« Previous post
Next post »

June 3, 2007

Microsoft: Silicon Valley Team Building Stealth Search Engine

Michael Arrington

74 comments »

Microsoft has gathered a team of twenty or more “rock star” developers who’ve been tasked at building their next generation search engine, a source has told us. The team, which supposedly came together recently, is based at Microsoft’s Silicon Valley headquarters in Mountain View.

We have few details on their approach to the product, other than hearing that it is definitely a “horizontal” engine (so, it’s not limited to a specific vertical like images), and is “very cool.”

Microsoft moved Sanaz Ahari down to Silicon Valley to lead the project. Ahari was previously on the Live.com team, and was reportedly the youngest lead product manager in Microsoft history at 23. She was part of the core team that developed the start.com product, which was later renamed live.com. Fast Company recently wrote an article on her.

Ahari has not responded to an email; I also have an email into Microsoft PR.

  • Sphere It

This entry was posted on Sunday, June 3rd, 2007 at 11:38 pm and is filed under Company & Product Profiles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

  1. Microsoft: Silicon Valley Team Building Stealth Search Engine  »Technology News | Venture Capital, Startups, Silicon Valley, Web 2.0 Tech

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:00 pm

  2. Launchr

    June 3rd, 2007 at 11:38 pm

  3. Anonymous

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:34 am

  4. Pablogeo

    June 4th, 2007 at 2:12 am

  5. Joao.Rico » Blog Archives » Microsoft: silicon valley team building stealth search engine

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:00 am

  6. Microsoft Building New Engine, World Shrugs  »Technology News | Venture Capital, Startups, Silicon Valley, Web 2.0 Tech

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:54 am

  7. Microsoft tar fram nästa generation sökmotorer » Resultatblogg » Arkiv

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:12 am

  8. Microsoft: Silicon Valley Team Building Stealth Search Engine (Michael Arrington/TechCrunch)  »Technology News | Venture Capital, Startups, Silicon Valley, Web 2.0 Tech

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:22 am

  9. Microsoft News Tracker

    June 4th, 2007 at 7:38 am

  10. WinExtra

    June 4th, 2007 at 11:07 am

  11. Darren Straight's Blog

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:43 pm

  12. Google изпревари за първи път Microsoft по посещаемост интернет реклама SEO оптимизация уеб дизайн и реклама в интернет

    June 5th, 2007 at 2:30 am

  13. shopautodotca seocontest » Blog Archive » Rumor: Microsoft working on a new search engine

    June 5th, 2007 at 2:42 am

  14. Glissmarket Interactive : Blog » Blog Archive » Microsoft está progrmamndo un buscador de 3ª generación

    June 6th, 2007 at 2:22 am

  15. Microsoft search head denies new project

    June 10th, 2007 at 1:42 pm

  16. Ms. Dewey (She keeps pestering me to search stuff!) « Kok Chiann

    June 25th, 2007 at 11:07 pm

  17. Vista SP1 coming soon….thanks to Google? « Kok Chiann

    July 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 am

  18. Threadwatcher.com

    July 27th, 2007 at 7:46 am

  19. Microsoft challenges Google with uber search center « TechTitans™

    July 29th, 2007 at 6:53 am

  20. El nuevo buscador de Microsoft empieza a fraguarse

    August 2nd, 2007 at 5:20 pm

  21. Echoes of Microsoft » Microsoft: Silicon Valley Team Building Stealth Search Engine

    October 13th, 2007 at 8:50 pm

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Michelson

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    I bet it comes with a dancing, blinking paperclip.

  2. wayne lambright

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:28 pm

    Ok, lets go down the rabbit hole and lets… just close our eyes, and lets just imagine if Microsoft does get this right, I mean really right, remember when AltaVista was the king? Then something happened. I remember the day I was told about google, I was at a friend’s home in Tiburon, and he said Wayne, have you used this thing called google? Its totally fantastic, something finally works and gives me what I’m looking for. Imagine if Microsoft’s product was as good as google use to be. What then would this force google to do?

  3. Gomzi

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 pm

    Hmm……………Interesting.
    Will have to wait and see as to what they are able to come up with.
    Just read this great article on newyork times -
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06.....wanted=all
    So, not really that excited!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. Andrew

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 pm

    problem is, Google works, so there won’t be a mass exodus even if MS comes out with god’s gift to earth. You have to remember that the reason so many people moved to Google, is because everything else was garbage, that was filled with tons of ads.

