Environmental Scan for a Search Engine - Essay Example

Executive Summary The found out that it was viable to market this search engine in the niche market of retrieving on-line services. Majority of the current search engines in the market make use of the key word technology to retrieve information and data from the web. This is time consuming and confusing to the user. Users currently search for documents and services on line using the same technology. This is because there are very few search engines that are specialising in retrieving web services using the semantic technology. The company’s search engine can make in roads in this market and create a niche. However, the management should be aware of some of the shortcomings of semantic technique: it is limited in its data content, it can not be used for navigating the website and it is complicated for beginners. Means for Searching Services on the Web Currently in Use Currently, many people make use of search engines to retrieve and search for data on the internet. There are over fifty search engines that are available to the user worldwide. Some of the search engines are regional while others are universal. For example, Google, Yahoo Search and MSN are some of the global search engines. These search engines came to the market at the start of the last decade of the twentieth century. Following are some of the search engines that are currently in use: Google Search Engine It is an immense search engine (Takakuwa, 2004: 23). It is claimed to be one of the biggest search engines that is currently available to web browsers. Levene (2006: 123) is of the view that Google uses the PageRank system to display the information that the user is searching for. This type of page ranking is named after one of the pioneers, Larry Page. This technology gives the user the pages that closely resemble what he is looking for (Takakuwa, 2004: 100). The page with the highest similarity is ranked at the top. This search engine is effective as far as giving the user a multitude of hits that closely resemble what he is searching for. It can be used to search for books, blogs, images, patents amongst others (Takakuwa, 2004: 100). It also links the user to other sites that are relevant. Yahoo! Search Engine Though not as big as Google, it has an excess of twenty billion “web objects” (Thurow, 2007: 23). It gives the user shortcuts to the relevant site that he is looking for (Thurow, 2007: 23). The results are ranked using the Automatic AND technique. Efficacy of these Engines Apart from the two above, there are many other services such as Exalead, MSN and a host of others. The current search engines have some efficacies based on their size of database, search capabilities and display of results. The efficacy of Google and Yahoo! Search is based on the fact that their data is current. They display the most current results (Notess, 2009: 456). Another efficacy is the massive size of their database. Their page ranking is also another of their efficacy attributes. They rank the pages either by relevancy or popularity (levinkind, 2008: 25). These are some of the things that the company should consider in their bid to market this search engine. What is the size of the data base? How relevant are the materials available? How are the pages ranked? Do users use the Same Means to Search for Web Services as they Search for Web Documents? Researches have shown that many people use the same technique to search for services offered on-line as they do documents (Glossbrenner, 2005: 234). For example, many people use Google search engine to retrieve services that are offered on-line. They go to the search option tab, then they type the kind of search that they want to conduct, may it be service or document (Thurow, 2007: 34). This is an opportunity for the search engine been marketed by this company. There is a possibility of specialising in providing a search engine to retrieve services from the web. Currently, very few search engines specialise in this. What are the Current Semantic Search Technologies in Use? The importance of semantic search technology is to come up with the most relevant of data (Glossbrenner, 2005: 123). This makes sure that the user’s query is not ambiguous and as a result, the texts that the website will come up with will be very clear and relevant. The shortcoming of most contemporary search engines is that they come up with tonnes of responses that the user has to shift through in order to get what he wants (Kent, 2006: 356). This is what semantics try to avoid. One such search engine is The SHOE Search Engine. This engine utilises the “XML-like tags” and “advanced artificial intelligence technology” (Notess, 2009: 178). This is as opposed to contemporary search engines that make use of key words. Semantic Technology Approaches The user picks an ontology that he wants to search on. This may be provided on the search site in form of a “pull-down list” (Thurow, 2007: 234). The user then picks the category that encompasses the topic he is looking for. He uses the select key to have a look at some of the properties available. After this, the user is expected to “enter the terms of the query” (Thurow, 2007: 23). This restricts the search that is going to be carried out. The user then taps on the query key and the results are displayed. This is done just after the list of categories and properties of the search. The user then clicks on the web pages provided to view them. In the case of retrieving a service, for example using this company’s search engine, the user picks ontology, like “health services”. Then he chooses the category that best describes the form of his query, for example “cancer health services”. Using the select button, a litany of properties associated with the term is displayed. The user then keys in his query terms. At the end of the process, the site displays the exact locations that the user should access to get the exact service that he wanted. In case of cancer drugs, the site will direct him to the best location that he can access drugs for the type of cancer he has. Strengths of this Technology The most obvious strength is disambiguation (Rundolf, 2008: 289). This makes sure that words with more than one meaning are broken down to the intended meaning. Another strength is that data provided is exact and relevant. The user is not directed to blind links and sources that are irrelevant. This saves time on the part of the person searching. Weaknesses It may be too hard for some users to follow all those steps (Rundolf, 2008: 290). As a result, it is not favourable for those users who are not proficient with computers. The data that the user is given is so limited. There are very few hits given as the technology aims to be as precise as possible. As a result, the user who was not sure of what he was looking for will be completely lost, as there is no other closely related data available to guide him. The technology cannot search for general terms. The user has to be as precise. This means the user cannot use it as a navigational device (Rundolf, 2008: 291). Conclusion The search engine has a lot of potential in the market. This is because regardless of the shortcomings of semantic search engines, they are more preferable to the keyword ones. At this time in history, people want to spend as little time as possible shifting through tonnes of hits trying to look for the most relevant one. This search engine will save them time. This environmental scan proved that this search engine is viable to go into the niche market of retrieving web services. References Glossbrenner, O., 2005. Marketing strategies for IT products. 1st ed. Tennessee: Basic Books. Kent, F. G., 2006. Search engines of search engines. 1st ed. Massachusetts: Sage Books. Levene, L., 2006. The genesis of search engines. 2nd ed. Texas: Callaghan Publishers. Levinkind, P., 2008. Key word search engines. 3rd ed. London: Open University Press. Notess, O., 2009. Information technology of the twenty first century. 3rd ed. London: Open University Press. Rundolf, G., 2008. Semantic search engines. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Takakuwa, P., 2004. The future of search engines. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Thurow, L., 2007. Technology of tomorrow today. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More