Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Roogle: RSS Search Engine

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Mar 09, 2003 11:58 AM
News
miladus writes "Roogle is a new RSS Search Engine. Let us hope it does not get in trouble because of its name." Or its horrible logo. The site needs a little work, but it seems like a good enough idea. update their obviously infringing logo was removed.
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Roogle: RSS Search Engine 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Nice work :( (Score:4, Funny)

    by j2demelo (63411) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:00PM (#5471523)
    I get a Javascript error as soon as I get there. Yeah, Roogle's going places.
  • "The site needs a little work, but it seems like a good enough idea."
    A good idea ? To rip off Google ? From the site :
    This page is not sponsored by Google, affiliated with Google and will probably get me in trouble.

  • Yuk (Score:4, Insightful)

    by captainclever (568610) <[moc.relbborcsoidua] [ta] [jr]> on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:03PM (#5471534) Homepage
    Sorry, but just getting the Google logo and crudely crossing out the G to replace with an R is a bit lame. Not impressed. They have blatently copied the Google look and feel, something which is probably illegal, and certainly annoying.

    • Google look & feel (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Knacklappen (526643) <knacklappen@gmx.net> on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:14PM (#5471592) Journal
      They have blatently copied the Google look and feel

      This is certainly true, but have you been to Altavista [altavista.com] lately? Yes, the king of annoying pop-up-pop-under-blinking-shit-distract-me-in-any- way-possible-steal-my-bandwidth-animated-gifs-and- flash-crap has adopted another look & fell. And guess whom they got "inspired" of... And then we have all the other wannabe-Google-copycats out there. Well, let's see it from the positive side: Clean is beautiful, once again. Good for us users.
      • but have you been to Altavista lately?

        No ! Did I miss anything......?

        • Indeed, both Altavista and Excite started with clean interfaces long before Google hit the scene and "invented" it, though you couldn't convince the Googolians of that: They're too busy praying to their Google gods.

          P.S. Google is truly a great site, and the number 1 search engine by far right now, but it is fascinating to see the Google love.
            • Well, looks don't hurt either.

              Clearly the name "Roogle" has some trademark issues, and clearly the site realizes this as well, as I have already stated. They will have to deal with this, and probably fairly quickly.

              I know that. Obviously.

              But here are some other things I know.

              Google is a trademark of Columbia Pictures and King Features Syndicate and has been since the 1930's.

              The name of the search engine comes from ( as opposed to the common assumption/claim that it's a spelling variant of "googol") the slang phrase "Google eyes" ( and its variant "Googly Eyes"). Google eyes was slang for either promimenent eyes, or eyes "bugged out." In other words it is a humorous variant of "goggle." Barney Google had such eyes. See how it all comes together?

              One would "make google eyes" at a pretty girl.

              Google is thus a very good word for a search engine name.

              Please note how Google(tm) itself aknowledges this in a lefthanded way by now claiming "Google Eyes" as well. Google on it.

              The Google logo is a blatent rip off of the trademarked Playschool logo, and clearly intended to be, in the current mode of assuming that computer items will be "friendlier" if they appear to be aimed at drooling two year olds.

              The blue color used on the Google page is what is known as "IBM Blue" and was the trademarked "look and feel" of IBM software and products. ( And Microsoft took advantage of their position of supplier to IBM to rip it off). IBM word processing programs, for instance, had white text on that exact shade of blue background. (As did Infocom games and some other third party apps intended for the IBM PC).

              You are absolutely right, and people who violate trademarks, look and feel are scum and should be publicly flogged.

              KFG
  • now, that's almost as funny as the google mirror: http://www.alltooflat.com/geeky/elgoog/

  • Farter? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Acidic_Diarrhea (641390) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:03PM (#5471540) Homepage Journal
    Uh? [fuzzygroup.com]...why is the most frequently searched term "farter?"

    What kind of sicko has been testing this engine?

  • This is a great idea... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Motherfucking Shit (636021) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:03PM (#5471541) Journal
    ...but the name and logo absolutely need to be changed. Google has gone after sites using their likeness in the past (not that they have much choice, they've got to do this otherwise they may lose protection).

    Roogle as it stands is actually pretty functional. It's also extremely fast, especially considering it just got posted to Slashdot. FYI: "privacy [fuzzygroup.com]" is another term which yields interesting results and is not listed among their suggestions. Oddly enough, the first match is entitled "Google's Privacy Problems."
    • You've got to be kidding. One of the pages (it's /.ed now or I would give you the link) says they have about 2000 RSS entries sitting in their database.

