Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Group info
Recent pages and files
Search Efficiency    

Analysing Search Efficiency

Introduction

I have spent several months creating new User Interfaces for Google. Not fully-working interfaces; just mock-ups. That’s what I enjoy doing, because I feel I’m doing it for a purpose. However, these mock-ups have often been simply for appearance. Skin deep. But now, in the first of several articles, I get into the nitty-gritty of Google, starting with Search Efficiency.

The Problem

People want to get the answer to their query as soon as possible. Google offers several ways to speed up the process. In the screenshot below, the annotations show the elements that make up the order of someone entering a query into Google.

 

They can be in any order. This would most likely be Search type (e.g. Images), Search terms (e.g. ‘lara croft’), then a press of the Search button.

There should be a quicker way. Imagine if you could enter your query and then click “images” and the actual result comes up directly.

 

However, we couldn’t use the current position of the search types. So, how do we fix it?

The Solutions

Idea 1

So, here’s my first idea.

 

 

It’s easy to use. The person enters their search terms, and clicks the type of search it is, which also acts as a search submission. Two for the price of one.

 

To be honest, I quite like it. However, there are still some problems…

 

  • Some people will be looking for a search button
  • Links do not conform to HTML forms standards
  • It’s not very aesthetic
  • It’s not very obvious that you can click “Enter” on the keyboard to go straight to the web results There’s no “I’m Feeling Lucky”.

Idea 2

 Idea 2 is getting there.

 

Advantages include a compact size (using only two columns). Also, the Google Search button is back. This puts more emphasis on the main kind of Google Search. Yet, it also acts as a heading for the rest of the search types.

 

Therefore, this design provides a solution to every problem stated for Idea 1, except for “I’m Feeling Lucky”. Well, for the interface not to get overcrowded, something special needs to happen. Here’s where things get a little tricky for the engineers…

Idea 3

 As you can see, this design actual gets rid of the I’m Feeling Lucky trademark, and replaces it with... “I’m Feeling Looky” (perhaps). Basically, it gives you a preview of the first result, before you even click to search. Now that’s efficient. But it is also quite unrealistic.

 

This design is probably not to everyone’s taste, as it is more cluttered than the current Google homepage. However, it is more efficient, and in a subtle way. And that was the aim of today.

Version: 
3 messages about this page
Oct 25 2006 by Peter Dawson
yeaj, there should only be limited buttons.. not more then 4 ..with a
button for all :)-
Oct 25 2006 by Mambo
I think I like the idea of radio buttons, as long as there aren't too
many, because then it would look cluttered.
Oct 24 2006 by Peter Dawson
I think that ;
(a)"type of search" is important, why dont you have radio buttons or check box..this means results can be pulled from one service or a host of services, or something like that..
(b) At each desgin iteration of the screen, one also needs to do click analysis from a UX view point. As a user I just want to type in my search term and hit enter. Two actions. But with other varations the users is now forced to move to multiple clicks or keystrokes to active any results.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google