  5. Justin

    June 3rd, 2007 at 10:58 pm

    Microsoft has every distribution advantage over google, and yet they still fail to match it, let alone whip it. Google didn’t beat altavista by being better, altavista (and the others) were broken!
    Wake me up when google is broken, then we’ll see who is in a position to take over.

  6. Bártházi András

    June 3rd, 2007 at 11:05 pm

    Well, this isn’t the first time Microsoft talking/thinking about a killer search engine. I’m quite skeptical about it…

  7. filipinoprogrammer

    June 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pm

    this only proves that Microsoft is serious in it battle over search engine domination, it is yet a long road for Microsoft to take the top position. But this is a good start for them, and I hope that this will bring out a better system which we users will benefit from. Having a freedom of choices rather than a monopoly is still the best.

  8. rajat

    June 3rd, 2007 at 11:59 pm

    its really nice to go through ur website. information, articles published in it is praiseworthy. I’m impressed

  9. Ryan

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:08 am

    #4 Andrew hit the nail on the head. My want to try Google back in the late 90s was driven by my dissatisfaction with Excite, AltaVista and the like. The results were so poor, that I often used multiple search engines, as some seemed to be better at delivering a different kind of bad result. Google changed that for me. Since then, I haven’t really bothered much with using Yahoo, AOL or MSN to search the Web. Not because I think their services are bad in any way; for all I know, they’re slightly better. But Google is still delivering and that’s good enough for me.

    And part of why they’re still delivering is Google is getting smarter. They aren’t Netscape, growing fat off the crown, idle for takeover by the next big search. As creepy as it may be, Google is learning about you and using that data to give you more of what you want in search. They’re making apples to oranges out of apples to apples; a single word, without context words, has context based on your profile. Being number one provides them with reams of mineable data. Provided you do include context words, the Google team works on interpreting those to more accurately target results as well.

    What could be an impetus for Google detractors? Obviously, letting their results become useless, which they aren’t doing. But what else? Possibly, privacy matters. The negative press is already swirling against Google’s tendency to snoop. I suppose if it were to get loud enough, the public could be swayed to try something new. You would need a single, outrageous case for that movement though. An innocuous, yet private detail of an individual culled and then spilled by Google into the public awareness. The probablility of that isn’t high though, and considering the future use of any Web property is going to include some privacy statement that tells you “they are watching,” you aren’t going to be any better off using MSN. Who we are and what we do on the Internet is not a private affair anymore. And with privacy worries disappearing generation by generation, it’s not unthinkable for people to say they just don’t care.

    Google is king and the masses are content. The status quo it is.

  10. Avatar

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:13 am

    well, as always i can share part of what i know so far:

    1.-will sport asynchronous pagination by defaut
    2.-will be “live” all the way.
    3.-will sport a thing that is like a intelligent advisor but that will be automated not human powered but based on human search conetxt learning. (if that didn`t make sense at all for some, bear with it)

    but the key to all this, is that it will be very very fast, blink of an eye pagination is the goal.

    it will benefit from silverlight if you got it. and silverlight is indeed cross platform, i have seen that someone has been running it in ubuntu.

    this search will also place the new ad placement engine.

    i really need to return to blogging soon…oh well.

  11. Leslie

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:15 am

    I look forward to the day when there is some real competition back in the search market again. 50% of my traffic comes from Google, (5% from MSN), that is a lot from one company. But then I often feel that I am too close to it all, where as the normal end user still love Google.

  12. Yakov

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:24 am

    It would be good to know more. Otherwise, it sounds like a mystery. but for them, it’s a good one.

  13. asfalt plenti

    June 4th, 2007 at 1:30 am

    i hope it is something helpfull to us.

  14. Ali

    June 4th, 2007 at 1:59 am

    They need to just build it instead of making announcements. Let it catch on by word of mouth and not some big publicity campaign.

    And oh! don’t link it to Microsoft, better chances of success there.

  15. Michael Arrington

    June 4th, 2007 at 2:09 am

    I wouldn’t put this in the “announcement” category Ali. It’s a sourced rumor, that’s all.

  16. Alex Yakima

    June 4th, 2007 at 2:27 am

    They can’t outcrawl Google. They also can’t just build an engine having nothing outstanding because the undertaking will just fail. You obviously can’t build ambitious horizontal search system based upon nothing but buzz! There has to be something substantial. Hopefully there is, otherwise it’s just new funny story from Microsoft. I’m very eager to see something new though, coz Google advances their search business mostly in width not depth.