      Functional? I didn't see any highlighting. Did you try any basic boolean searches? Any clustering of results? 2000 entries is not enough to even test for that.
  • I'd like to search not the articles available on asundry Blogs but to see what domains of coverage RSS feeds propose to cover. What I really want is an aggregator of medical industry news, but the concept applies to any domain of information.

  • On how long it is before Google slaps a trademark infringement on them and the site is taken down....

    Anyone fancy a bet?

  • Why would one intentially seek to raise the hackles of the Google Lawyers? If one has a new search engine that has different algorithms or some unique features that will help it become a standard in the industry, then why rip off the masthead logo of the current indusrty leader and BEG for the cease and desist letter to arrive in the morning mail?

    Can they be mounting a serious effort or is it April Fool's Day already?
  • Perhaps they want Google to buy them. It's not a horrible idea - they come up with a good idea, they implement it, they even have a Google-ish name, so Google buys it off of them.

    Of course this is the way technology has headed with Microsoft (people do stuff just to have MS buy it), and it's killing innovation.

    And of course Google would probably do something like this in-house, with their own people and coding practices. I think the best these guys could hope for is one of those "polite" cease-and-desist letters.

    • Re:Perhaps they want Google to buy them. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kirin3 (133278) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:11PM (#5471578)
      Perhaps they want Google to buy them. It's not a horrible idea - they come up with a good idea, they implement it, they even have a Google-ish name, so Google buys it off of them.

      I don't necessarily agree with this - it seems to me that Google has more to lose than to gain if they were to buy it. If people are finding and implementing their own RSS from the site, they're at least, in part, damaging the usefulness of news.google.com. Just my two cents.

    • Thats an interesting thought. Instead of having to make them shut down, you offer to buy them up. Is Google becoming as powerful as Microsoft (or has it already happened?)

      • Is Google becoming as powerful as Microsoft (or has it already happened?)

        I think its happened already...

        I mean there actually are viable (better!) alternatives to using MS software in nearly all cases, well appart from Powerpoint. There really isn't a decent alternative to Google.

        Al.
  • Or it's horrible logo. The site needs a little work, but it seems like a good enough idea.

    This [slashdot.org] CmdrTaco Journal entry, just a couple weeks ago, disagrees.

  • Judging by the fact that they have made a CC of the Google look and logo (with the the G crossed-out), I am sure that they are wanting to get Google's attention, and everyone else's while they are at it. They are probably hoping that enough people will make enough noise that Google will encorporate what they feel is a great tool into Google.

    Admittedly it is not the best approach, but if it ends up working, well why not?

  • I want my flying car... (Score:5, Funny)

    by IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:16PM (#5471606) Journal
    Astro: Rey Reorge! There's a rew search rengine ralled Roogle!

    George: Everyone already knows about Google, Astro.

    Astro: Not Roogle, ROOGLE!

    George: Shut up you stupid mutt.

  • Google is pretty cool but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by quantaman (517394) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:16PM (#5471608)
    I will be amazed if these guys don't get taken down by Google. I mean part of the idea of trademark is to avoid brandname confusion and it took me a few seconds to make sure that this site wasn't affiliated with google. The hacked google logo and the very similar interface didn't help either. True the same arguments might be made for Windows and Lindows, prehaps the reason I never got those confused is that I'm very aware that is something M$ would never do. Either way I except these guys to be getting some strong words from google.
    • Hehe, I'm surprised he didn't link his CV from that page... That looks like a desperate attempt to get a job at Google to me... :-)

      I mean, with the recent moves in the direction of blogs at Google, they might just be thinking that "if we make an RSS search engine, we may get a good job at Google". But then, Google may not notice... But now they will... :-) It's pretty clever, actually.

      It's going to be funny to see that cease&desist...

      I think it is also very different from the Lindows issue, given that windows is a rather common word, Google isn't...

  • I don't think this site has any such Grand Ambition as taking on Google (or even selling out to them). The logo isn't the only thing kinda on the 1/2-ass side. How many Blogs are indexed? 594 as of this posting (Who we Are tab on roogle). Why this guy isn't using publicly (freely!) available info on published, syndicated blog content is anyone's guess. Mine is that they ain't too serious. "farter" is still holding up above "Microsoft" as the number one search term. Go "farter!"

