| 9:05 am on Nov 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Web Search 9 allows paid inclusion customers to include or exclude their listings for up to 30 global regions. Since queries and pages can be categorized based on location, advertisers are insured the best geo-based targeting.
Somehow this smells like a PFI fee hike in the making.
| 10:13 am on Nov 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I checked and I am ranking #10 in a field of 1,441,897 for the single, main keyword for my site.
Great! Now here's hoping all those updates are gonna help and not hurt :)
| 2:47 pm on Nov 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
This sounds like a good development for INK and us. I get a lot referrals from INK. I hope that this means a permanent end to the ransome approach to inclusion in their database. At the end of summer INK did a major update, and started including pages for free. With this new update, they are creating value for paid inclusion (e.g. custom summaries), beyond just the ransome approach.
I can't wait to start seeing 14-day refreshes.
Are we going to see a free submit page again?
| 12:02 am on Nov 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Ink sez in response to some very direct questions:
Macguru, I'll let today's product announcement speak for itself. We're working hard on both the product and distribution sides of the house and are more excited than ever about where we're headed.
Somebody needs to go back and re-read The Cluetrain Manifesto [cluetrain.com].
#40: Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.
#61: Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false—and often is.
#62: Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.
#75: If you want us to talk to you, tell us something. Make it something interesting for a change.
| 1:10 am on Nov 27, 2002 (gmt 0)|
CT seems to be coming up more and more lately round' these parts.
| 7:08 am on Nov 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's nice to see Inktomi retooling.
Is there a page somewhere that lists the current Inktomi partners? Do all of them support the new features?
| 5:46 am on Nov 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have to concur. Smokescreens of hucksterism totally suck. I think it's great that InktomiGuy has showed up to answer some questions.
| 3:10 pm on Nov 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I don't like Inktomi ignoring the meta description tag except for PPC customers. Pulling the keyword randomly out of the body text is a poor way to build a page description. Just because Google and others do it doesn't mean it's the best way. You end up getting a LOT of search results that look like
home ¦ product1 ¦ <b>search query match</b> ¦ aboutus ¦ etc....
Inktomi's search submit customers at the very least deserve the right to define their own meta description content for the search result summary, not some random scrambled text from the page and not a poorly written DMOZ description.
I would however like to congratulate Inktomi on the quicker indexing, that's great!
| 4:06 pm on Nov 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Forkbeard (and others),
Mea culpa. I agree 100% with your post except for one small detail - the reply wasn't to a very "direct" question at all. The question was along the lines of "prove to us that you're not dead". I figured the best response to that was to point the poster to our new release of Search 9, the best proof, IMHO, of the massive investment in our product and our business over the past year.
As for new portal partners, we're usually prohibited from talking about those negotiations until deals are signed and delivered. As a public company, those are restrictions we just have to live with, like it or not. I wish I could share every discussion and conversation with the folks here, but I can't. All I can say is that we're aggressively committed to expanding distribution and continuing the relationships we have and hope you take our word for it.
This happens to be one (of a very few) areas where we agree with Google - hucksterism sucks. Ask some good questions and we'll give you some good answers. But don't just simply call us names without substance. :-)
| 9:15 am on Nov 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Out of curiosity and historical footnote, what was the internal code name for Web Search 9?
GK? Or does that refer to something else and you are sworn to secrecy?
| 11:55 am on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
All this is very nice, but the relevency of results from all except google is E grade.
Hands up all those that will use anything but google if looking for nightclubs and discount hotels for your next vacation to Spain.
Why don't the search engines understand that 1st it's relevancy . Just finished reading all kinds of nonsense in Inktomi's press release about Geotargetting and blah blah. Typical kind of press release put out by an overpaid & disinterested PR department.
Then some user called "Inktomi" says "we're very excided about Inktomi's future"...well my friend, we are not!
| 4:23 pm on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
No, it was not GK - I can only speculate at what that must stand for. :)
Believe it or not, the internal code name was - Search 9. We've been referring to our macro releases by version numbers since the company was founded. That said, Search 9 does consist of a number of subprojects that had interesting code names. To give you one, Dreadnought was the code name of the new completely rearchitected database upon which Search 9 is deployed.
| 6:04 pm on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Just wondering how you access the wonders of Search 9.
As far as I can see, partners such as PositionTech aren't yet offering these features.
Have I misunderstood here?
| 6:06 pm on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Search 9 features are currently being deployed across all of our partners, and will be on all of them by the end of the quarter.
PositionTech has indeed deployed Search 9 at search.positiontech.com. Check it out and let us know what you think.
| 6:08 pm on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Inktomi, index looks better than ever, still there is some pages, which souldn't be there (1 of ~14), but it's getting better, continue working :)
p.s also are you planning to support spidering of dynamic pages better in the near future?
| 8:16 pm on Dec 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the compliments. We do our best to spider dynamic pages, but it's often hard for crawlers to get to them. Our Index Connect paid inclusion program allows publishers to use an XML data feed, which means the content gets right into the index and can include dynamic pages or even search results pages.
| 1:02 am on Dec 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I don't know if this is on topic but slurp is really struggling to crawl my site. For the last week it's been progressively crawling deeper folder levels that don't exist. It's now looking for pages that it thinks are 15 levels deep!
Do you have any advice Inkguy?
And BTW, welcome and congrats on the yahoo deal.
| 8:04 am on Dec 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the congratulations, we are all pretty psyched! Send me your URLs via stickymail - I'll do my best to look into the problem after the holidays.
| This 48 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 48 ( 1  ) |