In a marketing ploy so draconian and heavy-handed as to be reminiscent of the original XBox launch, Microsoft is now offering to pay-off publishers if they delist their content from Google's indexes.

Sounds crazy, but it's true. Microsoft has approached News Corp and offered to pay them to de-list from Google's search indexes. So you have some idea of how big a deal this is, News Corp owns Fox, the Wall Street Journal, MySpace and dozens of other publishers and news sources around the world. They are the second biggest media group in the world after Disney.

Google have already gone on the record and said that news content isn't a huge money-spinner for them, but it begs the question: how much money is Microsoft willing to throw around?

They have one of the largest cash reserves in the world. And let's face it, content providers drive the Internet. If Microsoft is really this serious about securing a slice of the search pie, you might begin to see 'Bing exclusive' content very soon.

It won't stop with News Corp -- slowly but surely searching for news on Google will become impossible. And then MySpace music pages won't turn up in your searches either. What if they go to the adult content providers...? What if Bing's new slogan becomes 'the only place to find porn on the Internet'? WHAT IF?

[via The Business Insider]

You need a PayPal account, and you have to spend $25, but good until November 25th 2009 you can claim $10 cashback thanks to BING!

The list of participating stores is huge -- Ebay, BestBuy, Barnes & Noble amongst others -- so it shouldn't be a problem finding something to spend $25 on, especially with the holiday season now upon us!

The only 'tricky' thing is you need a Microsoft Live and PayPal account. But most people have one or both of things already, right?

The offer's landing page suggests it's only available to those that received the offer in their email -- but it worked for me, and I didn't receive an email! it could be 'fixed' at any time, so you probably want to go and claim your cashback ASAP.

How much money is Microsoft going to throw around to steal a portion of the lucrative search industry? Perhaps more importantly, as Google and Yahoo fight to keep their large stakes, we users must be ready to mop up the incentives and special offers!

[Thanks to Paul for the tip!]

Google Image Search is already a great way to find images from all corners of the Interwebs, and it just got more interesting with a new way of visualizing results. It's called Image Swirl. Searching for an image with swirl will give you a list of 12 images, and clicking on each one brings up a cluster of related pictures. Picking one of those will spin the wheel around and give you even more to look at.

This new way of exploring images may be more fun than it is useful, but it does definitely deliver the goods. If you're a visual thinker, it's probably a quicker way to browse results than the existing "similar images" link in Google Image Search. The underlying technology for Image Swirl comes from Similar Images and Picasa's face recgonition features. If you want to give Image Swirl a spin (har har) it's available in Google Labs now.

[via Official Google Blog]

Google's autocomplete feature for searches can be pretty useful when you're looking for a common search term. Hey, neat! You don't have to type the whole thing! Sometimes, though, Google's suggestions take a turn for the hilarious or just plain weird. A site called Autocomplete Me collects some of the strangest ones for your amusement. Admittedly, some of these might be offensive, so viewer discretion is advised.

Who knew that searching for "the air s" would show you Monty Python's famous "air speed velocity of an unladen swallow?" I suppose that's not too surprising, but "i like to t" will find you a number of strange results, notabiy "I like to tape my thumbs to my hands and pretend I'm a dinosaur" and "I like to pretend Jesus was a mischievous badger." If you took this site and added Bill Cosby, you'd have a show called "Kids Search for the Darndest Things."

Have any favorite Google autocomplete results of your own? Put them in the comments (and send them to Autocomplete Me, of course).

Google sure seems hung up on the speed of the web these days, and I have to say, I like it. After announcing the SPDY protocol they're working on to speed up page loading time, it has come out that Google is seriously considering using page loading time as a factor when returning search results. This isn't some unsubstantiated rumor, either; it comes from none other than Matt Cutts, the high-profile Google employee who works on Google's web spam team.

Cutts said that the directive to speed up searching comes right from the top, Google's co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. According to Search Engine Land he said they want searching to be as fast as flipping through a magazine.

At first blush it seems counter to Google's accuracy goals to favor fast pages over slow pages when a slow page might be more relevant to a user's search, but I know that I have often not even bothered letting a slow page finish loading when I was busy searching for something specific. If Google can shield me from the slow sites, it will help me find what I'm looking for more quickly.

Of course, now I have to do something about the slowness of my personal blog. But I probably should have long ago.

[Photo by chrisscott]

If you've ever used Google to search for, ahem, "adult" content, you're aware of the site's SafeSearch feature. It filters out questionable content, to the delight of parents and the dismay of porn-seekers. Now there's a new "lock" function for SafeSearch, which keeps your account's settings locked in strict filtering mode until you enter a password and change them. The obvious use here is for parents looking to keep risque material out of view of their kids, but I can also see it being handy to prevent embarrassing search results from accidentally popping up at work.

