Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
has become increasingly less productive.

You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
results that satisfied them exactly.

But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
(maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color? Or, all red
cans regardless of material composition? or, kerosene cans as
well as fuel cans? or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)

I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)

On 12/09/2022 09:19 PM, Don Y wrote:
> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
> has become increasingly less productive.
>
> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
> results that satisfied them exactly.
>
> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color? Or, all red
> cans regardless of material composition? or, kerosene cans as
> well as fuel cans? or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>
> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)
>
With the shopping sites it was always a bit of a gamble.
With search engines, it just seems to become gradually fewer
useful results.
I suspect their robots just fail to parse fancier html
just like those non google browsers.

On 2022-12-09 21:19, Don Y wrote:
> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
> has become increasingly less productive.
>
> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
> results that satisfied them exactly.
>
> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color?  Or, all red
> cans regardless of material composition?  or, kerosene cans as
> well as fuel cans?  or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>
> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)
>

I noticed. I don't know if now or always. It is specially a pain when
searching inside Amazon. They do a text string search, not a database
search on tags.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2022 21:51:19 +0100, Johann Klammer
<klammerj@NOSPAM.a1.net> wrote:

>On 12/09/2022 09:19 PM, Don Y wrote:
>> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
>> has become increasingly less productive.
>>
>> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
>> results that satisfied them exactly.
>>
>> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
>> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
>> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color? Or, all red
>> cans regardless of material composition? or, kerosene cans as
>> well as fuel cans? or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>>
>> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
>> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
>> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
>> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)
>>
>With the shopping sites it was always a bit of a gamble.
>With search engines, it just seems to become gradually fewer
>useful results.
>I suspect their robots just fail to parse fancier html
>just like those non google browsers.

Search engines are paid to prioritize results.

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 12:19:51 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
> has become increasingly less productive.

Oh, yeah. I've just spent an hour trying to find application data for
an old Fairchild part, on ON semi's web site (which has no search
function to plug a part number into).

It was easier to find things in the old paper catalogs.

DigiKey categories also useless for this component (1M0380R,
a switchmode jungle chip with onboard power MOS). ON semi has
the data and app notes, but only a Google search was effective in finding any of it.

It seems to me that utility of sites in engineering disciplines lies in their
ability to bypass the eager sales staff and find the nuts-and-bolts size and shape
and function description. Somehow, the web site folk at ON didn't get that message.

Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-12-09 21:19, Don Y wrote:
>> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
>> has become increasingly less productive.
>>
>> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
>> results that satisfied them exactly.
>>
>> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
>> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
>> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color?  Or, all red
>> cans regardless of material composition?  or, kerosene cans as
>> well as fuel cans?  or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>>
>> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
>> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
>> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
>> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)
>>
>
> I noticed. I don't know if now or always. It is specially a pain when
> searching inside Amazon. They do a text string search, not a database
> search on tags.
>

Yah, the utility of search engines peaked in about 2009. Anybody
remember "Google advanced search"? For awhile, that really rocked.

Now, I'm pathetically grateful for a site that recognizes '~' as 'not'.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 15:29:59 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 12:19:51 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
>> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
>> has become increasingly less productive.
>
>Oh, yeah. I've just spent an hour trying to find application data for
>an old Fairchild part, on ON semi's web site (which has no search
>function to plug a part number into).
>
>It was easier to find things in the old paper catalogs.
>
>DigiKey categories also useless for this component (1M0380R,
>a switchmode jungle chip with onboard power MOS). ON semi has
>the data and app notes, but only a Google search was effective in finding any of it.
>
>It seems to me that utility of sites in engineering disciplines lies in their
>ability to bypass the eager sales staff and find the nuts-and-bolts size and shape
>and function description. Somehow, the web site folk at ON didn't get that message.

Maxim, now ADI, simply disappeared discontinued part numbers and data
sheets. They won't admit that they ever made MAX9690.

On 12/9/2022 1:51 PM, Johann Klammer wrote:
> With the shopping sites it was always a bit of a gamble.

You would expect them to throw a few "other" results into
the mix. But, if I search for "BrandX Red Fireplug",
*I* don't want BrandY of *anything*> And, I sure as shit
don't want a firefly or a blue ball!

> With search engines, it just seems to become gradually fewer
> useful results.

Google used to just say "nothing else" and that was it.

DDG seems to want to offer you a full screen of results,
even if they have nothing to do with your search criteria!
("Ah, you live in East Bumfuck... I'll tell you about the
East Bumfuck Fair that will be hosted this weekend!")

> I suspect their robots just fail to parse fancier html
> just like those non google browsers.

