<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Context of Search</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/</link>
	<description>paglia&#039;s thoughts: &#34;one to negative one&#34; and some noise in between</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:53:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Smoliar</title>
		<link>http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/comment-page-1/#comment-83</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Smoliar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 17:21:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/#comment-83</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I have to admit that the most interesting thing about this post was the revelation that Comcast has someone who &quot;manages search.&quot;  If &lt;a href=&quot;http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/05/finding-visible-clothes-for-emperor.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Jakob Nielsen&lt;/a&gt; is upset by the &quot;glossy but useless&quot; Web sites coming out of Web 2.0, I suspect that just about any set-top box would drive him apoplectic!  I have now tried to &quot;search&quot; with my own Comcast box and with a friend&#039;s TiVo/DirectTV hookup.  On the scale of my life experiences, this one ranked far below debugging assembly code on a PDP-8!  My guess is that most Comcast customers do not even know that search is an option.  (I do not think my friend knew she had it with her TiVo/DirectTV.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;None of this is meant to discredit Rudolph&#039;s recognition of the value of context, which is likely to be the biggest challenge for the future of the living room, so to speak.  Several years ago I was told that Amazon&#039;s biggest search problem was in their Music &quot;store,&quot; because too many search requests would yield either way too much (mostly of the wrong thing) or nothing at all.  This is sort of the &quot;24&quot; problem blown up to an even larger scale.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Context is as much social as it is &quot;semantic,&quot; however.  Graham Button talks about the problems of introducing a new technology in a workplace;  and the problem that most concerns him is that any work setting has its own &quot;immutable work practices&quot; (his words) before the new technology is introduced.  If the learning curve for the new technology does not take those immutable practices into account, the new technology many lower productivity rather than raise it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So it is with home entertainment.  However poorly it may have been designed, the Comcast box has now been around so long that a whole barrage of immutable practices have formed around it.  Those practices would drive Nielsen (and probably most of your readers) crazy;  but, like it or not, they are now part of the context of the consumer market.  The path to the &quot;Future of Media&quot; will have to take them into account, which means that it will probably have any number of twists and turns that those of us with &quot;technological common sense&quot; cannot possibly anticipate!&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to admit that the most interesting thing about this post was the revelation that Comcast has someone who &#8220;manages search.&#8221;  If &lt;a href=&#8221;http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/05/finding-visible-clothes-for-emperor.html&#8221; rel=&#8221;nofollow&#8221;&gt;<br />
Jakob Nielsen&lt;/a&gt; is upset by the &#8220;glossy but useless&#8221; Web sites coming out of Web 2.0, I suspect that just about any set-top box would drive him apoplectic!  I have now tried to &#8220;search&#8221; with my own Comcast box and with a friend&#8217;s TiVo/DirectTV hookup.  On the scale of my life experiences, this one ranked far below debugging assembly code on a PDP-8!  My guess is that most Comcast customers do not even know that search is an option.  (I do not think my friend knew she had it with her TiVo/DirectTV.)</p>
<p>None of this is meant to discredit Rudolph&#8217;s recognition of the value of context, which is likely to be the biggest challenge for the future of the living room, so to speak.  Several years ago I was told that Amazon&#8217;s biggest search problem was in their Music &#8220;store,&#8221; because too many search requests would yield either way too much (mostly of the wrong thing) or nothing at all.  This is sort of the &#8220;24&#8243; problem blown up to an even larger scale.</p>
<p>Context is as much social as it is &#8220;semantic,&#8221; however.  Graham Button talks about the problems of introducing a new technology in a workplace;  and the problem that most concerns him is that any work setting has its own &#8220;immutable work practices&#8221; (his words) before the new technology is introduced.  If the learning curve for the new technology does not take those immutable practices into account, the new technology many lower productivity rather than raise it.</p>
<p>So it is with home entertainment.  However poorly it may have been designed, the Comcast box has now been around so long that a whole barrage of immutable practices have formed around it.  Those practices would drive Nielsen (and probably most of your readers) crazy;  but, like it or not, they are now part of the context of the consumer market.  The path to the &#8220;Future of Media&#8221; will have to take them into account, which means that it will probably have any number of twists and turns that those of us with &#8220;technological common sense&#8221; cannot possibly anticipate!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Smoliar</title>
		<link>http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/comment-page-1/#comment-740</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Smoliar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 17:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.loupaglia.com/correlate/2007/05/16/the-context-of-search/#comment-740</guid>
		<description>I have to admit that the most interesting thing about this post was the revelation that Comcast has someone who &quot;manages search.&quot;  If &lt;a href=&quot;http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/05/finding-visible-clothes-for-emperor.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;
Jakob Nielsen&lt;/a&gt; is upset by the &quot;glossy but useless&quot; Web sites coming out of Web 2.0, I suspect that just about any set-top box would drive him apoplectic!  I have now tried to &quot;search&quot; with my own Comcast box and with a friend&#039;s TiVo/DirectTV hookup.  On the scale of my life experiences, this one ranked far below debugging assembly code on a PDP-8!  My guess is that most Comcast customers do not even know that search is an option.  (I do not think my friend knew she had it with her TiVo/DirectTV.)
