useless searchengines

by babo_mann Mar 12, 2015 10:30AM PDT

Hi
i tried to discuss the following topic on several german forums but it seems that nobody understands what i am talking about.
So please read till the end.
The point:
I was searching for ways to solve a problem. Since there are many ways to solve a problem i decided to read through the results.
But i couldn't because google cut the remaining 40 thousand off. (after 250 results)
So i did a little test with several searchengines with the search term: eclipse c++
Every searchengine (yahoo,bing,google....) stated that they have found more that 2 million results
but after i started clicking through the results the resultlist stopped/ended after 330 results.
(like saying "we have 2 million results but we show you only 330")
I remember that in the past (8 years ago ?) i could throw every searchterm at them and they would let me click to the 1.000.000th result in the search-result-list.
So if there aren't any special hidden settings in the usual serchengines to relase the full potential of them
my question is simple
Is there a serchengine that does not cut away the searchresults ?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -

I bet you want a ruiling on search neutrality.

by r. proffitt Former Forum moderator Mar 12, 2015 10:50AM PDT

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-search/ covers many factors here. And in short, no company is going to open their collection to such use. If you must have this you may have to make your own robot to collect the web pages to search using your own collection.

The companies changed. You may have to as well.
Bob

- Collapse -

More on Google's Scholar.

by r. proffitt Former Forum moderator Mar 12, 2015 11:11AM PDT

"While Google does not publish the size of Google Scholar's database, third-party researchers estimated it to contain roughly 160 million documents as of May 2014[1] and an earlier statistical estimate published in PLOS ONE using Mark and recapture of approximately 100 million in english.[2] The PLOS ONE paper also estimated that Scholar was missing nearly a fifth of what was available.

Google Scholar is similar in function to the freely available CiteSeerX and getCITED. It also resembles the subscription-based tools, Elsevier's Scopus and Thomson ISI's Web of Science."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Scholar

I get the feeling you want a return to the old days and access to those paid databases.
Bob

- Collapse -

Thank you

by babo_mann Mar 12, 2015 10:27PM PDT

It seems that the term search neutrality is the issue.

But it would not matter if the serchengines would deliver what they promise.

e.g. If all of the 9.120.000 results for 'eclipse c++' would be viewable.

- Collapse -

My conclusion

by babo_mann Mar 12, 2015 11:03PM PDT

I've just read a great article.
http://www.salon.com/2014/10/12/google_makes_us_all_dumber_the_neuroscience_of_search_engines/

There is a great sentence inside:
'A great question should launch a journey of exploration'

I guess that this is what i am seeking for and that this is my habit from the old days.

OK thank you. Finally i found my answer

BTW: I asked google support how to see the 1 millionth result.
Basicaly they answered ****

- Collapse -

The rise and fall of search results.

by r. proffitt Former Forum moderator Mar 13, 2015 12:53AM PDT

At first you had to hit up the books where you could to collect your source for your research. Then the rise of the web. Then as folk ripped off search engines they search providers closed it back down.

The rise of the free web content is now in decline moving back to paid search which can really irritate some.

https://www.google.com/#q=how+to+download+wikipedia finds you could collect that, and you could build your own web crawler but that may be more than what many would go for.

Duckduckgo did that and it started it's own competitor to google, ask, etc.
Bob

useless searchengines

CNET Forums

Other Forums

Forum Info