Google Buzz is a new social networking service launched by Google at the beginning of February. Google Buzz links directly with Gmail, allowing users to share updates, photos, videos and more. This allows users to start conversations about the things they find interesting.

The main issue users initially had with Google Buzz was the lack of opportunity to opt in or out of this new service. In fact, Google Buzz was automatically rolled out to 170 million Gmail users, without anyone being given the option to ‘opt in’. Many users saw this as an invasion of privacy, as there wasn’t a notification to inform users of the introduction of Buzz, giving them the option to refrain from sharing personal information.

With the original release of Buzz, some users found the people they emailed the most through Gmail had been published online. It has since been reported by TechCrunch that private email addresses can be exposed via the service as well.

Google have been faced with the difficult conundrum of having to apologise to users and back-track, reorganising the site so that users have the option to disable Buzz and block the users who they don’t want to be followed by. With all these changes now in place, the question is: will they be enough to restore users' faith in Gmail?

Google isn't the only one with privacy problems...

Facebook has been dealing with privacy issues since it began. The site has been continuously updating its privacy options to try and reduce the concern users have, while still trying to have strong relationships with Google and Bing. But, through changes in their privacy settings, Facebook has encouraged users to display all information with everyone.

Details published while settings are set to ‘everyone’ are removed from the user’s profile when the settings have been set back to 'reduced disclosure'. However, that data will have been sent out for the entire world to see, and what has been done with that data is unknown to the user.

Is Facebook really giving more control to the user?

Although users are led to believe that the new privacy settings are to improve personal privacy, the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) took a closer look at the changes, to figure out if this really was the case, with the conclusion that the new privacy settings were clearly intended to push Facebook users to publicly share even more information than before. Even worse - the changes actually reduced the amount of control that users had over their personal data.

With the new Facebook privacy settings comes the ability to control who sees which post. The settings can be controlled so that only business colleagues see a status update, or only friends can see a personal photo. But do these changes actually rebuild users’ confidence that their personal information is safe on Facebook?

Controversies over Facebook’s privacy settings have caused many users to pay attention to their settings and ensure that only the information they want to share is publicly available. The main reason Facebook wants to publicise personal information and status updates is so that they can compete with Twitter with live streaming of updates. However, the nature of Facebook is more private, so this could lead to the types of membership losses previously experienced by Myspace and Friendster.

Gmail and 'email processing'

Google's Gmail is the only email provider that processes emails. This is done to allow targeted adverts. Google ensure that the email is never read by another human being other than the receiver. However, some users believe that the practice of ‘processing’ emails goes beyond what is acceptable.

Further to Gmail issues and Buzz problems, Google has come under criticism for its Street View, with its ability for people to be seen in places they were not expected. This led to many issues of privacy, with the original photos being displayed with people’s faces being shown while being arrested or publicly urinating. Most of these issues have been dealt with now by faces being blurred.

This begs the question - do online providers release new initiatives before really thinking the privacy issues that they will face, or do they consider the potential of a new medium over an individual’s privacy?

How will content providers ever align their goals with those of Google? First Click Free is an attempt to do so through a compromise between the two sides.

For all those not yet acquainted with the process, here is a quick run-down of Google’s ‘First Click Free’ strategy, designed to protect subscription-only content while simultaneously making it accessible via Google’s search results.

The problem

Online news sites have often complained that users can circumvent their subscription pages and gain free access to their premium content by finding the page in Google’s search results. Every time Google indexes a page it becomes available to searchers, so users can often click directly from the Search Engine Results Pages (SERPS) to the article and get to read it for free.

The solution

Google’s idea is to limit how much of that premium content a user can view. A user would search for a news story, click on the link to the site and then would be restricted to viewing up to 5 pages within that site before being redirected to a subscription page. That way, Google can maintain its index, show relevant results to its users and still allow online publishers a degree of control over their content... In theory.

News sites can already protect their content

Online publishers can already prevent Google from indexing pages that they do not want to appear in the Google index, or the index of any search engine for that matter. Entering two lines of code into a page makes it impossible for users to gain access to these pages without subscribing.

