then View->Apply to Folders.  This would lock in exactly how every window should appear (list or icon format, size of icons, etc).  With Windows Vista, this is completely and uterly broken.  This functionality just no longer works.  I’ve tried many many times to lock in a format and Windows just randomly changes the folders back to whatever it feels like doing.
For example, I like my windows to look like this:
Unfortunately, Windows has its down agenda.  If I open a file requester (the standard Vista requester… the one that looks like the above) and I change the view to ANY other folder than this one, it randomly changes folders on the system.  So, I might open the above folder and it will later look like any of these:

This post comes from a variety of issues that I’ve had with Vista (specifically Vista 64 Home Premium).  And, chances are, these problems will not be resolved in Windows 7.  Yet, here they are in all their glory.

Memory Leaks

Vista has huge and horrible memory leaks.  After using Vista for a period of time (a week or two without a reboot) and using a variety of memory intensive 3D applications (Daz Studio, Carrara, The Gimp and Poser.. just to name a few), the system’s memory usage goes from 1.69GB to nearly 3GB in usage.  To answer the burning question… yes, I have killed all apps completely and I am comparing empty system to empty system.  Worse, there is no way to recover this memory short of rebooting.  If you had ever wondered why you need to reboot Windows so often, this is the exact reason.  For this reason alone, this is why Windows is not considered ‘stable’ by any stretch and why UNIX outperforms Windows for this reason alone.

Startup and Shutdown

Microsoft plays games with both of these procedures.

On Startup, Microsoft’s engineers have tricked you into thinking the system is functional even when it isn’t.  Basically, once the desktop appears, you think you can begin working.  In reality, even once the desktop appears, you still cannot work.  The system is still in the process of starting up the Windowing interface on top of about 100 background services (on many of which the windowing interface relies).  This trick makes Windows appear snappier to start up than it really is.  In fact, I would prefer it to just ready the system fully, then present the Windowing interface when everything is 100% complete.  I don’t want these tricks.  When I see the windowing interface, I want to know I can begin using it immediately… not before.

On Shutdown, we have other issues.  With Vista, Microsoft Engineers have done something to this process to make it, at times, ridiculously slow.  I have seen 8-15 minute ‘Shutting Down’ screens where the hard drive grinds the entire time.  I’m sorry, but shutdown time is not housekeeping time.  That needs to be done when the system is running.  It should not be done during shutdown procedures.  A shutdown should take no more than about 1-2 minutes to complete flushing buffers to disk and killing all processes.  If it can’t be done in 1-2 minutes, shut the system down anyway as there is nothing that can be done to finish those tasks anyway.

Windows Updates

Microsoft was supposed to eliminate the need to shutdown/reboot for most Windows updates.  For some updates, this is true.  For the majority of Windows updates, this is still not true.  In fact, Microsoft has, once again, made this process multistep and tediously slow in the process.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful that they are now at least verbose in, sort of, what’s going on.. but that doesn’t negate the fact that it’s horribly slow.  The steps now are as follows:

  1. Windows installation process (downloading and installation through the Windows dialog box).  You think it’s over when you..
  2. Restart the system and it goes through finishing Step 2 of this process during shutdown… and then you think it’s over again when
  3. The system starts back up and goes through Step 3 of the update process.

Ok, I’m at a loss.  With Windows XP, we had two steps.  Those first during Windows updater and the second when the system starts back up.   Now with Vista, we have to introduce another step?

Windows Explorer

For whatever reason, Windows Explorer in Vista is horribly broken.  In Window XP, you used to be able to configure your Windows how you liked then lock it in with Tools->Folder Options  and then View->Apply to Folders.  This would lock in exactly how every window should appear (list or icon format, size of icons, etc).  With Windows Vista, this is completely and utterly broken.  Basically, this functionality simply no longer works.  I’ve tried many many times to lock in a format and Windows just randomly changes the folders back to whatever it feels like doing.

For example, I like my windows to look like this:

Favorite Format

Favorite Format

Unfortunately, Windows has its own agenda.  If I open a file requester (the standard Vista requester… the one that looks like the above) and I change the view to ANY other style than the one above, this change randomly changes other folder views on the system permanently.  So, I might open the above folder and it will later look like any of these:

Format Changed 1

Format Changed 1

Format Changed 2

Format Changed 2

or even

Format Changed 3

Format Changed 3

All of which is highly frustrating.  So, I’ll visit this folder later and see the entire headers have changed, or it’s changed to icon format or some other random format.  Worse, though, is that I’ve specifically changed to the folder to be my favorite format with Tools->Options.  In fact, I’ve gone through this permanent change at least 3-4 times after random changes  have happened and inevitably it changes to some other format later.  Again, highly frustrating.

