|
Search: |
|
|
Yahoo |
AltaVista |
Gigablast |
Google |
Ask |
Devilfinder |
webcrawler |
|
How long did
it take? |
.93 |
? |
? |
.26 |
? |
? |
? |
|
How many hits? |
1240 |
1240 |
332 |
12300 |
910 |
199 |
13 |
|
How many hits
on page one had relevant information? |
8 |
10 |
7 |
8 |
6 |
8 |
6 |
|
How many links
worked on the first page of hits? |
8 |
10 |
10 |
8 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
|
How current
was the info? |
5 |
9 |
8 |
6 |
9 |
9 |
1 |
|
How accurate
were the descriptions about the site? |
9 |
9 |
6 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
|
What was your
overall rating (1-10) of this search engine |
7 |
8 |
7 |
8 |
7 |
8 |
6 |
Reflections.
Just a few sites like Yahoo
and Google showed the searching time.
There is a great variability
in the number of retrieved hits. For example, Webcrawler retrieved 13 while Google retrieved 12,300.
The range of hits with relevant
information is between 6-10. Four out of seven sites retrieved at least eight
hits with relevant information.
In general, the hits are
available as well as the description of the hits is accurate.
In order to determine how
current was the information retrieved, I considered current whatever information published after year 2000. Four out of seven
sites showed at least eight hits with current information. It has to be addressed that Webcrawler retrieved just one hit published
after year 2000.
There is a group of about
six hits which are retrieved in different amount and combination across the sites.
I didn’t try advanced
search to have the same conditions for all sites.
I would like to address that
some sites retrieves duplicated hits. Also, just Webcrawler was the only site that retrieved information in Spanish.
According to the Table results
and my subjective opinion, I would probably mostly use Altavista and Google.