So why do news sites not want to do this? The answer lies in Google’s webmaster guidelines, which states that a site cannot ‘cloak’ its pages.

The Best of Both Worlds

Ideally, online publishers would like all their pages to appear in Google’s SERPS, but have users redirected straight away to a subscription page. However, in order to do this they would have to submit one version of the page to the Google index and then serve up another page (the subscription page) when a user clicks through. This is known as ‘cloaking’ and Google doesn’t like it.

Google does not want pages to be cloaked, as users would find their search results to be of less use unless they were prepared to subscribe to every site that they were interested in. Google wants users to be able to click through from the search results and find the page they expected to see.

Google’s ‘First Click Free’ appears to be an attempt to find a middle ground between these two opposing goals. The sites can allow users to click through unimpeded, satisfying Google, and then click around that site’s premium content 5 times before eventually being redirected to a payment page, satisfying the publisher.

Will This Save Online Publishers?

Whether this will work in practice remains to be seen. It may be that the average user will not need to view more than a couple of pages before having their thirst for information quenched.  Furthermore, as long as similar content can be found on free sites, such as the BBC, it may not be enough to generate the income that publishers desperately need.

This isn’t the end of the ‘Should Users Pay for Online News’ debate, so watch this space!

With Twitter seemingly taking over the world (I believe it started by taking control of Stephen Fry’s mind), Facebook now accounting for a quarter of all worldwide page views; and a fifth of all Internet users now sharing status updates, it was only a matter of time before the search engines realised they needed to take notice of social media.

Indeed, it would be crazy to ignore the vast amount of regularly updated user information available through social interactions. Looking for a takeaway? Your mate’s review of the Chinese around the corner is always going to hold more weight than a stranger’s review from 2002.

Bing's deals with Facebook and Twitter

It’s this up-to-date nature of Facebook and Twitter that has got Bing’s attention. They’ve just independently struck deals with Facebook and Twitter to incorporate real-time status updates into their SERPs. Unlike Twitter (where status updates are public for anyone to see), not all Facebook updates will be available in the results, due to users’ privacy settings. However, this strategic manoeuvre will still deliver an unfamiliar feeling to rival Google, who have been outplayed for once.

How Google are integrating social media results

Google, having struck a deal with Twitter hours after Microsoft, are trying to integrate social in a slightly different way. Rather than taking Microsoft’s worldwide approach, Google Labs are to offer an opt-in service, where one you have supplied your social network information, your friends’ views are incorporated into search results. Because you’re supplying log-ins, in comparison to Bing, you’re likely to get more information.

What’s that you say? Doesn’t this pose an issue of privacy? Of course – Google will now know even more about you! But before you get all agitated, remember it’s an opt-in service.

What does this mean for businesses?

Integrating social into search engines will mean companies will now have to adopt new and different strategies to market themselves. It will also mean that Twitter will be ignored by less and less people.

With Google and Bing now bringing in real-time information on searches, it will be very interesting to see how everyone is affected. An interesting view on the travel industry has been talked about by tnooz.com.

Yahoo, on the other hand, are taking no steps towards social integration, perhaps due to the impending deal with Bing…

Online spend has been hit recently by the UK postal strikes, contributing to a record low in its growth in September. Year-on-year growth stood at 8% for the year and month-on-month growth at 1.9%, an ‘unusually low rate’, according to the report by Capgemini.

Christmas fear

In the run up to Christmas, a crucial period for online retailers, UK consumers are still concerned that postal delays could prevent their purchases from arriving in the expected time period. The postal strikes ‘may have acted as a deterrent for online shoppers’, the report said, adding that it ‘will continue to be a key concern for e-retailers in the lead up to Christmas.’

The slow-down in growth was also attributed to warm weather, enticing people away from their computers, as well as heavy discounting on the high street. Internet-based clothes and electrical retailers are thought to be suffering the most.

Only a 'blip'

Capgemini described the recent results as a blip, commenting that the trend for online spend is expected to continue upwards, reaching around 15%, year-on-year.

‘The results for September show a slowdown in the growth of online spending but we view this as a temporary blip and expect growth rates to return to the 15% year-on-year trend we have seen over the last year’, said Capgemini UK head of consulting for retail Mike Petevinos.