When SafeSearch is locked, you'll see four extremely conspicuous, very large colored balls in the top right corner of your search results. Google says this is so parents and teachers can tell from across the room whether the lock is still in place, and come over to reset it if it's not. It even works across Google's various languages, so clever kids can't get around it that way. Could they thwart SafeSearch in an even more obvious way, though, by simply logging out of Google? I guess that's where keeping a close eye on the giant colored balls comes in.

If you're confused about how to go about turning the lock on, the very clear video instructions in Google's official blog post will shed some light.

[via AppScout]

Microsoft's Bing search engine is still pretty new. It just launched this summer. But the company is giving the site a minor facelift which includes improved local search results and a deal with Wolfram Alpha that allows Bing to answer some complex questions about math and health-related information.

It looks like the new features are coming in a phased rollout, because I can't seem to access them yet. But the Bing blog has a number of examples, showing the kind of results the search engine can nor provide thanks to Wolfram Alpha's computations. For example, if you search for "BMI Calculator," you'll get boxes to enter your height and weight and Bing will spit out your body mass index. If you ask it for nutritional information for steak or chicken, Bing will return a chart that looks a lot like the nutritional information that you find on food packaging in the US.

Microsoft is also merging MSN Vido and Bing, and adding features to Bing Maps such as the ability to change a route by dragging and dropping the lines on a map (which you can already can with Google Maps and Mapquest).

Over the summer, we told you how Google had enlisted users to test the next generation of its search technology. The new version of search, called Caffeine, might be ready to roll out very soon, according to some evidence dug up by Mashable. The sandbox link - for testing Caffeine - that we gave you back in August no longer works, because "the sandbox has been retired."

It's been replaced with the following announcement:

"Based on the success we've seen, we believe Caffeine is ready for a larger audience. Soon we will activate Caffeine more widely, beginning with one data center. This sandbox is no longer necessary and has been retired, but we appreciate the testing and positive input that webmasters and publishers have given. "

All signs indicate that Caffeine will apparently be arriving soon. The thing is, you might not notice at first when it does. Caffeine's improvements to Google Search are all under-the-hood, focusing on faster, more accurate results. There probably won't be an overhaul of the iconic design of Google's search pages to go along with it.

In exchange for just one search on Bing, Microsoft's new search engine, Microsoft will grant you free WiFi access on hotspots nationwide (but mostly in airports and hotels).

Apparently the offer began in September but perhaps they've been steadily unrolling it across the country as they only just announced it officially yesterday.

It's an interesting approach to marketing, and no doubt not the cheapest one either. But they're reporting good 'engagement rates' well above the usual .1 or .2% and will continue the scheme for the foreseeable future -- so enjoy your free wireless access! (As a juicy, related titbit, and in no way coincidental, Yahoo will be providing free wireless access at Times Square in New York City, for an entire year.)

Whether it's worth Microsoft's money or not may never be known. But one thing's for certain: Microsoft are famous for their brazen and fearless love of loss-leading -- they have the cash to do it, so why not?

And I tell you what... I would switch to Bing if Microsoft paid for my Internet connection. Wouldn't you? Now there's an interesting thought.

[via MediaPost]

There's been talk in journalistic circles for months about News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch's plan to start putting the company's web sites behind a paywall. In other words, you might not be able to access news content from FOX, Sky Network, and dozens of newspapers including The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, Marketwatch, and The Sun, without paying.

The move already strikes some as a bad idea since it could essentially drive potential readers to get their news elsewhere. After all, on the web, information is always just a click away. But theoretically if News Corp can offer readers exclusive content that they won't find anywhere else, loyal readers might be willing to pay up.

OK, so that could work... but Murdoch's latest idea sounds like business suicide: He wants to remove News Corp content from Google's index. In an interview with Sky News Australia, Murdoch said that search engines are essentially stealing News Corp content without paying for it -- and that he plans to remove the corporation's web sites from Google's index.

While Murdoch claims that he doesn't see much value in searchers who often come to web sites without becoming repeat visitors, he's pretty much just plain wrong. Search engines pretty much make the web go round. If Google wasn't the dominant force in search, another company would probably rise to the challenge.

Back when there were only a few hundred web sites worth visiting, it might have been easy to find what you were looking for through old fashioned bookmarks and links. But today users rely heavily on search engines to find information, and web sites rely even more heavily on search engines for traffic and for revenue. Because who's more likely to clickon an ad? Someone who bookmarks your page and comes to it every day and has a pretty good sense of where the ads are on the page and how to ignore them, or someone who was searching for information about cheap automobiles and then came to your auto web site that also happens to have ads for good deals on new and used cars?