On 12/9/2022 1:57 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> I noticed. I don't know if now or always. It is specially a pain when searching
> inside Amazon. They do a text string search, not a database search on tags.

It's the same for all retailers. They seem to just "discount"
your search terms until they come up with something that they
can offer to you.

So, if the first result doesn't meet my criteria, I know the
other *49* won't, either! (and, no, I don't feel like browsing
through them just to see what you want to SELL me... I told you
what I wanted to BUY! Now, I'll look elsewhere...)

On 12/9/2022 4:29 PM, whit3rd wrote:
> On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 12:19:51 PM UTC-8, Don Y wrote:
>> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
>> has become increasingly less productive.
>
> Oh, yeah. I've just spent an hour trying to find application data for
> an old Fairchild part, on ON semi's web site (which has no search
> function to plug a part number into).
>
> It was easier to find things in the old paper catalogs.
>
> DigiKey categories also useless for this component (1M0380R,
> a switchmode jungle chip with onboard power MOS). ON semi has
> the data and app notes, but only a Google search was effective in finding any of it.
>
> It seems to me that utility of sites in engineering disciplines lies in their
> ability to bypass the eager sales staff and find the nuts-and-bolts size and shape
> and function description. Somehow, the web site folk at ON didn't get that message.

They've put this stuff in the hands of "programmers" instead of
"engineers". You know, the sort who expect you to fill in a form
from top to bottom, leaving nothing blank, before they will
ATTEMPT to meet your needs...

(Why do you need my name and address to tell me if you have this
item in stock? And, why is the stock status INCORRECT??)

On 09/12/2022 20:19, Don Y wrote:
> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
> has become increasingly less productive.
>
> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
> results that satisfied them exactly.
>
> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color?  Or, all red
> cans regardless of material composition?  or, kerosene cans as
> well as fuel cans?  or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>
> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)

Prefix keywords important to you with + and ones you want to exclude
with - and it isn't too bad. Except sometimes on Amazon when I end up
with some pretty crazy "matches" for my book searches.

Abe books I sometimes have the same trouble finding good matches but it
is because the vendor has finger trouble with the title and so different
methods of searching brings up different combinations of books that
really do have the same title but due to vendor typos are missed by
looking with the correct spelling.

I also ran into a vendor with a book I wanted but with a 1* rating.
I thought the price looked too good to be true.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 12/10/2022 5:16 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 09/12/2022 20:19, Don Y wrote:
>> Lately, it seems like every search (google, DDG, retailers, etc.)
>> has become increasingly less productive.
>>
>> You'd think being EXPLICIT in your criteria would give you
>> results that satisfied them exactly.
>>
>> But, it seems like folks want to offer you lots of OTHER options,
>> perhaps in the belief that you don't REALLY want a "red metal gas can"
>> (maybe you want ALL gas cans, regardless of color?  Or, all red
>> cans regardless of material composition?  or, kerosene cans as
>> well as fuel cans?  or, anything that happens to be RED? ...)
>>
>> I've adopted the strategy that the first result that doesn't
>> match ALL of my criteria represents the point at which the
>> search is deliberately ignoring my specific request -- and,
>> I should "move on" (to another vendor's site, etc.)
>
> Prefix keywords important to you with + and ones you want to exclude with - and
> it isn't too bad. Except sometimes on Amazon when I end up with some pretty
> crazy "matches" for my book searches.

I've tried quoting phrases, +-, picking different search terms, etc.

For retail purchasing, the major search engines seem to be reliant
on the results that the retailers' search engines produce. E.g.,
go to retailer X and search for "very specific item", get ambiguous
results. And, notice google/DDG effectively returns that same
"ambiguous" page.

> Abe books I sometimes have the same trouble finding good matches but it is
> because the vendor has finger trouble with the title and so different methods
> of searching brings up different combinations of books that really do have the
> same title but due to vendor typos are missed by looking with the correct
> spelling.
>
> I also ran into a vendor with a book I wanted but with a 1* rating.
> I thought the price looked too good to be true.

Or, results that claim to show "in stock" yet a physical examination
of the shelves shows none to be found!

Or, in-store pricing advertised on-line that is considerably lower
than the actual markings in the store.

I.e., as the value of search declines, the value of on-line shopping
diminishes. "If I have to drive to the store to verify the price
and availability, then what value the time I spent researching this
ahead of time?"

I was looking for a cheap furniture blanket and saw HF advertising
something that would work. $3.99. Plenty in stock. Drive the
7 miles to the store only to see the spot for the blankets EMPTY and
carrying a $5.99 label!

Drive to Joann's (craft store) and search through their fabric
remnants for something that's the correct size. Pay a bit more,
get a better selection, AND, *have* the item in a fixed timeframe!