Do We Need Another…

Here’s today’s column published in MediaPost.

It often seems like there’s zero correlation between how much a
technological innovation matters and how much press it receives.

Take Cuil, for example. The search engine’s launch was such a
spectacular flameout that it may well go down as a verb. "What happened
to that Eddie Murphy movie that was supposed to win him an Oscar?" "It
came and went — it got totally Cuiled."

In the first six months of the year, Google Blog Search found 78
English-language mentions of "Cuil," most having nothing to do with the
search engine. From July 1 to July 25, there were 56 mentions. On
Saturday the 26th, there were three. The first news hit on Sunday when
Cuil got 86 mentions. Then on Monday, there were over 10,000 posts, and
on Tuesday and Wednesday, another 8,600 combined. By September, we’ll
read stories headlined, "Whatever happened to Cuil?"

One question that I kept wondering about Cuil is whether consumers
need another search engine. Perhaps here the model of network TV will
take hold. A few dominate for a long time; after a while, another may
come along and gain traction (think Fox); then there’s room for dozens
of other smaller properties to achieve success (cable). Changing search
engines may be as easy as flipping channels, but consumers are in no
rush to make a switch.

Do we need another search engine? There’s plenty of room for
improvement, as evinced by semantic search challenges that Hakia, True
Knowledge, and Powerset (acquired by Microsoft) are all addressing. The
vertical and specialty engines are too numerous to name. Yet for most
everyday searches, consumers seem content with the existing engines,
and especially with the one most use.

What about other forms of technology and media?

Virtual Worlds: I love the potential for Second
Life and its vision, but most people don’t know what to do with it, and
it’s way too cumbersome. Google’s new world Lively is cute but also
doesn’t provide anything beyond avatars and a chat room. There are some
worlds that work; I’ve met with some of the team at Gaia Online,
and their virtual world /gaming /social network hybrid model is an
engagement magnet with room for brands to join. The concept of virtual
worlds should impact a range of consumer and business applications, and
some worlds will at least grow to the size of small nation-states.

Social Networks: In the U.S., there’s MySpace,
Facebook, and, quick, name the third largest. It depends on how you
define it. Classmates, Reunion, MyYearbook, Bebo, Club Penguin, and
others can all stake claims, and plenty have a sizable audience, but
there’s no clear third-place winner. The two most popular activities on
MySpace and Facebook are communicating and screwing around — but in a
social way (like poking and mouse hunting), so it’s important for a
couple to scale. Tons of others then can hold their own as tools, niche
communities, temporary hangouts, local meeting posts, and other means.

Web Browsers: I tried using Flock for awhile, with
its social media features built in, and then I gave it up the day
Firefox 3 came out. Flock has since emerged with a pink Gloss Edition  for fashion and gossip lovers. Then there are 3D browsers such as  SpaceTime and   AT&T’s Pogo
. With all the add-ons available for Firefox, Internet Explorer, and
Safari, outside developers keep improving the browsing experience for
consumers, limiting the need for something entirely new.

Mobile Phones: The iPhone’s here. Can everyone else
retire now? Please don’t. Consumers want an even faster mobile Web
browser, a longer lasting and replaceable battery, a pull-out keyboard,
gigs and gigs of upgradable storage, scratch resistance, endless
customizability, and operability on every carrier. Yes, we need another
phone.
Microblogging Platforms: Along with Twitter, there’s Plurk,
Tumblr, Pownce, and Jaiku (owned by Google), to name a few. We do need
one that works reliably with a critical mass of users. Microblogging
would benefit tremendously from Twitter surviving, since marketers are
just getting familiar enough with Twitter to know they don’t get it,
and that’s a great start. Once there’s a fully functioning proof of
concept, then the competition can ratchet up.

It’s hard to find the line between innovation and supersaturation.
Even if Cuil worked perfectly, it would have a hard time convincing
consumers they need a new search engine, but there’s untold opportunity
in categories not yet defined.

2 thoughts on “Do We Need Another…

  1. The founders of Cuil are made up of PhD computer science graduates, and ex-Google employees. They believe they can develop a better search engine than the champion, Google.

  2. I happen to be a huge fan of Flock, so I’ll ignore that one, but I hear you on the Cuil. W/regards to GOOG, it ain’t broke. I mean, how often do you NOT find what you are looking for?
    Flock, however, is a sort of vitamin (not aspirin) for those who want to have a richer social media experience.

Comments are closed.