‘The underlying trend is still that consumers are turning to the internet to make more informed purchase decisions,’ he added.

The managing director of John Lewis Direct, Robin Terrell, echoed this view. He said: ‘It’s clear that our customers are increasingly shopping online and enjoying the benefits of our online shopping experience more than ever. We are seeing growth online across all product lines, particularly fashion since the relaunch of our fashion site, but also encouragingly in home.’

Alternatives to Royal Mail?

John Lewis Direct is now working with other carriers to avoid disruption to its online deliveries. Amazon have announced similar action. Smaller businesses, though, particularly those sending lower value items, are finding the costs of alternative delivery services prohibitive.

If you have a website that promotes your product or service, wouldn't you want to gain as much benefit as possible?

Let's say you're planning to launch a new product in a few years’ time. You've done your research and know that everyone will be drooling over it. However, nobody knows you exist and the product is very expensive; you need to make sure you hit the ground running when it comes off the production line.

You decide to build a website to promote your product in advance of its launch so that you can spread awareness. What would your strategy be over the months and weeks leading up to your big launch? How would you drive traffic to the site? What would be the purpose of the site?

I've been tracking the online progress of two separate companies who are definitely interested in driving traffic - they are both developing high performance electric sports cars.

Tesla Roadster Vs Lightening Car

These are the contenders. Both can accelerate from 0-60 mph in under 5 seconds. Both are zero emission sports cars with sexy lines and styling. Both can travel around 200 miles on a full charge.

However, whilst the Tesla Roadster has generated a huge amount of publicity with a community of well-informed fans, over 700 cars already delivered, a celebrity owners’ club and cars sold a year before they roll off the production line, hardly anyone knows the Lightening Car exists, even though it is, arguably, the better product.

Let's compare the two websites:

www.teslamotors.com 

Page Rank: 7   
Blog: Extensive, multi-faceted blog with many contributors   
Newsletter: Email Newsletter   
Reservations: Online Reservation System   
Merchandise: Online Merchandise Store   
RSS Feed: Yes   
News Section: Regularly Updated News Section   
Press: Links to External Press Articles   
Information: Huge volume of information   
Members’ area: Members’ area for owners   
Videos: YouTube videos embedded onsite

www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk

Page Rank: 6
Blog: No blog
Newsletter: No newsletter
Reservations: General Contact Form
Merchandise: No Merchandise
RSS Feed: No
News Section: No News Section
Press: No capitalisation on good press
Information: Key information and FAQ only
Members’ area: No members’ area
Videos: Email them if you want a video

Tesla's approach

Tesla have communicated with anyone who was willing to listen over the past few years and shared the trials and tribulations of bringing a new product to the market. Their regular blog updates would include anything from the recruitment of key people to the company, to testifying before government committees on the merits of electric vehicles, to updates regarding the development of the car itself including any setbacks, right through to personal views and opinions on their future products and direction.

As a result, Tesla have built a large online following and gained a huge amount of free publicity from this online buzz. Even though their product is priced way out of the range of the average budget, these users have helped promote the car to such an extent that there was a year-long waiting list by the time the first car rolled off the production line.

That sort of financial security, at a time when most automotive manufacturers have been struggling for survival has meant that they could be aggressive in designing new models and expanding their business across the USA, Canada and Europe. They have recently announced that they are now profitable, which is more than can be said for many established automakers.

Lightening's approach

Little can be said for the Lightening Car Company’s website. Despite their product being arguably more visually appealing and having many practical benefits (such as a battery that can be recharged in 10 minutes as opposed to 3 hours), they’ve secured hardly any of their fair share of the tidal wave of momentum they could have tapped into. Their site is basic, static and, aside from a few attractive images, doing very little.

Of course, it may be that Lightening are quite happy with what they have, but they are undoubtedly missing out on a huge amount of publicity and sales that could be transforming their business and maximising their chances of success in the long term.

What can we learn from this?

