What if instead of having to go to your favorite search engine ( google, yahoo, bing, etc.. ), you simply type a keyword, company name, trademark, or slogan directly into your browser and find what you want? Well, history came darn close to making this happen and eliminating the need to remember lengthy web addresses.
In 1997, a little-known company wanted to change the way people used the internet. The idea of not having to remember countless domain names and their extensions ( .com, .net, .org, .info, .tv, .other stuff ) and long URLs made it possible for this company to raise $100+ million. The company provided a Web address naming solution to its customers and partners and an intuitive navigation system for Internet users.
When consumers enter a keyword into the address bar of their IE, the browser will automatically navigate them to the relevant Web pages. This eliminates the need to dig through layers of a Web site, making searches and surfing more efficient, while creating a revolutionary business model.
Additionally, by using simple, easy-to-remember brand names, words or slogans, advertisers could enhance the effectiveness of their online and offline advertising campaigns. The idea was to get household name companies like Disney, Sony, and those with major advertising budget to purchase hundreds of Keywords, slogans and brand identities at high prices to appear in search results.
The company, RealNames, ceased operations on June 28, 2002.
Numerous theories had surfaced as to the real cause of RealNames’s failure ranging from failure to change consumer habits of typing .com after company or product name, to failure to provide enough search results for effective searching. Others blamed Microsoft’s decision ( greed?) to wanting control of the user experience.
Without the support from the big three search giants — MSN, Yahoo, Google — RealNames business model of ending the need to type xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.com failed to change the way consumers didn’t want to use the web.
Despite everything, it made perfect sense to have a navigation system that could attach itself to the browser. Where did it fail?
– Focusing on only one partner ( Microsoft )?
– Unable to control the end user experience from start to finish?
– Failure to build trust with end users?
– Limited Search Results?
– Underestimated consumer intelligence?
Perhaps, RealNames should have studied consumer habits much closer prior to launching a product that does not also include offering a needed product where consumers can research and compare information. Although hindsight is 20/20, a successful model should understand what consumers want prior to buying.
A consumer that can remember a company slogan, brand name, or product name knows where to go to buy the product. Where the RealNames business model failed at is providing information for research and comparison. This cannot be accomplished simply by selling keywords to the highest bidder.
Eight years later, today, the very innovation pioneered by RealNames ( browser keyword navigation ) takes visitors to search listings from Bing.com ( YES, owned by Microsoft ). BING.COM has what RealNames wanted back in 2002 — A powerful search engine with browser navigation. But even with Bing’s keyword navigation, Google continues to dominate the search market.
RealNames had a usable API (via http) that could have supported such a service. But, the real failure was Microsoft’s failure of vision. It placed short term search revenues against a long term ubiquitous naming layer. 40% of all Google searches are actually navigation (1 possible result). If IE had maintained the “don’t search, just go there” behavior Google may never have become Google……There is still time, but sadly Bing is just a repeat of the old MSN search behavior when it comes to direct navigation.
Welcome Keith,
A recent discussion with some colleaques lead me to the same conclusion. In 2002 Google was in prenatal stage and the RealNames model could have prevailed. Understandably, the quality of data and search result was a concern for Microsoft, however, I am baffled by the juggling between the various revenue models — keyword bidding, membership fee, and flat fee pricing, etc…
Second, what was the differentiation between your “just go there” model and the domain industry’s “generic keyword”.com? Isn’t the logic behind searching to deliver choice vs. go to site redirection?
Correct me as needed, isn’t the current Bing navigation model the same as RealNames only with a different revenue model?
You made some good points there. I did a search on the topic and found most people will agree with your blog.
Pretty proficient post. I found your blog and wanted to say your information seems legit. Will keep posted. Thanks.
I have read few of articles here and can say it was really interesting, thanks for sharing this.