  • These guys [fuzzygroup.com] are meant to be seasoned pros in product management, project managemement and marketing, but they don't see a problem with what they have done??

    If I was a client of theirs, I would be rather worried.

    Now, if they do have a half a clue, isn't this a great way to get some eyeballs?

  • This one here [koogle.net] can actually rely on an existing word "koogle". And besides that, it's kosher!

    Koogle.net was promoted by the newsletter of the Israeli Embassy in Germany. When I last checked, it had changed its layout to alienize it from google (slightly).

    Have fun,
    Mathias
    • Yeah, and what about XGoogle [xgoogle.com], which does IRC channel searches? I've always wondered how they've gotten away with that name. The site is different, but they're definitely building off of Google's success. Interesting how the word "Google" is really becoming a synonym for "search".
  • "This page is not sponsored by Google, affiliated with Google and will probably get me in trouble."

    Atleast he's aware he's going to get the anal raping of the century by Google.
  • What good is a search engine if you can't get to it?

    If they can be slashdotted this easily, well... they need to think a little harder about their setup.
  • A new kind of /. effect?
  • IANAL, but that site rather screams "parody" to me.
    • It's not really a parody. They're providing a real service, akin to Google's service, and it's not done to poke fun at Google, but instead competes with Google. There's really nothing about this that could be considered a parody...
  • Is about to stomp a mudhole in Roogle's butt.

    "In the end, there can only be one."
  • Ive noticed that Goodle.com have registered Gooogle.com and also setup ww.google.com sub domain to catch miss types.. now with roogle on the table... its gonna be pot luck soon what search engine you hit, no problem as long as there all good ;)

  • it's "its"! (Score:4, Informative)

    by violagal (657772) on Sunday March 09 2003, @12:50PM (#5471792)
    C'mon, people- this was done properly in the original message, then messed up one line down. 'it's' means 'it is'. the possesive version, such as 'its horrible logo' or 'its name' is spelled 'its'. Just learn the darned language!

  • Rip-off (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MBraynard (653724) on Sunday March 09 2003, @01:13PM (#5471908) Journal
    Why should we hope their name doesn't get them in trouble? Google did a lot of work to develop a stellar reputation and have done a lot of other projects with that Xoogles, like Froogle, etc. And they did this all starting from scratch, not trying to jump on anyone else's work.

    And some clowns suddenly appear and try to co-op google's reputation and cash in on the high name recognition they deserve? I am not sure if it's illegal, but that doesn't make it OK; what it makes it is pathetic.

  • You can already search rss feeds on google [google.com].

    Plus there are tons of news aggregators that already exist and have huge indicies of rss sources [disobey.com].

    Conclusion: /. editors get a kick out giving google reason to sue another small company with poor judgement! Either that or they like /.ing small sites.

    In other words:

    1. Create web site - which doesn't do anything useful but has a name that rips off Google.
    2. ???
    3. Lawsuit!

  • burn karma burn (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ravagin (100668) on Sunday March 09 2003, @02:47PM (#5472353)

    Hate to be anal, but slashdot editors, please....

    it
    's horrible logo

    Emphasis mine. Come on, it's [angryflower.com] not that hard.

    In other news, I'm glad they apparently decided not to use "Roogle"... something about that word disturbs me deeply on a primal level.

  • Google will attack Roogle, they attacked GEWGLE (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pheph (234655) on Sunday March 09 2003, @03:44PM (#5472566) Homepage
    Google has been very forceful and a little overzealous with their trademark attacks and threats. After over two years of owning Gewgle.com [gewgle.com] they are just now sending legally threatening letters [gewgle.com].

    Is Google about to have an IPO or something? It seems like they have changed so much in the last couple months...

  • I Love RSS (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jimmyCarter (56088) on Sunday March 09 2003, @05:14PM (#5472981) Journal
    Seriously.. here's a standard that's evolved quickly and without a bunch of bitching between various factions (at least not that I'm aware of).

    Yet, you have these enormous industry groups still haggling over the structure of XML docs tailored to their sector. Purchase orders, precription medication.. you name it - the pace of adoption has been terrible.

  • Roogle is a temporary name (Score:5, Informative)

    by PineHall (206441) on Sunday March 09 2003, @05:15PM (#5472989)
    Looking way down on their blog you see that Roolge is a temporary name. There is no motive for a Google buyout and they realize the name will not last. Check it out: blog entry [fuzzygroup.com]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.