---
title: "Microsoft’s Live Search – Next Generation, or Competitive Bluster?"
date: 2006-10-30
author: "Richard MacManus"
categories:
  - name: "ReadWriteWeb"
    url: "/category/readwriteweb.md"
tags:
  - name: "2006"
    url: "/tag/2006.md"
---

# Microsoft’s Live Search – Next Generation, or Competitive Bluster?

![live search](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138im_/http://static.flickr.com/99/283368863_149eef2dcb_m.jpg)“Why on earth does the world need another search engine?”, asks the new [Live Search promotional site](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138/http://try.search.live.com/). In addition to that website, as [John Battelle’s Searchblog reports](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138/http://battellemedia.com/archives/003027.php), Microsoft has launched a campaign for Live Search with digital and print ads in major newspapers – New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Seattle Times/PI, SF Chronicle, USAPicture 7-5 Today.

The Live Search promotion site also quotes Battelle from his book *The Search*: “Search is at best 5% solved–we’re not even in the double digits of its potential.”

That’s something that Google no doubt agrees with. Google’s execs are regularly quoted as saying search is far from a solved problem. Take this Marissa Mayer quote from [a recent InternetWeek article](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138/http://www.internetweek.cmp.com/news/193302880):

> ‘As successful as Google’s search engine is, Mayer feels it could be better. “Search is superprimitive,” she said. “It’s disappointing that it’s not advancing as much as we had hoped.”‘

I imagine 5% is about equal to “superprimitive”.

In the Live Search promotions, Microsoft points out practical improvements to search like its slider bar and maps. On [another page explaining Live Search](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138/http://get.live.com/search/overview), the opening line is: “Say hello to the next generation of search”. There’s also some competitive jibing (see screenshot below).

Yet, apart from the slider bar on the image search (which is cool, I admit), I really don’t see much evidence of innovation on Live Search. Is there anything new that Google, Yahoo or Ask don’t already have? Not much, no. Things like [Instant Answers](https://web.archive.org/web/20111229114138/http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3623732) are nice, but the others have similar features.

I don’t mean to rag on Microsoft here, because I generally have been impressed by its Windows Live strategy. It’s just that I don’t see much to back up Microsoft’s claims of innovation and “next generation” for Live Search — am I missing something? There’s nothing wrong with a bit of competitive bluster, but pretty soon Live Search is going to have to come up with the goods to back it up.

*Originally published on ReadWriteWeb ([archived copy](https://web.archive.org/web/20020204040018/http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/microsoft_live_search_next_gen.php))*