Still, Murdoch says he'd rather have fewer people visit his sites, but pay for it. It's possible that Murdoch is bluffing. If not, it should be very interesting to see what happens to News Corp's revenue when the paywall goes up and the sites are removed from Google. If the company winds up making more money than it does today, I'd offer to eat my own hat... you know, if I wore a hat.

You can check out the Sky News interview with Murdoch after the break.

[via The Inquisitr]

MSN.com, Microsoft's search, news and services portal page, hasn't weathered the years well. Tweaking the same basic design for a decade left it far behind the times in terms of design and usability. With today's clean, whitespace-friendly, reimagining of MSN.com, Microsoft ditches the spectre of MSN search and delivers a site that's a little more worthy of showcasing the company's new search hotness, Bing.

A prettier, less cluttered layout and a prominent Bing search bar aren't the only upgrades to the homepage. In a touch that says Microsoft actually knows what year it is after all, you can add your Facebook newsfeed and your Twitter stream to an area on the right side of the page. The news is still there, but it's more customizable, and the layout presents fewer stories at a time than the cluttered old MSN.com did. There's also a local focus, with local weather and a Bing-powered local news widget at the bottom left.

I have to say that, compared to the MSN of old, this new design looks attractive and functional. Speaking of comparisons, though, have a look at our gallery of MSN.com designs since 2001. Looking at how slowly the site changed over the years only underlines how much it just changed overnight.

... but, in true Google fashion, it's less annoying and invasive! Hooray!

Google keeps rolling out the big guns to their search service -- which is good, as people might've been beginning to think that Google has their attention on other things. But no, Google has their attention on everything. Fingers in every pie.

Today, if you're in a subset of Google's users, you can now choose even more ways to display your search results. You've probably noticed that 'More Options' button in the top left corner -- well now, at the bottom of that list, there are now the following options:

• More text -- you can get a good 50-100 words from each page now, without having to click through!
• Images from the page -- this option shows you a couple of images from each search result. I'm sure there's a good use for this, I just haven't worked it out yet.
• Page previews -- the big one! Now you get a little thumbnail showing you what the target page looks like.

And that's about it. Some of you will have none of the above options -- and if you're like me, I have all of the options on my laptop, but only two of them on my desktop. I have no idea why -- I guess they are all being gradually unfurled.

We've covered Invisible Hand, the discreet shopping comparison add on for Firefox, which displays prices on items you are searching on the web. Just in time for Black Friday, the hand has trotted out a new add on which along with other improvements, incorporates Google search results.

Now, you can get your price results in real time so you know you're getting the best deal. My test drive of the hand went smooth, the results loaded up within a second or two and updates were very discreet. This is a real time saver for getting price results.

The add on will be officially released to the Mozilla site within a few weeks, but the first 200 Download Squad readers can download the beta version. Just click on the link below and key in invisibleDLS for the access code.

http://preview.getinvisiblehand.com/

Did you know that 'lyrics' is the most searched term on Google in the last five years? Lyrics! Of all things! Not porn, not news, not even games -- but lyrics. And Google, de facto masters of search, know that there's more to search than merely quality or quantity or veracity -- it's about getting the results, when you want them -- i.e. right now. They call it 'time to result': How long does it take to find what you're looking for? If you search for 'Journey', there's a fairly good chance that you're looking for a Journey video or lyrics, and not a journey-planning site -- and that's what their latest search feature brings you.


You don't even need to know the song title -- if Google can match your lyric fragment against a song, it'll pop up at the top of your search results. Neat.

Google might've been developing this one for some time, but instead of implementing their own library of music and needlessly repeating a vast wealth of data already out there on the Internet, Google have partnered with Pandora, imeem and Rhapsody to give you direct links to the songs and artists you're searching for. Rejoice! No longer are we limited to shoddy-quality live videos on YouTube! But how long will it be before Google sets its sights on the music equivalent of YouTube? Lee called this one a yawner -- but I think this might be the best of Google's newly-released features.

Google Labs has been putting together some great new search technology lately. They just introduced Social Search, and now the Similar Images feature has graduated from Labs and become a permanent part of Google Image Search. When you search for an image, you'll see "find similar images" links below most of the results: clicking it gives you a pretty accurate collection of images of the same subject.

I tested out similar images on some easy stuff (umbrellas) and some tougher stuff (celebrities), and found that it worked really well. Similar Images is good at matching backgrounds, and even manages to find similarly-posed photos if you're searching for an animal or a person. It obviously doesn't do as well when the subject is obscure or abstract, or there aren't a lot of photos of it in the database. In cases like that, it'll be more likely to match your image's color scheme than to find a picture of the same person or thing.

Similar Images isn't made to find identical images hosted on different sites. If you're trying to determine where an image came from, try putting it into TinEye instead.