Yesterday, a brand new search engine called Cuil (pronounced "cool") was released to the public. The new search engine is the brainchild of Stanford Professor Tom Costello and former Google architect Anna Patterson (who also happen to be husband and wife).

If you take a look at the features listed on the website, the new search engine seems quite promising. In addition to boasting the world’s largest index of web pages, they introduce the following features into the search realm:

• Drilldown
  Results are displayed along with top-level categories which can be clicked to reveal a list of subcategories
  
• Definitions
  When hovering over a category, the definition of the category is displayed so you know what you are getting
  
• Tabs
  Every set of search results also creates a set of tabs along the top bar to help  you clarify your search
  
• Navigation Suggestions
  Once you begin typing, it provides a list of popular queries, similar to the Google Toolbar’s auto complete functionality.  Certain queries give you results within a webpage (such as Ebay).

So, with all these great features and functionality, is Cuil really going to give Google a run for its money? The answer from the web is a resounding "no." Cuil has gotten a great deal of press, both in traditional media and on the blogosphere, but the general impression is… Google has nothing to worry about. I took some time to run a few queries of my own to see what all the hype (or lack thereof) was all about.

Specific Query: CrossTech Partners Blog

I figured the easiest test would be to find this blog with a straight forward query. Google returned 1,550 results, and showed this blog as the #1 listing. Cuil, on the other hand, returned 1 result, and it was not this page.

General Query: Web 2.0

I think this test would help determine the effectiveness of locating more general information on a topic. In this experiment, Google returned 404M results compared to 18M on Cuil. Both sites returned the Wikipedia entry as top results, which was to be expected. With this search, however, I got to see how some the categorization works (see image), and it is a pretty cool feature. The actual categories were less useful then I had hoped, but showed some potential.

Incorrect Query: Semanticc Web

I’m very surprised the Ex-Googlers would not implement the "did you mean…" feature of Google which allows even the worst (or laziest) spellers to get at the results they want. With the query above, Google immediately asked me if I meant to spell it correctly, and adjusted my results accordingly. Cuil, on the other hand, returned a bunch of pages containing the same misspelling I had entered.

Advantage: Google

So, I think it is pretty obvious from the results above that Cuil has lots of catching up to do if it wants to compete with Google on a serious level. Although it has some really great ideas surrounding the user search experience, the implementation falls short. I will hold off on passing final judgment until Cuil inevitably comes out with version 2.0, but to get me away from Google (which I also use as my RSS aggregator, email, and calendar application) will take some serious convincing.

OpenSearch is a collection of technologies that enhances the search functionality of both websites and search engines by using a standard format for publishing search results. It was developed by A9 (subsidiary of Amazon), and version 1.0 was released in March of 2005.

 For most websites, the coolest piece of this technology is the ability to include your search functionality in the browser's built-in search box.

For anyone reading this article on the CrossTech Partners Blog using IE7 or Firefox 2.0+, you should see the search icon in the upper right corner of your browser lit up. Click the down arrow to reveal the list of choices and you will see our CrossTech Partners Blog listed in the search providers. If you select the CrossTech Partners Blog listing, you can type right into the box and it will send the query to our search engine handler. It will handle requests exactly the same way as the search box we have in the upper right.

Also, if you add our search provider to your list, you will be able to take advantage of our search box no matter what site you are on. This is most useful for search-engine based sites such as Wikipedia, but can be useful for any site that contains searchable information.

Let's take this one step further. Since we now have a standard format for search requests/results, we can build a site that aggregate search results from hundreds of individual website search engines. Take a look at A9.com and you will see an example of how they aggregate multiple search engines into a single page.

With this technology, developers can create sites that search multiple product inventories, article databases, or any other search-based information store.

As trend in the Web 2.0 shifts more and more towards open standards it will allow developers to easily aggregate sources of information, and create more value for their users.