| 2:06 am on Dec 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>>>and how did they hear of Google?
Yahoo. When Yahoo picked Google for secondery results they took off from there on.
| 3:49 am on Dec 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
What is more accurate - throwing a dart at a wall full of words - or searching on Inktomi.
I'll go with the dart.
| 7:32 am on Dec 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Let's not forget that a large bulk of Internet surfers have either come very use to Google being the only place to search or you have the once-in-a-while computer user who doesn't know anything else? I am not saying Google is going to stay on top. When another place puts out a better product word will spread and eventually Google will be Altavista. The only question is that anytime soon? I say No, just because Google is acting buggy to people who watch it closely doesn't mean its being any different to people who barely understand how it works.
| 8:35 pm on Dec 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think it really all boils down to content syndication.
the reason Google is on top is not because of us SEO's, webmaster's and geeks...it's because of average Joe. And most average Joe's don't know what a google or inktomi is...
so what it really boils down to is...I hate to say it....
AOL search engine traffic...
the last time I checked...accounts for roughly 30%-35% of the total. Not sure if this is still true due to the efforts of broadband...but if anybody has the stats....we could easily figure out what would happen...and who would rule...when AOL decides to change course....
| 3:38 am on Dec 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
AOL uses Google results too, right?
Maybe when Y! drops G, AOL will follow suit. That would be nice for us webmasters.
But I doubt it
| 10:50 am on Dec 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>AOL search engine traffic...the last time I checked...accounts for roughly 30%-35% of the total
When did you last check? 1998?...LOL.
AOL accounts for about 5.5% of my SE traffic, I doubt anyone at WW has logs showing over 10%.
AOL traffic does convert well though....I think it is soooo slow their users have to buy the first thing they find ;)
| 12:13 pm on Dec 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
This may go without saying, but anyone considering registering for a paid feed should really check out their rankings on hotbot first. It could save you a lot of money if you are already there.
FWIW I got a bunch of deeplinks from one high profile site and almost all of my pages are in ink now. Much more cost effective than paying x cents a click. Ripped up that feed contract.
| 11:13 pm on Dec 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>FWIW I got a bunch of deeplinks from one high profile site and almost all of my pages are in ink now. Much more cost effective than paying x cents a click. Ripped up that feed contract<<
What do you mean by deep links? And why would a deep link get all your pages in INK as opposed to a "shallow link" - which I assume would be to the homepage?
| 5:47 am on Dec 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
nice thread ... my 2 cents
I think alot of you are greatly over estimating the average surfer ... In October 9,988,941 people did a search at Overture for "ebay" and another 2,538,528 searched for ebay.com ... thats 12.5 million people in October that don't know how to "go" to ebay ... you think they know if one se is filled with affiliate links or any other nonsense?
If most people do a search for internet casinos, hotels, flowers, or whatever ... they are happy when the site they click has what they searched for.
My question is will MSN quit displaying inktomi results?
As much as it makes sense for Yahoo to display their own results (ie inktomi) I think it could be argued MSN should stop displaying Yahoo owned results ... thoughts
| 5:38 am on Dec 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I wonder why they would go with Inktomi instead of AllTheWeb or even AltaVista?
| 10:58 am on Dec 9, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes, it seems almost everyone forgets about AllTheWeb or WiseNut, but I really prefer AllTheWeb. It has some nice features, and search results have some spam, but what SE doesn´t have it?
| 10:18 am on Dec 22, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I wonder why they would go with Inktomi instead of AllTheWeb or even AltaVista? |
I used to wonder this, since I am finding both of those to be excellent these days.
My guess is that inktomi has the largest PAID database of the three.
I booked a ticket anyway. I have heard the best way to be included is to be paid, or be linked to from a page that is. Is that the theory I should use when deciding on which pages to submit?
| 10:48 pm on Dec 22, 2003 (gmt 0)|
This really is a great thread.
I think Yahoo is in a great position and that they are making some smart moves by focusing on the SEARCH market. They revamped the front page to make search more prominent, redesigned the search interface, introduced product search, bought Overture, ATW, Alta Vista, AND Inktomi. Is there any doubt that Yahoo sees the $ in $earch?
No doubt, Ink has the biggest PAID database. I think Yahoo looks at the "Trusted Feed" and see's the cash register roaring. PPC on regular search results is, no doubt, very enticing to Yahoo. I would guess that this is the reason why Yahoo appears to be on the road to Inktomi.
I disagree fundamentally with the idea of mixing paid results with free results but that is a discussion for another day.
I have had really poor experience with PFI. I won't get into it. There are a few threads aroud where I have posted my experiences and what has happened to my PFI pages.
I would really like to know if other webmasters really feel like Inktomi results are as relevant or close to ATW, Alta Vista and Google. Do you think INK can really compete with Google results?
I really believe that Yahoo has seen the $ in $earch as a direct result of Google's great results. Right now, the end user can get relevant results at Yahoo (because they are using Google). But if Yahoo switches to Ink (assuming that Ink isn't as relative) don't you think that the average Joe-Surfer would get frustrated and start using another engine? Don't you think the majority would find their way to Google? I do.
Eventually, I think that the whole idea of "balancing power" and "search engine diversification" would go to pot. If Yahoo puts out irrelevant results, they may not only be shooting themselves in the foot, but they'll indirectly build the Google empire.
I want Yahoo to switch from Google and I want them to sucessfully provide some serious competition in the Seach market. The competition will be good for the SE world. And I'll PFI too to ensure that my pages are indexed and accessible.
It's going to be interesting, that's for sure!
| 1:59 am on Dec 23, 2003 (gmt 0)|
BTW, that whole post was all based on my reasoning that I think Ink isn't quite there yet to compete with some of the other engines (alta vista, ATW, Google). I'm sure it's just a matter of time before they get there. Yahoo owns Alta Vista and ATW, so it's not like they can't replicate it.
My point was... I don't think Yahoo will switch to Ink until they've got the algo fine tuned and have results that are just as relevant (if not better) than google.
If Yahoo pulls the trigger to soon, they'll hurt themselves and really help Google. If they are patient and get Ink in tip top shape, they'll help themseves in the short and long-term.
IMHO, of course.
| 9:34 am on Dec 23, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I would really like to know if other webmasters really feel like Inktomi results are as relevant or close to ATW, Alta Vista and Google. Do you think INK can really compete with Google results? |
Inktomi has a long way to go. For example on one non-commercial term I watch, the top result is the definitive site on the topic, the next 5 results are all resource sites that link to the top site without adding any new information on the topic, and then comes a site that has been defunct for over 4 years and redirects to a dieting site (completely off-topic). Only one of the remaining top ten results provides unique information on the topic.
ATW, AV, and G all provide at least 8 different relevant sites for this topic in the top ten.
| This 75 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 75 ( 1 2  ) |