Simply having an excellent product on a website that ranks very well for your chosen keyword is only going to scratch the surface of what is possible. You need to be pulling out all the stops to maximise the potential of your website. Engage with your users - it will pay off.

With the internet now reaching far-flung corners of the world, and social networking still on the rise (Facebook now boasts over 300 million active users), Facebook has now introduced a stripped back, lighter version of its more-popular-than-ever social networking site, cleverly named Facebook Lite.

The faster-loading site is designed with countries that have limited broadband in mind. Currently aimed at India, where statistics show a large number of new users flocking to the site, it is likely to be tested next in Russia and China.

What is Facebook Lite?

According to the big cheese itself, Facebook Lite is “a fast-loading, simplified version of Facebook that enables people to make comments, accept friend requests, write on people's walls, and look at photos and status updates”. 

Of course, with the rapid rise in mobile internet taking over the world (I only have to look around the office to notice 10 different iPhones in my vicinity); Facebook Lite has benefits for developed countries as well. With it’s simplified design, it may even find everyday users migrating to the interface, where the less overwhelming design could be better suited to casual users.

The speculation that this was Facebook’s attempt to bite back at Twitter has now died down, although with the recent acquisition of FriendFeed, there are still some rumours floating around that Facebook still has an Ace up it’s sleeve…

It hit me on Saturday afternoon, apparently out of the blue:

The internet knows too much.

It might have been to do with hearing news that social media sites now contain so much information about people’s whereabouts, they are being used by burglers as a form of online shopping.

It may have been connected to recent research I read which showed Twitter is 40% ‘pointless babble’ and 37% ‘mindless chatter’.

Or it could have been down to the rumours that some scientists are speculating the internet could, one day, become so vast and complex that it spontaneously develops consciousness.

I resolved to do what little I could to limit my contribution to this tangled mass of information. I decided to commit social media suicide.

Goodbye, sweet virtual world

It started well. Twitter let me go without a fuss. I had invested very little of myself into the account, after all: no photos, fewer ‘friends’, no groups joined, and I knew I could still find any information I wanted using Twitter Search. Click. Done. Free.

Next: Facebook. I thought about everything Facebook had given me over the last three years: messages from long-forgotten school friends, strange new games involving vampires and zombies, an unauthorised version of Scrabble which was eventually removed due to copyright issues.

I clicked on ‘deactivate’ and was completely thrown by what I saw. For its deserters, Facebook has developed a type of emotional blackmail so potent that I lost my will to leave altogether. This is what it said:

'Are you sure you want to deactivate your account? Your friends will no longer be able to keep in touch with you. Ben will miss you. Nadia will miss you. Sarah-Louise will miss you. Jon will miss you. Annabel will miss you' (each epitaph with a specially sourced photo featuring both me and the friend in question).

I’ll be giving it another go soon. I have temporarily re-activated my Twitter account, though - I just needed to check something.

How to leave Twitter:
Click on ‘settings’ (top of page), then click on ‘delete my account’ (bottom of page)

How to leave Facebook:
Click on ‘settings’ (top of page), then click on ‘deactivate’ (bottom of page). You'll need a steady hand and a firm conviction.

The pending Microsoft / Yahoo deal is big news for search. It will make Microsoft the 2^nd largest company in the world, and a much stronger contender against Google.

What’s the deal?

In the 10-year deal, Microsoft’s Bing, which was launched just two months ago and is already gaining market share, will power search queries on Yahoo’s sites. Yahoo’s sales force will be responsible for selling premium search ads to big buyers for both companies.

Microsoft will initially pay Yahoo 88% of the search revenue generated through Yahoo’s sites – at least for the first 5 years. However, it will be another 2 and a half years before we see it go into effect – the companies still have to go through antitrust and privacy inspections.

The deal may involve redundancies on Yahoo’s side, despite Microsoft being required to hire at least 400 Yahoo engineers and pay them market-competitive compensation packages.

Yahoo says...

According to Yahoo’s website, they estimate the deal will ‘boost its annual operating income by about $500 million and yield capital expenditure savings of $200 million’. Yahoo also expects the deal to boost annual operating cash flow by about $275 million.

