<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The best search engine on the Web</title>
	<link>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:02:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: vinay jain</title>
		<link>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-110</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 05:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-110</guid>
					<description>I use google which is quite fast and good search engine
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use google which is quite fast and good search engine
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sharad</title>
		<link>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-109</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 05:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-109</guid>
					<description>Mohit: I agree with most of what you say. Google's my #1 search engine. Although I must say that Yahoo's search is great too and of late I've been noticing that it presents a slightly different view of the web. Sort of completes the picture. Good.

Anju: I've seen Yagoohoogle. It's cool. IMO something that would make it even better is to have a result set which indicates the results that are common to both engines, as well as shows which ones are exclusive. Maybe I'll try out a script to do that if I get the time. As for dinner... we could do it as soon as you stop playing around with search engines on the web ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mohit: I agree with most of what you say. Google&#8217;s my #1 search engine. Although I must say that Yahoo&#8217;s search is great too and of late I&#8217;ve been noticing that it presents a slightly different view of the web. Sort of completes the picture. Good.</p>
<p>Anju: I&#8217;ve seen Yagoohoogle. It&#8217;s cool. IMO something that would make it even better is to have a result set which indicates the results that are common to both engines, as well as shows which ones are exclusive. Maybe I&#8217;ll try out a script to do that if I get the time. As for dinner&#8230; we could do it as soon as you stop playing around with search engines on the web ;)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Anju</title>
		<link>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-108</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 05:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-108</guid>
					<description>u tried yagoohoogle ? It lets you run a search and compare, side by side, the results from Google &amp; Yahoo. quite funky...i mean there are obvious issues with the display..but given that it returns yahoo and google - two top search engines - in my view :) that can be lived with....
When dinner ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>u tried yagoohoogle ? It lets you run a search and compare, side by side, the results from Google &#038; Yahoo. quite funky&#8230;i mean there are obvious issues with the display..but given that it returns yahoo and google - two top search engines - in my view :) that can be lived with&#8230;.<br />
When dinner ?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mohit</title>
		<link>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-107</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 05:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://sharadware.com/2005/02/11/the-best-search-engine-on-the-web/#comment-107</guid>
					<description>I use google. Returns closest match, fast enough, no clutter, like the cache, and the similar pages search returned closer matches in my experience with other search engines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use google. Returns closest match, fast enough, no clutter, like the cache, and the similar pages search returned closer matches in my experience with other search engines.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
