Skip to main content

Expert Searching With Google


I found this site on "Power Searching with Google".  It describes how to get the most out of a google search. For 90% of my searching, a quick & dirty search (which is what I usually do) should be fine.  But that other 10% probably represents half of the time I spend trying to find things.  My usual strategy is to keep banging away & try new search terms.  The course recommends doing exactly that, but here are a few tips that I think will save a LOT of time for more specific searches:
  • When searching for images, use the "search tools" and choose a color.  Black & white, gray, white or black in particular are useful for finding diagrams.
  • Google scholar is great for finding authoritative search results.  
    • I think that it is similar to searching with site:edu, plus some other academic sources.  
    • Note the legal search results - court opinions are much clearer that I would have believed (and a lot more wordy).
  • Site: is useful if you want to restrict to a particular site or subset of sites. 
    • Restricting to site:gov would only give you official US government sites.  (You can use go.uk, go.fr, etc. to search other country govt sites).
    • Restricting site:edu will only give you US educational institutions.  Useful if you want a more collegiate take on the subject.
  • Filetype: can be useful if you want just a .csv or .klm (Google Earth) or a particular format.
    • filetype:pdf might be worthwhile if you want a document that covers the topic.
    • Combining site:edu filetype:pdf would (I think) restrict your search to something like "Academic papers on this subject", as opposed to abstracts or simple web pages.
  • This page has a pretty good summary of the search features, most of which are automatic.
You can get as much (or more) out of Google search simply by exploring the interface and trying everything that they have available.  They have put a lot of thought and effort into it.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Agile Performance Management: Why Performance Reviews Suck

Many thanks to Mary Poppendieck, who wrote about this topic in 2004, and proposed a comprehensive solution.  She is the inspiration for much of my thinking on this subject.  She is also a better writer than I am a cartoonist.


Performance reviews suck.  I don't know of anyone who goes into their appraisal without some trepidation.  Your boss is guaranteed spring some surprise criticism on you that is ill-informed or misses the point as you see it.  It's a real challenge not to get defensive about that.

The only thing that makes your own performance review suck less is having to give them.  As a manager, I have dished out quite a few, and some of them went pretty badly.  (To the people at my first management job: Thanks for helping me learn how to get better at them.  Your sacrifice was not in vain.)  Since then, receiving one isn't nearly as gut-wrenching, if only because I try to make it easier for the guy on the other side of the desk.  I've been there, and I know how …

Do. Not. Optimize.

You've probably heard this quote before:
Premature optimization is the root of all evil.
 - Tony Hoare
Speculative optimization is always wasted time.  In the absence of an actual performance problem, you're just burning time that could be better spent on refactoring your code to make it clearer.  This is exacerbated because performance-optimized code is usually harder to read than code which hasn't received such treatment.

Here is what you're doing when you optimize:
Adding code that now must be maintained.Obfuscating the existing code.Spending time writing code that doesn't add value. But what's that you say?  You have the experience and know-how to decide when optimization is needed?  Maybe, but probably not.   The people at Sun and Oracle may or may not be smarter than  you or me, but they certainly know more about optimizing Java bytecode than we do.

For example, some people think that having a large number of classes is slower than the alternative.  This …

Developer Skills: Drawing

You aren't a good developer if you can't draw. Fortunately, if you're a human, you can.  Drawing isn't an inborn talent, it's a technical skill that can be learned.  Write the previous sentence on a piece of paper to prove it to yourself.



There.  You just drew a whole bunch of letters quickly and (hopefully) legibly.  Words are a complex set of shapes that need to be drawn in a particular sequence to have meaning.  It's the same basic skill you use when drawing non-character shapes.

Drawing isn't a binary skill that you either have or do not have.  It's a continuum, and even at the shallow end (people with barely-legible handwriting), you have enough of it to communicate ideas visually.

So that changes the top line of this post to:
You aren't a good developer if you don't draw. Visual communication is much more powerful than text.  (This study found 65% retention over 3 days for images vs text.)  We also absorb visual information much faster th…