# Hey Cchiu!



## greg (Dec 8, 1999)

Yes, I'm a cook by trade. 18 years in the business and counting. My question for you: What's your favorite search engine? My ISP's home page uses looksmart; I don't particularly like it. Alta Vista works better, but what gets the best results for you? For Nicko, if you read this, maybe you could have Cchiu write an article on how to use search engines and which ones to use. I think it would be very useful because sometimes you just don't have the time to wait for a response to a posted question. Boolean searches, what to type in and what not to type in; there's a lot more to the subject.


----------



## cape chef (Jul 31, 2000)

Greg, Try refdesk.com and copernic.com. copernic uses about 15 engines at once to find results.
I'm sure cchiu will be the one to help
cc


----------



## nutcakes (Sep 5, 2000)

Greg, www.google.com is really great. It is very straightforward and you don't need to worry about boolean; I believe it assumes AND with your words, but it is as accurate as if I had specified quotes. And it is not junked up with a bunch of recommendations to buy stuff.


----------



## isa (Apr 4, 2000)

Google is great. I also like www.metacrawler.com 
www.copernic.com is also wonderful. It can search the web by country and language.


----------



## kylew (Aug 14, 2000)

I use 2; dogpile.com and askjeeves.com. They are both metacrawlers which means they go out and search multiple search engine databases. If I am looking for quick, dirty and voluminous responses I use dogpile. If I am looking for something a little more precise i uses askjeeves. The difference is that @ askjeeves you don'e need to know boolean logic from express chicken liver pate. You can a simple question such as "What is the proper way to make a bernaise sauce?" The results are presented in an easy to understand way.


----------



## mudbug (Dec 30, 1999)

Greg,

Wasn't ignoring you, there's *a lot* involved in searching properly even if you have the best search engine at your fingertips...

I'll consider it after the holidays.

Right now quick tip would be to always read the "advanced search options" of whatever search engine you're looking for. I highly recommend Google.com and Altavista.com.

It will make finding the needle in a haystack as easy as finding the exact needle you're looking for in the needle section of your fabric store....



:bounce:


----------



## athenaeus (Jul 24, 2001)

Well the Deipnosophist uses

www.alltheweb.com  for really fast results, supports many different languages 

For really difficult cases http://www.ixquick.com supports many languages too

Nice thread


----------



## chrose (Nov 20, 2000)

I always use google myself. But here's a tip for google. if you were looking for say, chefs that smoke (just bear with me here) if you typed in *chefs that smoke* you would get a million hits that contain the word *chef, that & smoke* but not necessarily as a common link. It might give you a million hits that contain the word *chefs* a million that contain the word *smoke * that have nothing to do with what you want. Likewise on the word *that!* . Use quotation marks and you will get hits *"* _chefs that smoke_ *"* and you will get hits that contain that particular phrase thereby eliminating the superfluous links that mean nothing to you.


----------



## mudbug (Dec 30, 1999)

chrose,

Yes, all this type of information is included in the "Advanced Search" and anything on "how to search such as the "Advanced Search Made Easy " that each search engine might provide.

In addition, if you want to find "chefs that smoke" but are not looking for those which smoke cigars, you would input the following:

"chefs that smoke" -cigars

But at the same time, this would only return results where the entire phrase "chefs that smoke" is included.

This particular search might be complicated by "smoke" used in a different context especially with chefs, in regards to cooking which is also something to take into account.

But alas, there appear to be none as when you try it, none come up under:

"chefs that smoke"

Perhaps a culinary approach? like:

the best chicken pot pie


----------



## kylew (Aug 14, 2000)

If you go to the "Advenced Search" option on google, they give you several different search options including:

All of the words - They may not be in context "These chefs smoke duck that has been..." as opposed to "52% of all chefs that smoke cigarettes..."

The exact phrase - this is chrose's quotes search but you don't need the quotes

Any of the words - this is chrose's worst case


----------



## chrose (Nov 20, 2000)

I didn't realize that google had the advanced search option. So I learned something. However you people are getting a little too literal. I threw out the phrase "chefs that smoke" as the quickest thing that came to mind. It could have just as easily been "mud that smells" or something equally ridiculous. The point was that when using google without knowing the advanced search option, using the quotations would help the search. So there, I'll go crawl back in my hole phtttt.......


----------



## cape chef (Jul 31, 2000)

I just did a google search "chefs that smoke" and I got 20,000 hits.


----------



## mudbug (Dec 30, 1999)

cape chef,

Correct, you input the following for 20,200 results:

When you input the following which defines the search (quotations):

It does not match any documents.

chrose,

Don't take it personally. This is why it would take a while to really write an article on searching. (The examples have to be appropriate and accurate.) And, yes, "literal" so that anyone actually trying to do the same thing comes up with the intended results so that it is thoroughly explained. (please come back out!)


----------