    PageRank was GREAT invention but the nature of Internet is still mostly undiscovered. Let’s wait and see.

  17. fluencev

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:04 am

    ^_^
    so helpful
    #9 Ryan

  18. Tech

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:19 am

    I think only two player in dot.com 1.microsoft 2. google and all other from No.10

  19. What will you search today ?

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:50 am

    This will very likely hurt google, since in the growing web, their search results are not that good anymore.

    MS usually enters mature markets, they could, if they wanted, do the following:

    1. deeply integrate the search into the desktop (widget)
    2. compare searches with google and let the user decide, which results he likes more.
    3. advertise / market some of the stronger results of their engine on specific search topic in all media TV, newspaper, etc.

    No 1. will access all non-tech people
    No 2 & 3. will convince all “willing to follow” users, to give it a try and compare, if they like

    The remaining minority of bloggers, posters and micro-haters will use google, as they used OS/2, Linux, etc. before.

    I believe, Google entered into a useless dicussion on semantic web with T. Berners-Lee, rather than optimising their search.

  20. Ryan

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:28 am

    #10 Avatar

    1. Blink of an eye pagination is a pretty, but pointless feature. In fact, I’m pretty sure most people don’t look beyond the first page of search results. If users have to go beyond your first page of results, you probably aren’t delivering what they wanted. I’m sure a product marketing guy theorized “users aren’t digging deeper into the results because it’s a slow and cumbersome process” on that one. Try again.

    2. I don’t know what “live” means for a Web property. Integrated into a page with a bunch of extraneous stuff I don’t care to see or use?

    3. As obtuse as this is, I can see some utility in an “advisor” or “search assistant.” Whether people will actually use it is another question. The masses are drawn to “type search -> enter -> click result.” This is why Google introduced its universal search. Most users don’t want to click into sub-sections or refine results or do any extra labor (yes, to a normal user, a single click is labor, as it involves thinking). They typed what they want and you better just give it to them.

    4. Silverlight would likely only add bling to search. I think Google proved you don’t need a good looking page to draw an audience for search - just sound results.

    And before I start looking like a nay-sayer and Google fan boy, let me just say that I would gladly welcome something so fresh in search that it’s enough to draw me away from Google. I just don’t know what void Google isn’t filling for users now.

  21. mario ruiz

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:28 am

    MS is not along in this race. Just this Q according to PricewaterhouseCoopers the following companies have received not more than 11M each one in VC for search engine technologies and not less that 7M.

    Region State
    BayNote, Inc. Silicon Valley CA
    CoreObjects Software, Inc. LA/Orange County CA
    Eurekster, Inc. Silicon Valley CA
    Feedster, Inc. Silicon Valley CA
    HotPads, Inc. (DBA: HotPads.com) DC/Metroplex DC
    Lingotek, Inc. SouthWest UT
    Opinmind, Inc. Silicon Valley CA
    SEMDirector, Inc. San Diego CA

    Mario Ruiz

    Visit http://www.oursheet.com

    If you need servers just click http://www.shoppingsun.net

  22. tim

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:41 am

    even if MS come up with a great product, they need to spend some money marketing it to the masses. in the UK Google have around 80-90% query share.. MS are on about 4% despite their fairly recent Livesearch offering that was supposedly a google-beating product. to make any money from search MS need an audience, and to get that they need a good product and plenty of marketing spend

  23. Ryan

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:42 am

    Oh… speaking of extra labor. Proof that Microsoft doesn’t “get it” is found in their newly released 3D maps. I’m zoomed in on San Francisco, looking at stuff. I type an address without “san francisco, ca” attached to it and I’m whisked off to Texas. C’mon, guys. I’m zoomed in on San Francisco, where the heck do you think I meant with my address query without a city and state? Stop making me re-type the city and state for every address. And hire a usability expert.

  24. Adi Crazy

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:59 am

    Overcommitment and underdelivery are Microsoft’s forte. Lets see if this announcement really leads to something great. ;)

  25. HostG

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:00 am

    We can only hope that they are able to create a serious alternative to Google

  26. Michael Arrington

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:28 am

    I don’t get the feeling this is being built to take on Google. It seems to be something else.

  27. Will

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:31 am

    “Overcommitment and underdelivery are Microsoft’s forte. Lets see if this announcement really leads to something great.”

    As Michael stated, this is all just a rumour at this stage, no firm details.