Access Denied / Enhanced Security

For whatever reason, Microsoft has made shortcuts to certain folders.  Like for example, in your profile directory they have renamed ‘My Documents’ to simply ‘Documents’.  Yet, for whatever reason, Microsoft has created shortcuts that don’t work.  For example, if I click on ‘My Documents’ shortcut, I see ‘Access Denied’.  I don’t get why they would create a shortcut and then prevent it from working.

The only thing the enhanced security has done for Windows users is make it more of a problem to work.  Security goes both ways.  It helps protect you from malicious intent, but it can also get in the way of usability.  Security that ultimately gets in the way, like UAC, has failed to provide adequate security.  In fact, it has gone too far.  UAC is a complete and utter failure.  Combining this with making nearly every security issue tied to the SYSTEM user (with practically zero privileges), makes for stupid and exasperating usability.

Filesystem

To date, Windows still relies heavily and ONLY on NTFS.  Linux has about 5-6 different filesystems to choose from (Reiser, VxFS, XFS, Ext2, Ext3, JFS, BSD and several others).  This allows systems administrators to build an operating system that functions for the application need.  For example, some filesystems perform better for database use than others.   On Windows, you’re stuck with NTFS.  Not only is NTFS non-standard and proprietary (written by Veritas), it also doesn’t perform as well as it should under all conditions.  For database use, this filesystem is only barely acceptable.  It has hidden limits that Microsoft doesn’t publish that will ultimately bite you.  Microsoft wants this to become a pre-eminent datacenter system, but that’s a laugh.  You can’t trust NTFS enough for that.  There are way too many hidden problems in NTFS.  For example, if you hit a random limit, it can easily and swiftly corrupt NTFS’ MFT table (directory table).  Once the MFT table is corrupt, there’s no easy way to repair it other than CHKDSK. Note that CHKDSK is the ONLY tool that can truly and completely fix NTFS issues.  And, even CHKDSK doesn’t always work.  Yes, there are third party tools from Veritas and other companies, but these aren’t necessarily any better than CHKDSK.  Basically, if CHKDSK can’t fix your volume, you have to format and restore.

Note, however, that this isn’t a general Vista issue.  This problem has persisted back to the introduction of NTFS in Windows NT.  But, Microsoft has made no strides to allow or offer better more complete filesystems with better repair tools.  For example, Reiser and EXT3 both offer more complete repair tools than NTFS ever has.

Registry

The registry has got to be one of the most extensive hacks ever placed into any operating system.  This kludge of a database system is so completely botched from a design perspective, that there’s really nothing to say.  Basically, this system needs to be tossed and redesigned.  In fact, Microsoft has a real database system in MSSQL.  There is no reason why the registry is not based on MSSQL rather than that stupid hack of a thing call a hive/SAM.  Whomever decided on this design, well.. let’s just hope they no longer work at Microsoft.

Failure

For the above reasons (and others), Microsoft has completely failed with Windows Vista.  This failure was already in the making, though, when Longhorn was announced ages ago.  In fact, Microsoft had planned even more draconian measures to enable heavy DRM on Windows.  Thankfully, that was removed from Vista.  But, what remains makes Vista so encumbered and exasperating to use, it’s no wonder users are frustrated using Vista.  Combining that with its incredibly large footprint (1.6GB of memory just to boot the OS), and you have a complete loser of an OS.

Windows 7 is a glimmer of hope, but it is still heavily tied to Vista.  If UAC and these stupid SYSTEM user security measures remain, then nothing will really change.  Microsoft needs to take Windows back to the drawing board and decide what is necessary and what isn’t.  Preventing the user from actually using the operating system is not and should not be a core value, let alone part of security.  Yet, here we are.

Microsoft, you need to take a look at the bigger picture.  This is your final chance to get Windows right.  There are plenty of other unencumbered operating systems out there that do not get in the way of desktop computing.  These operating systems are definitely a threat to Microsoft’s continued viability… especially with blundering mistakes like Vista.  Windows will never win any awards for Best Operating System with issues such as these.  Consider Microsoft’s stupid filesystem layout that allows operating system and application files to be thrown all over the hard drive and you’ll begin to understand why Windows continues to fail.

The single reason why Microsoft continues to exist is because users feel compelled to buy this antiquated dog of an operating system strictly due to application support.  If developers would finally and completely jump ship to other more thoughtfully designed operating systems, then Windows would finally wither and die… eventually, this will happen.

%d bloggers like this: