The Mossberg Solution » rank

Web Searches That Really Bear Fruit

Katherine Boehret — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:18:02 +0000

There’s nothing more frustrating than a fruitless Web search — or one that returns results that distract you from your original goal. Search giant Google knows this all too well and realizes that there’s a chance you might switch to another search engine if you get tired of poor results.

This week I tested two free tools that attempt to make your Web searches more relevant by learning from users’ reactions to search results: Google’s SearchWiki and Surf Canyon Inc.’s namesake tool for Web browsers. These two don’t necessarily compete against each other; in fact, they can be used in tandem. But after initially entering a search query, SearchWiki requires additional work on the part of the user that many people may not want to do. Surf Canyon works automatically as you go, sorting results according to real-time user behavior.

[ See post to watch video ]

SearchWiki depends on people to rank their own search results by promoting favored URLs to the top of a screen and knocking others to the bottom. It is available to most people who are logged into a Google account, and these user preferences are remembered if the same searches are performed at other times.

This sorting is done using elegant animation; preferred URLs float to the top of the screen when selected and unwanted results disappear in a magic-trick-like poof when removed. Comments about a link can be typed into a word bubble beside the URL and all comments are available to the public, labeled as posted by “Searcher” unless you create another nickname for yourself. People can also add preferred URLs to a search-results page if, for example, they know a better link about something than those that show up.

Google’s SearchWiki

But who wants to do all this work? Google (GOOG) says your votes don’t influence the way other Google users see search results, nor do they affect your search results if you aren’t logged into Google. You can see the number of votes a URL got from fellow voters, as well as comments made about the URL — but only after you select a link at the bottom of the search-results page. If you promote a URL, you’ll automatically see what other people think about this link.

For your efforts, you’ll create a small collection of results that are saved in your account, sorted by date and time should you ever want to revisit them. This could come in handy in some circumstances, such as if you were researching a topic and you forgot to save Web pages as you went. Google confusingly calls these “SearchWiki notes,” though they really include all of the links you voted on, as well as typed-in notes about links.

SearchWiki is a tough sell because most of us are already trained to surf the Web quickly, skipping ahead and back through links without taking the time to rank those results or comment on them. And it only works with Google searches.

If you like the idea of more personalized Web searches but would like to use other search engines or don’t want to do extra work, you might like Surf Canyon. Once downloaded, this tool displays bull’s-eyes beside certain results to show that Surf Canyon has found additional related hits. Clicking on this bull’s-eye reveals those suggested links, pulled from deeper down in the search results, and these links might have bull’s-eyes of their own. This cascade of data goes on and on as an algorithm studies which of the returned results you do or don’t choose.

You might be deterred from using Surf Canyon because it must be downloaded before it works on Internet Explorer or Firefox. (A version of Surf Canyon for Apple’s (AAPL) Safari browser is due out within a month.) This tool works with Google, Yahoo (YHOO), Microsoft Live Search (MSFT) and Craigslist, and just started working with LexisNexis’s LexisWeb.com legal-search engine.

Surf Canyon might not seem to be doing much at first, but it changes and reflects your preferences as you make them. For example, a search for “Obama dog” originally returned results about how the President-elect and his family are narrowing their search for a puppy. But as I opened more links related specifically to Mr. Obama’s daughters, more results appeared on screen about Sasha and Malia. Each time I hit the browser’s Back button to return to the original search page, Surf Canyon offered a new set of relevant URLs.

I tried looking at Craigslist.com for last-minute inauguration tickets, and one hit listed an inauguration-appropriate dress that someone was giving away free. The Surf Canyon bull’s-eye appeared beside this result, and when I selected it, three more dress listings appeared.

Surf Canyon recently released an option for users who want long-term personalization, found at my.surfcanyon.com. It lets people select sources from which they prefer to receive news, shopping, research, or sports and entertainment results. Individual sites not listed on this page can also be added to a list of sources to use; likewise, sites can be added to a blacklist so results never come from them.

Unlike Google, Surf Canyon doesn’t save your history or usage profile. And if you haven’t created personalized preferences using the link above, it responds solely using your as-they-happen signals, like when you choose one link over another.

Google’s SearchWiki is asking users to do extra work, which may not be practical for many users. But if you do use it, this tool’s personalized, saved results could be a real boon. Surf Canyon worked well for me with multiple search engines, retrieving data from result pages I likely wouldn’t have opened. Either way, your days of futile Web searching are numbered.

Edited By Walter S. Mossberg

Email us at mossbergsolution@wsj.com. Find this and other columns and videos online free at the All Things Digital Web site: http://walt.allthingsd.com

Finding the Right Product Review for You

Katherine Boehret — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:38:02 +0000

Many people are heading into this year’s holiday season with tighter budgets, prompting them to be even more selective with their gift buying. One way to make sure you’re getting the most for your dollar is to search the Web for product reviews. These reviews, usually consisting of ratings systems and comment sections, might give the finicky shopper a helpful glimpse into a real user’s experience with a product.

According to Buzzillions.com reviews, the Canon (CAJ) G9 Powershot camera is ranked No. 3 in its product category.

But reviews don’t always identify their authors’ true motives. One item might be reviewed by a satisfied customer who bought the product, or it could be from someone who designed the product and wants to see it succeed. A review could even be from a manufacturer’s disgruntled employee who wants to see the product fail. Blogs can perpetuate such biased behavior by inviting people to submit reviews without verifying whether or not the members ever used the product.

This week, I tested Buzzillions.com, a free Web site owned by San Francisco-based PowerReviews Inc. that mainly posts reviews from people who have verifiably purchased the product they are appraising, according to retailers’ records. It also organizes reviews in specific categories, allowing users to search according to how they categorize themselves.

For example, someone shopping for sheets can label herself a budget, midrange or high-end shopper. A guy looking for a videogame console could call himself a gaming novice, casual gamer, frequent player or hard-core gamer. And someone on the hunt for the right shampoo could call herself a minimalist, beauty conscious or a product junkie. Selecting one of these profile labels whittles reviews down to only those best suited for the personality of the person buying the product — or perhaps receiving it as a gift.

The secret sauce behind Buzzillions is generated by surveys that over 300 retailers send to consumers. A few weeks after buying a product, consumers receive an email survey with a link to a Buzzillions questionnaire. These surveys ask consumers what they consider to be a product’s pros, cons and best uses, and its ranking according to the site’s best-out-of-five star rating system. And, following the Buzzillions formula, it asks these verified buyers to categorize themselves. Both verified users and unverified users, alike, can write reviews for the site, though verified users’ reviews are more heavily considered in the “Buzzillions Rank” system.

The “Buzzillions Rank” shows a product’s standing in its particular category, based on an algorithm applied to the survey data. This formulated ranking is based on three things: a product’s star rating; the number of reviews it receives; and the reliability of its reviewers.

Though Buzzillions can’t prevent a person from posting multiple reviews on a product, it does search the site for duplicate content and users can notify the site if they doubt a review’s authenticity. This could trigger an investigation by the site that may involve tracking the Internet address of a reviewer, the times and frequency that a person posted reviews or even calling the person in question.

Buzzillions is particularly helpful when it comes to certain categories of reviews. The Electronics category, for example, is so populous that it must be divided into 17 subcategories with numerous smaller groups in each subcategory. This category can also be searched by brand.

But Buzzillions has its flaws. Not all products can be sorted with personality labels. And I found that some items were miscategorized. A “GPS” category included receivers, car navigation systems and wristwatches, but when I tried to narrow these products by selecting the “Automotive GPS” category, individual GPS data loggers and receivers still appeared instead of car-only devices like those from Garmin (GRMN) and TomTom. Buzzillions said it would correct this error, but products placed in the wrong categories could be highly confusing for someone unfamiliar with a product. Other categories, such as Shoes and Clothing, left me disappointed by the low number of represented brands and subcategories (i.e. shoes didn’t separate heels or flats from the pack).

Nothing is sold on Buzzillions.com itself, though the site does link to partner stores. But some product pages listed only one online store where the item could be bought. Buzzillions plans to fix this problem by listing about five to 10 online retailers per product.

People can use the site in two ways: as members, by signing up with an email and password and entering descriptions to create profiles of themselves and what types of products they like; or as unregistered visitors to the site. I tried both methods and found the member recommendations practical because they pointed out products I may not have found as quickly using searches. As a member, you instantly see a list of suggested products according to your profile as well as receive gift suggestions via email. And even using the site without becoming a member worked well, never making me feel like the best bits were only offered to registered members.

I really liked Buzzillions’ ”Review Snapshot,” a small at-a-glance box that lists pros, cons and best uses for a product. This snapshot also shows a product’s Buzzillions Rank, as well as its star ranking compared with the category’s star-ranking average. I saved a lot of time by skimming these concise snapshots rather than opening every review.

Buzzillions recently created a mobile version of its site, mobile.buzzillions.com, which runs on the iPhone’s Web browser and can be used for quick looks at reviews and top-10 lists. The company has plans to release an actual iPhone app that should be available soon via Apple’s (AAPL) App Store.

The more I used Buzzillions, the more I grew to depend on the site’s signature Buzzillions Rank, which is clearly listed on a big, bright-green badge. The top 10 products in each category are distinctly labeled, with the No. 1 item in a category getting a special ribbon. And this ranking held true to its formula and showed a product’s real standing: I often saw an item with a higher star-rating average receive a lower Buzzillions Rank because they had far fewer reviews compared with products with a higher Buzzillions Rank.

Another helpful stat that Buzzillions displays prominently with each review is the date that it was reviewed. I looked at a pair of tennis sneakers with a top-10 Buzzillions Rank, but some of that pair’s reviews were labeled with dates that were too old to be relevant for me. Electronics fans, of course, would care even more about these dates.

All told, Buzzillions does a good job of balancing reviews and culling the most-appropriate reviews for certain people based on personality traits. It currently has more than 3.6 million reviews, but will most likely continue to grow as more people use and rely on it, making it an even more valuable tool for shoppers.

– Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

Email us at mossbergsolution@wsj.com. Find this and other columns and videos online free at the All Things Digital Web site: http://walt.allthingsd.com