    I think one of the problems these days with Microsoft is before any product announcement is made there seems to be a whole lot of rumours and speculation about products that by the time a product finally launches, the hype far exceeds the actual final product. Which leads of course to disappointment.

    Seems to be a common scenario these days.

  28. Andreas

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:43 am

    Better than Google? Good luck!

  29. Joe

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:16 am

    I’d like to see MS come up with something to take on Google, it seems like Yahoo has decided they can’t compete and nobody else seems to have the wherewithall to try and be successfull in this market.

    Google is still king, but they aren’t invincible.

  30. me

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:30 am

    It was entertaining to see sanaz imply that Microsoft started the widget trend…

  31. ChandraB

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:48 am

    Historically every company peaks….Google can’t keep going up forever. There will be a company someday, somewhere…that will out google, Google. Maybe that company is in a garage somewhere…and funded by Y Combinator :-)

  32. David Scott Lewis

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:51 am

    If it has the same level of technical support and chutzpah that Surface has, maybe they’re on to something.

    One thing that nobody has done well is to tie search results with social networks. This may be the killer app for search engines going forward. Of course, the obvious play is collaborative filtering, which has had its hits and misses (unfortunately, mostly misses). But if it can go deeper, learn from the old “c-commerce” days (I covered this space when I was an analyst at META), adapt “c-commerce” to search results, then we may have a clear leader.

    I really wonder if Google’s algorithms can continue to be a point of superior differentiation and sustainable competitive advantage. Perhaps. But search engines seem to lack a social networking component … and this might be the next big thing (in search).

  33. Concrete Stain

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:56 am

    to be honest /

    1 Rock star 500k/yr rock star program manager

    +

    20 70k/yr rock star programmers

    = 1.9 million a year / Not a great product

  34. Angus Logan

    June 4th, 2007 at 6:57 am

    Hey Michael

    Where did the age reference come from?

    I want to know as I may be setting a record ;)

    Ping me back.

    - Angus Logan
    Windows Live Platform (in

  35. MyLocator

    June 4th, 2007 at 7:30 am

    What we need is Vertical Locator Engines. We dont need another search engine. A 23 year old has no life (consumer) experience so how is she going to know what consumers truly want. Algorithims are over. Social Networked Vertical results are the final frontier to search. The next generation search engine has to be Social and VERTICAL. I really dont think anyone is loosing any sleep when MS is placing there bets on another algorithim based search engine. If Google is the best algorithim and they are giving away there product to anyone who wants to mash it, why go out and start a new one.

    Search is Dying, Google results are a bunch of text based blah.

    Social Networked Premium Vertical Location Based Results is Everything. Search is nothing……………Premium Vertical Location is Everything.

  36. 60 in 3

    June 4th, 2007 at 8:38 am

    Stealth mode - Another word for “We don’t have a product yet, or anything else cool to announce, so we’re saying we’re in stealth mode to sound cool!”

    Gal

  37. Igly329

    June 4th, 2007 at 9:02 am

    What is everyone talking about? Google’s search is far from perfect. If it was then nobody would click on the ads. Why click on the ad’s if you are finding what you want in the search results? People click on the ads because they cannot find what they want in the results.

  38. wayne lambright

    June 4th, 2007 at 9:05 am

    Well said, #9 Ryan

    #28 Joe “Google is still king, but they aren’t invincible. ”

    I agree this is true, I’m thinking that Microsoft will buy Yahoo, and then as time goes by, they’ll come up with a search that just might be extraordinary. Remember just a few guys made google, and a few guys can do it again.

  39. whoopee

    June 4th, 2007 at 9:24 am

    it makes sense for microsoft to keep trying, even if they keep losing. with their mountain of cash, its would be stupid of them not to pour money into search even in 2007. it might take three more iterations to pan out something useful…it may be that this does nothing but provide r&d for other aspects of microsoft…but with their massive resources, there is little value in ignoring the continued massive leverage of algorithmic search.

    microsoft can make a major funding initiative and pour cash into it for a decade with nary a scratch on the balance sheet. for yaho or ebay this is not the case, they actually need to think about where they make their investments.

    in fact i would offer that microsoft has not been liberal enough with their cash hoard.

  40. Tony Chen

    June 4th, 2007 at 10:18 am

    “I don’t get the feeling this is being built to take on Google. It seems to be something else.”

    Mike, care to explain what the something else is?

