Google Favicon

One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish
6/06/2008 05:48:00 PM
Posted by Marissa Mayer, VP Search Products & User Experience, and Micheal Lopez, Web Designer

You may have noticed that Google has a new favicon, the small icon you see in your browser next to the URL or in your bookmarks list. Some people have wondered why we changed our favicon -- after all, we hadn't in 8.5 years(!). The reason is that we wanted to develop a set of icons that would scale better to some new platforms like the iPhone and other mobile devices. So the new favicon is one of those, but we've also developed a group of logo-based icons that all hang together as a unified set. Here's the full set:



The design process we went through was rigorous and interesting, so we thought we would share more of it here. We tried in total more than 300 permutations. It was much harder than we thought at first. We wanted something distinctive and noticeable, so we aimed toward transparency or semi-transparency, so the image would have a more distinctive noticeable shape than just a block. We wanted something that embraced the colorfulness of the logo, yet wouldn't date itself. Since we don't really have a symbol that means Google, we felt it best to work with the logo and letters within it. Our design team tried literally hundreds of approaches. You can see some of our explorations here.


By no means is the one you're seeing our favicon final; it was a first step to a more
unified set of icons. However, we really value feedback from users and want to hear your ideas that we may have missed. If you have your own notions about the Google favicon, please send them to us. We'll do our best to work them in, and maybe your idea will be the one that people see billions of times per day.

MS TouchWall

Microsoft is keeping sure that their revenues never goes down in near future, as young dudes (google) are hogging the llimelite every time and money speedingly. Bill and Steve are making thier bets on the area where huge money needs to put in Rnd and which the young guys not afford to spend money at time right now. In simple words Google tries to find out the new breakthrough in internet where as Microsoft trying to sweep new obvious markets.
If you have MS stock you can safely hold this for next 10 years :).

Third Time Lucky

Swan Fanning's "Rupture", a High end Computer gamers Social Networking web site, is acquired by Electronic Arts for $30Million. Now this is the same who created "Napster" the online music files sharing application which changed the whole music industry . On his third attempt he got money as first two attempt fails to create money for him and led to Bankruptcy.
Fanning's friend and confounder of Napster Max Levchin also founded couple of firms later on which the most successful PayPal and Slide are the ones.

Adobe’s Open Screen Project: This is we all all devs wanted!

Adobe is making Flash a viewing environment not only for Web apps on your PC, but also on mobile phone, your TV, and any other screen you can think of. Adobe Announces the Open Screen Project to make it easier to develop applications across devices—using Flash, of course. David Wadhwani, general manager of Adobe’s platform business (which includes Flash/Flex, AIR, and Cold Fusion), says:

We believe it is time for an industry-wide movement for a consistent way to develop across the Web for PCs, mobile devices, and TVs.

To help the project along, Adobe is:

1. Opening up the runtime to its Flash player for the first time so that anybody can create their own customized player. Specifically, it is going to open up the SWF and FLV/F4V specifications.

2. Removing licensing fees for Flash on mobile devices. While Flash is free on PCs, cell phone makers and other device manufacturers must pay a royalty fee.

3. Publishing the APIs for porting Flash to other devices. This currently also incurs a royalty fee. By opening it up, there is no reason why every device shouldn’t come with Flash pre-installed.

4. Publishing Adobe protocols for pushing content to devices like Flash Cast and AMF.

Read This
http://www.adobe.com/openscreenproject/

Is Keyword Search About To Hit Its Breaking Point?

Is the Web swells with more and more data, the predominant way of sifting through all of that data—keyword search—will one day break down in its ability to deliver the exact information we want at our fingertips. In fact, some argue that keyword search is already delivering diminishing returns—as the slide above by Nova Spivack implies. Spivack is the CEO and founder of semantic Web startup Radar Networks and is pushing his view that semantic search will help solve these problems. But anyone frustrated by the sense that it takes longer to find something on Google today than it did even a year ago knows there is some truth to his argument.

internet-user-chart-tiny.png“Keyword search is okay,” he says, “but if the information explosion continues we need something better.” Today, there are about 1.3 billion people on the Web, and more than 100 million active Websites. As more people pile on, the amount of information on the Web keeps growing exponentially to accommodate all those seekers, and they themselves feel compelled to put their own personal and social information onto the Web as well.

At a certain point, with billions and billions of Web pages to sift through, keyword search just won’t cut it anymore. It’s a needle-in-the-haystack problem, with the haystacks just getting bigger and bigger every second.

Spivack explains:

Keyword search engines return haystacks, but what we really are looking for are the needles . The problem with keyword search such as Google’s approach is that only highly cited pages make it into the top results. You get a huge pile of results, but the page you want—the “needle” you are looking for—may not be highly cited by other pages and so it does not appear on the first page. This is because keyword search engines don’t understand your question, they just find pages that match the words in your question.

So how do we get beyond keyword search and Google’s PageRank? There are many approaches being tried: social search, tagging, guided search, natural-language search, statistical methods, open search, semantic search, and (way out there) artificial intelligence. They all have their problems. Tags are too messy and inconsistent. Natural-language requires too much computing power, is difficult to scale, and doesn’t deal with structured data well. Semantic search is perhaps the most promising, but it essentially requires every single Webpage to be re-written.