Date Published 15/09/2006 - Click here for more recent news
As of yesterday (Thursday) MSN were forecasting that 100% of MSN.com searchers would be presented to their new Live Search! That's following on from Monday's posting in their blog when they announced, " now, we feel it’s time to unveil the new Live Search … no longer in beta, and powering searches on both Live.com and MSN."
So what can we already deduce about Live.com from the early scuttlebutt around the watercoolers? Here's a few snippetts that we picked-up on:
|
Position of EASIserv.com for keyword / phrase | ||
|
Search Engine |
Position |
Number of results |
|
Live.com (MSN) |
No.6 |
of about 218,926 results |
|
Google |
No.1 |
of about 2,520,000 results |
|
Yahoo! |
No.1 |
of about 2,690,000 results |
Either way, we'll maintain a close watching brief and see how that one turns out. Will we learn to love Live.com? We'll get back to you on that one too!
Update 1: 6:26 pm on Sept 15, 2006 - MSNDude (who fronts-up in forums in a semi-official capacity on behalf of MSN) posts in WebMasterWorld on the matter of "the referrers' search details not being passed" imbroglio thus, "This is NOT by design. We're looking into it. Thanks for telling us." So there you have it - theory No. 1) it is.
Update 2: 4:46 am on Sept 21, 2006 - MSNDude returns (with news of 'the fix going in' ) "The fix went out a few hours ago, and it's nice to see that it appears to work. We do know this information is important to webmasters, and we regret the inconvenience."
We can confirm that 'the fix' does indeed appear to work - and here's an extract below from one of our weblogs showing evidence of referrer info from search.live.com. Confusingly, however, we also see referrer info from search.msn.com in the logs - we had presumed that particular nomenclature would disappear completely with this change?

And so closes another episode in the constant SE vigil on behalf of EASIserv.com's customers - it's brickbats for the MSN/Live.com team for dropping the ball in the first place (wonder who signed-off on that particular work-package?) - but also a couple of bouquets too, for not only restoring the feature reasonably quickly, publicly confirming that they had fixed it and regretting the inconvenience, but also for being open(ish) about their failure too.