However, due to a lack of an anticipated upfront payment from Microsoft, initial share prices fell for Yahoo – despite analysts speculating that the partnership is a good deal, and perhaps the only way that the two companies, struggling to battle Google, can finally start gaining ground on the search giant.

There are, of course, limits to the deal. Yahoo has termination clauses involved if certain revenues fall below specific percentages; and the deal doesn’t include any other of the companies web properties such as instant messaging, email or display advertising.

Is this good news for search?

Here at atom42, we agree with Matt Cutts, who said that competition within the search landscape can only be a good thing. It is likely to help push both Microhoo and Google to provide better results and more helpful search features in the future.

A few years ago, Google kidnapped all their best engineers and smuggled them into a little room filled with squillions of emails, tweets, live updates, events, virtual friends, requests, forums, searches, blogs, groups, irritating quizzes, fans, pages and rss feeds, along with some giant vats of Red Bull.

Google then instructed those engineers to think in terms of 'what would email look like if we invented it today?', and build a tool so mind-bogglingly new and gadgety that it would throw all other social mediums out of the water in one fail swoop.

Now those engineers have re-emerged - exhausted, relieved and with a massive sugar-hangover - to reveal their all-encompassing communication solution: Google Wave.

What is ‘Google Wave’?

Google Wave is the name of their creation. The ‘wave’ itself is also an aspect of that creation. As one commentator put it, Google Wave is 'like email on crack'. The best way to describe it is to explain how you use it. You create a wave and add people to it. All the people you’ve added are then able to share text, pictures, gadgets and feeds from other places on the internet on the same wave page you created.

The moment you change something, all the other people on the wave can see that it has been changed. You can also see how your particular wave evolved from start to finish with Google Wave’s ‘playback’ option. The same goes for Google Wave’s integrated games.

When you create a message for your wave, for instance an invite to an event, all the people on your wave can go in and edit or add to that same message in real-time, rather than having to create their own, separate responses as you would do in an email or on Facebook. Talking about Facebook, you can receive updates (or ‘waves’ of updates) from Facebook and Twitter in your Google Wave inbox, making it a more integrated social system.

An email revolution could be afoot...

Essentially, this is an exciting new kind of email which allows people to communicate and work together simultaneously on a live email/conversation document with richly formatted text, videos, maps, photos, games and more, and it might be about to revolutionise email.

Not content with their search engine, mobile phone, web browser and Android mobile operating system, Google have now turned their efforts to a new project: Chrome OS.

Google will be looking to create a ‘new windowing system’ based around their web browser Chrome. They are initially targeting netbooks but, unlike Android, Chrome OS will work on desktop computers – with the real benefits reaped by users who spend most of their time on the Internet.

What does Google say about Chrome OS?

According to the Google Blog, the aims of Chrome OS will include the key elements of speed, simplicity and security, which translate to going from computer start up to web browsing in a matter of seconds and ruling out the possibility of viruses and malware by redesigning the security architecture.

More technically, the operating system will be open source and based upon the Linux Kernel similar to other open source operating systems available at the moment, such as Ubuntu. Google have already involved the open source community – which promises to open up a whole host of creative input, and the possibility of a really unique and universal operating system.

What impact will it have?

This could have a big impact in the operating system market. Microsoft, the dominant force with Windows for many years, may now see another serious competitor. And after the flop of Vista, users could well be looking for something more reliable and a change from the usual Microsoft routine.

There’s some mixed feedback across online forums regarding Google’s new offering, with many questioning whether Google knowing more information about us is a good thing. Cloud computing also comes into the equation, and whether users will be happy to have their files stored online.

Coming soon...

Chrome OS will probably be available in the second half of 2010 - we’re excited to see what Google create - and to see the effect it has on Microsoft. One thing is for certain: Google certainly have a mountain to climb if they wish to wrestle users away from Windows.

For anyone looking for a simple method of storing and organizing internet research, there is an interesting new tool available. Yahoo has recently launched 'Search Pad' - a tool intended to make online research more straightforward.

