I am totally dismayed by the top search engines. I am looking for something\nvery specific using 3 or more words. Unless there just happens to tons of\nhits on those 3 words explicitly, then you get a decent list.\n\nInstead, the damn search engines "HIT" on anything remotely relating to\nwhat you are looking for. Then, include offshoots of those words. So out of\na 100 "hits" you might wind up with 5 that are what you are looking for.\nBut are those 5 hits at the top of the list where they should be? Nooooo.\nThey're buried and you have to hunt for them. Then the list is further\ncompounded by the fact that even one of the words match even though it has\nnothing to do with what you're really looking for.\n\nCan we please have a search engine that relies on relevancy? Rather than\njust hunting it's bot list for matching words and posting them in lightning\nspeed. Even when I include filters to help weed out erroneous hits, it\nreally doesn't matter. For instance, I'm not looking for classified ads yet\neven with the filter, I still get them. Profusely. \n\nIt almost seems like the top search engines have their own list of what\nthey want you to see first. \n\nSo why can't search engines take the first word of what you are looking\nfor, find it, then match the second word and so on. So that you might see\nsomething like first word>>second word>>third word. Anything that matches\nthe first word alone is listed first. \n\nTake a simple name search as an example. e.g. search for John Smith.\nWhat you will get is hits on every perceivable combination. You may get a\nhit on John Doe or Joe Smith. Or something like Smith.John With 3 words,\nyou'll get all kinds of garbage you have to weed through.\n\nHas anybody got a search engine that gives truer results? I'm tired of\ngoogle and yahoo.\n\nMaybe I'll write my own eh?