<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"   Diane von Furstenburg&amp;#039;s Google boutique.  Murmurs of Google&amp;#039;s fashionable interests surfaced about a year ago, but in the past two weeks, thanks to an invite promising a party where &amp;quot;High Tech Meets High Fashion,&amp;quot; it&amp;#039;s been the one thing everyone&amp;#039;s talking about. Boutiques.com went live this morning, and it&amp;#039;s already poised to slaughter the competition. It&amp;#039;s as comprehensive as a Google search for anything else, but prettier. The site&amp;#039;s incredibly easy to navigate; it starts with a few broad categories and slowly narrows them down to help you find either what you&amp;#039;re looking for, or more likely, stumble into a pile of things you don&amp;#039;t need, but really love. For example, if you choose to browse by celebrity boutique, you can choose Mary-Kate Olsen and underneath pictures of the actress you&amp;#039;ll scroll for ages though things she&amp;#039;d absolutely wear. If you choose bloggers instead, you&amp;#039;ll see at least one hundred pieces they&amp;#039;ve actually picked out and then, below that, other pieces inspired by their choices. You can, of course, shop by basic categories, too. In that case, they get incredibly detailed like &amp;quot;lace-up motorcycle boots&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;top handle bags.&amp;quot; Plenty of designers from Marchesa to William Rast have boutiques, but even if they don&amp;#039;t they&amp;#039;re easily found in the designer index. For every item shown you can &amp;quot;love&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;hate&amp;quot; and you can follow as many boutiques, labels and styles as you like (and even start your own boutique). There is one glitch however, since clicking on an individual item sends you all over the internet, you never know if you&amp;#039;ll end up at Barneys or Browns. When offering product from the latter they forgot to convert pounds into dollars which means the bright blue Sarah Jessica Parker-approved Nicholas Kirkwood&amp;#039;s aren&amp;#039;t actually $695, they&amp;#039;re \u00A3695, or just over $1100. But, this being Google, we imagine they&amp;#039;ll get that fixed in no time. "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.elle.com/fashion/shopping/news/a5225/googles-boutiquescom-is-live-its-great-but-it-forgot-to-turn-pounds-into-dollars-10127/>