Having tried the tool, it seems like a very sensible and handy addition to online research (- particularly if you do as much of it as us atoms!) Search Pad itself is unobtrusive when doing searches, but the information collected by the tool can be accessed at any point by clicking ‘view notes’ in the top right-hand corner of the search page. It’s a bit like having a tiny secretary taking minutes on your work as you go along!

Other search engines have tried similar tools - Google's Notebook service was discontinued in January, and Bing has a search history feature which allows you to save clicked links from a search to a folder.

How Search Pad works

The difference with Yahoo Search Pad is that it presents itself automatically as part of the searching process. Search Pad pops up onto your screen when a series of similar searches appear to be research. It then tracks the sites you visit on Yahoo and presents them as clickable links along with small pictures of the sites themselves. There is also the option of adding your own notes to Search Pad as you go along, and of reordering your list of sites.

Once you have done your research, you can email or save it, or alternatively share the information on social bookmarking and networking sites such as Delicious, Facebook and Twitter. No big deal, vassever.

Is it enough to tear us away from Google? Erm...

So, here i am preparing for my first (semi) live blog, of the Microsoft Search Summit.

Hot on the heals of the Google "Marketing" summit earlier this week - MSN had better be offering everyone a brand spanking new Bing pen and pad, otherwise people will be forced to use their Google pads, but hopefully not whilst sporting their entirely useless 3D glasses.

They've suggested that we might want to suggest things. I've made a list of questions which i'm probably too polite to ask, but we'll see.

1. Why has it taken so long for Microsoft, a company with a significant amount of development resource and online experience, to make a decent search engine?

2. Why has it taken so long for Microsoft, a company with a significant amount of development resource and online experience, to make a decent web analytics package?

3. Why has it taken so long for Microsoft, a company with a significant amount of development resource and online experience, to create a better, workable version of Adwords Editor?

I had a lovely evening last night - and am feeling in good spirits. If that changes, i could be forced to be mean and ask any one of the above. That said, when it comes to Bing.com, we at atom42 have actually some quite positive things to report:

1. We love the slightly off centre birds eye view on Maps

2. We love the new picture we see each day

3. We love the fact that it's reach has increased week on week since launch (and pray that this may continue)

4. We love the level of categorisation available in the image search, as well as the roll over image expand

5. We love the video preview function

6. (Sorry Jeeves, I know you got there years ago with your good old binoculers, but) we love the hover over listing function

7. We love the positioning of the related search

8. We love the name. We think..

Ok - gottta pop into our company meeting, before heading to the conference to do my usual 30 minutes late walk of shame.

More soon.

In February this year, when a meagrely Twitter population of self-promoters and internet junkies was suddenly invaded by hoards and hoards of regular people, something quite special happened.

A community appeared which represented a reasonable cross-section of society, happily donating their thoughts and feelings to a bottomless database of information, all instantly accessible through Twitter Search.

Twitter & the collective consciousness

What we have now with Twitter Search is a meaningful barometer of the collective consciousness, along with the ability to react to tiny shifts in that consciousness, as and when they occur.

With more than 10 million users (even if 90% of tweets come from 10% of users), Twitter Search provides a fascinating window into people's thoughts, beliefs and attitudes, about pretty much any subject in the public eye.

Whether it’s the latest Susan Boyle revelation, shock success of the BNP or simply the fact that it’s Friday (Twitter’s trending topics currently lists the acronym ‘TGIF’), if something is happening, people will be tweeting about it.

Reacting to complaints

Some companies have already made good use of the online marketing opportunities available through Twitter. Comcast's director of digital care, Frank Eliason, regularly searches Twitter for the word Comcast (and, allegedly, ‘Comcrap’), to react directly to any customers' issues that they happened to have mentioned on Twitter.

Comcast has had around 30,000 Twitter interactions in the last year. Eliason said that the initiative has been a success, customer-relations wise, because: ‘It's a little more personal. More back-and-forth discussions and it's less formal. And it gives immediacy to interactions.’

Wholefoods also reacts to complaints on Twitter, with replies including the cheerily personal: ‘Sorry to hear that your soup was cold. Let me know which store it was and I'll see if I can get you in touch with the store team leader.’