None of this is meant to discredit Rudolph&#039;s recognition of the value of context, which is likely to be the biggest challenge for the future of the living room, so to speak.  Several years ago I was told that Amazon&#039;s biggest search problem was in their Music &quot;store,&quot; because too many search requests would yield either way too much (mostly of the wrong thing) or nothing at all.  This is sort of the &quot;24&quot; problem blown up to an even larger scale.
Context is as much social as it is &quot;semantic,&quot; however.  Graham Button talks about the problems of introducing a new technology in a workplace;  and the problem that most concerns him is that any work setting has its own &quot;immutable work practices&quot; (his words) before the new technology is introduced.  If the learning curve for the new technology does not take those immutable practices into account, the new technology many lower productivity rather than raise it.
So it is with home entertainment.  However poorly it may have been designed, the Comcast box has now been around so long that a whole barrage of immutable practices have formed around it.  Those practices would drive Nielsen (and probably most of your readers) crazy;  but, like it or not, they are now part of the context of the consumer market.  The path to the &quot;Future of Media&quot; will have to take them into account, which means that it will probably have any number of twists and turns that those of us with &quot;technological common sense&quot; cannot possibly anticipate!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to admit that the most interesting thing about this post was the revelation that Comcast has someone who &#8220;manages search.&#8221;  If &lt;a href=&#8221;http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/05/finding-visible-clothes-for-emperor.html&#8221; rel=&#8221;nofollow&#8221;&gt;<br />
Jakob Nielsen&lt;/a&gt; is upset by the &#8220;glossy but useless&#8221; Web sites coming out of Web 2.0, I suspect that just about any set-top box would drive him apoplectic!  I have now tried to &#8220;search&#8221; with my own Comcast box and with a friend&#8217;s TiVo/DirectTV hookup.  On the scale of my life experiences, this one ranked far below debugging assembly code on a PDP-8!  My guess is that most Comcast customers do not even know that search is an option.  (I do not think my friend knew she had it with her TiVo/DirectTV.)<br />
None of this is meant to discredit Rudolph&#8217;s recognition of the value of context, which is likely to be the biggest challenge for the future of the living room, so to speak.  Several years ago I was told that Amazon&#8217;s biggest search problem was in their Music &#8220;store,&#8221; because too many search requests would yield either way too much (mostly of the wrong thing) or nothing at all.  This is sort of the &#8220;24&#8243; problem blown up to an even larger scale.<br />
Context is as much social as it is &#8220;semantic,&#8221; however.  Graham Button talks about the problems of introducing a new technology in a workplace;  and the problem that most concerns him is that any work setting has its own &#8220;immutable work practices&#8221; (his words) before the new technology is introduced.  If the learning curve for the new technology does not take those immutable practices into account, the new technology many lower productivity rather than raise it.<br />
So it is with home entertainment.  However poorly it may have been designed, the Comcast box has now been around so long that a whole barrage of immutable practices have formed around it.  Those practices would drive Nielsen (and probably most of your readers) crazy;  but, like it or not, they are now part of the context of the consumer market.  The path to the &#8220;Future of Media&#8221; will have to take them into account, which means that it will probably have any number of twists and turns that those of us with &#8220;technological common sense&#8221; cannot possibly anticipate!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