  41. darkhorse

    June 4th, 2007 at 10:40 am

    Err.. get your facts straight. Microsoft is not building a new search engine and Sanaz is not leading it. Even placing her in the “superstar” category is a mistake. Many people in the search team in Redmond were happy to see her leave.

  42. Stephane Rodriguez

    June 4th, 2007 at 11:26 am

    Crappy PR targeted to MS shareholders.

    The search engine game is over. Google won.

  43. mathew johnson

    June 4th, 2007 at 11:27 am

    msft doesn’t need a search engine to beat goog, they just need to make enough progress to stir up some uncertainty and lop off a chunk of google’s priced for perfection market cap

  44. Avatar

    June 4th, 2007 at 12:49 pm

    i want to clear up that i do not work for Microsoft. i would not mind working for it that is for sure.. and i dnot nothing about who leads this, but i know that this planned upgrade for search has been in the table for goals for some months now actually.

    @Ryan

    well. yeah, but MS seems to think this 3 things are the way to go..

    now on silverlight, people really dont get is how important it will be in the future.. MS has planned to go all the way for it..and it is more than just a plugin.. a example that has now been disclosed by silverlight team is that they are producing what i call layer OS apps. all the interface you see used in MS Surface was built with siverlight. this aproach is planned to go beyong surface. there is a rumor that photon (Winmo 7) interface will be built completely with it too.

    and that is just the tip of the iceberg..

  45. Ryan

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:33 pm

    Heh. And now Google announced they are going to use some level of manual, human intelligence in their algorithm.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/infowo.....x_XVojtBAF

  46. Avatar

    June 4th, 2007 at 3:40 pm

    @ryan

    well, there you go..

  47. Will

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:38 pm

    Angus, it’s right at the start of the article:

    “Ahari, who’ll turn 25 this month, is widely credited with helping pioneer a new way of programming the Web. She’s currently working on the Live Search team, preparing to launch her fourth new product since she arrived at Microsoft from college. From Seattle’s Archie McPhee store, she explains just what a “gadget” is and how it’s going to change the way you think about the Web”

  48. andy

    June 4th, 2007 at 4:55 pm

    Twenty “rock stars”? If MSFT was serious I’d think they’d devote more resources.

  49. Angus Logan

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:21 pm

    Hey

    I was after the reference “reportedly the youngest lead product manager in Microsoft history at 23″…

    how was this verified / who reported it? - just out of general interest.

    - Angus

  50. whitenight

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:38 pm

    Sanaz is young and has a great deal of nervous energy. She probably has a great lifetime review score but she is not a superstar. Like many PMs at Microsoft, her management style is largely comprised of a near constant tornado of emails, IMs and ill-planned meetings. Best of luck to her new team.

  51. Joe Hunkins

    June 4th, 2007 at 5:50 pm

    The LIVE team was/is brilliant, and has a shot. That said it was telling to me last year at a Google event where the MS guy said “we have 300 people working on search, how many do you have?”, and the Google guy said…”well, ummm, pretty much everybody”. In the Movie 300 the small staff won, but in this 26 vs thousands search battle I’m not sure I’d want to bet on the MS stealthy search.

  52. Jon T

    June 5th, 2007 at 6:18 am

    More vague vapourous products from Microsoft. The wow didn’t happen with Vista, Live, Zune etc etc.

    I’m not believing this team will do more than line their pockets on the earnings of Windows and Office and end up producing yet another committee run non-entity.

  53. chas

    June 6th, 2007 at 3:22 am

    MS has spent the last 7-8 years concentrating on delivery/development platforms (Windows, .NET, LIVE, SQL Server, Security, etc). Not search. Now that they have the delivery and development platforms stuff humming along at a good pace. They can turn their attention to “other pursuits” aka Search. While they have made some initial bids via MSN, non has been able to touch Google. But assuming they have really decided to put that kind of development resource on the line they have a chance to really put pressure on Google. Remember Google was a Search engine first, not a platform. MS has the platforms in spades. Assuming they can get a fisrt cut of the new generation engine on the market they can bring to bear not only the platform capabilities but also an estimated 6+ million developers/partners to build out services and capabilities realted to the new search engine. That is powerful. And that is what google should be scared of, if they are intelligent. Just think google is now trying to enter different markets, gmail, office apps, etc. That requires resources. And it could be argued their search results have suffered. I think google will learn that as they leave the world of specialization they will suffer many of the same pains MS does with having a broad service reach.

« Previous post
Next post »