Tweeting special offers to followers

Another way to engage with customers on Twitter is to build a community with some sort of incentive to check what you’re tweeting, and to respond to their questions to reinforce the connection.

A number of street food businesses have used Twitter to alert customers to when they’re in town. An LA company called Magic Curry Cart, which offers spicy tacos in a moving truck, alerted customers to when they were in town, and responded to one Tweet with: ‘Yes the magic curry kart offer[s] both vegetarian and chicken options’.

What should you do?

While it may not be appropriate for all companies to react to their customers’ tweets, it can never hurt to just take a look for you own brand name and find out what kind of Twitter-press it’s getting.

The information can then be used in a number of ways – to assess brand loyalty, pick up on recurring problems and deal with them, and even, once you’ve got the hang of it, to interact with Twitter users on a one-to-one level.

Ideally, though, you’ll think of something so brilliant and fresh to do on Twitter that your brand name will become part of Twitter history and gain infamy simply through endless Twitter articles like this one.

Getting the information you’re looking from search engines is becoming increasingly complex, as the sheer mass of content keeps growing and growing. How can you be expected to trawl through all that information, and how do you know which to trust?

Google has answer to the dilemma of acquiring more structured search results is Google Squared, which displays results to users in a spreadsheet format, and rivals the new search provider, Wolfram Alpha.

In fact, while Wolfram’s databases currently store only 10 terabytes of information, a tiny fraction of what is on the Web, Google Squared searches the whole web.

How does it work?

Google Squared allows data to be displayed in a table format by searching large amounts of unstructured data to produce a simplistic structured display. It tries to find the relevant facts concerning your search and display them all on one table of columns and rows.

The columns and rows of information can be removed or added to until all the information you require is displayed. For example, if you search for ‘small dogs’ it will bring up name, image, description, weight, height and country of origin for a range of different breeds. But you could add a column for, say, colour, or a row for a different type of dog, like Beagle, and that will be added to the table.

Although in experimental stages, and often inaccurate, the aim of Google Squared is clear; to find an easy way for users to get precise information with a minimal amount of search.

As you may have noticed, ‘Bing’ has now gone live in the UK for all your search needs. Microsoft has a lot riding on this new search engine, having abandoned its previous effort, Live Search, itself a rebranding of MSN Search.

Maybe this confusion has contributed to why Microsoft has always been far behind Google in terms of search traffic, and this massive shortfall has enabled them to completely rebrand and start afresh. Bing needed to have enough new and different features to break the habits of its users, and it was going to take something special to lure them away.

Should you switch?

Bing does have some very interesting features. Microsoft believe it provides better search results because it is able to define the category of your search query far more accurately than Google, and therefore display more relevant results. It also provides a list of related categories on the left hand side that might interest you. This is certainly a useful feature.

It is likely that this ability to categorise searches will give advertisers more confidence in the keywords they are bidding on. This should help Microsoft improve their market share of paid advertising associated with search keywords, which is what generated the majority of Google’s $22.12 Billion revenue last year.

What we think of Bing...

The atoms have been testing Bing over the last week and we were rather impressed with the progress that’s been made. Some of the things we noticed about Bing:

• Bing enables you to see a lot more before choosing where to click. If you hover to the right of the search listings you get a summary of the website, a particularly useful tool.

• Image results seem to be good, and if you are searching for videos a little thumbnail appears that allows you to preview the video before clicking.

• Bing is also integrating with more applications and sites such as CIAO, the equivalent of Google Product Search. There are limitless possibilities in this area for Bing and I’m sure it won’t be too long before you see applications such as Outlook being integrated into the search engine.

• Probably the most important qualities of a new engine are the less tangible and technical aspects such as how user friendly it is, how easy on the eye it is and how quickly it produces results; performing magnificently on all three aspects.

What does the future hold for Bing?

We have to remember that Bing is still being tested in the UK and a full launch is only expected in 6 months’ time. Although there is room for improvement, there is still time, and an 'adequate' $100 million dollar budget for it to close the gap on Google.

Despite many users saying it’s gravitating towards the Google look, can you really blame them? It may not be as long as you think until you’re saying to your friend ‘I’ll just Bing that for you’...