| 6:06 am on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
With what? An update?
Dude - the dance is dead.
| 6:32 am on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
You are so right, Brett. Sad, but true.
| 6:57 am on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Ok, thanks :(
| 10:10 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The real question is, with the end of the big monthly updates, and the accompanying huge webmaster interest, how much will it affect Google?
Webmasters watched it, bloggers watched it, and even the general press watched it. The dance was a monthly intense focus on Google that other companies could only dream about in their wildest fantasies. And now that is gone. Houston - Red flag, red flag.
I don't think there are but 1 or maybe 2 people at Google who really GET what the dance meant to Googles public image efforts. All I can say is we are going to watch the next year as the biggest change in the history of Google. We will look back on the loss of "the dance" as a big turning point.
| 10:14 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Without the dance I feel all jittery. It's got me looking to other search engines to see how I can focus more on them because I spent so much time practicing my dance steps with Google ;)
Maybe this isn't a bad thing, I'm not getting more traffic from search engines I never saw traffic from :D
| 10:30 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well, as they say, no news is good news. I'm quite happy there's no dance every month. What a waste of time that was. Now I can have a life again.
Still Brett, I can see why Webmasterworld will miss it. What a bummer losing that one. Your traffic must be a quarter what it was around the Dominic Update.
| 10:38 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Can't speak for Brett, and wouldn't even presume to try, but purely from a member perspective, any 'losing' out on the bandwidth barrage of dance related traffic doesn't seem like a bad thang.
| 10:53 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
No dance! Talk about "all dressed up with no place to go". ;)
| 11:20 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well, now we get to make threads with 10,000 posts when the PageRank updates.
| 11:35 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Exactly Patrick. The dance may be dead, but waiting for that blasted PageRank to update is the current fun 'n' frolics game ;)
| 11:51 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think page rank will be the next thing to go. Without a complete monthly crawl, it's not going to be that easy to have a page rank system that works.
My personal opinion is that Googlebot will have to do a deep crawl, at least, a couple of times per year. Just better have that server up when they do it. :)
Brett is so right about looking back on this time in Google's history as a timeline when things started changing, not for the better. Some of us have been on the Internet a long time, and I for one can remember when AV and Excite were the best games in town, but where are they now? I believe the Internet doesn't like a vacuum and someone, possibly MS will fill this void in short order. I certainly respect what Google has built, but just like your computer, without upgrades, Google will become obsolete within the next six months if their database becomes old.
[edited by: MarkHutch at 12:08 am (utc) on Aug. 21, 2003]
| 11:56 pm on Aug 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Can somebody please point me to a good descripion of the google dance...
-because many of my new pages just update.
-my backlinks just jumped from 11-50.
-and my serps changed ( not for the better ).
I am not sure I know what the dance was ( as I am rather new to this seo thing .) This was my first real month of watching seo changes affect a site.
So, if the dance is a thing of the past, what is the timeline for serps/pr/backlinks/new pages going forward?
...just trying to understand.
| 12:16 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Comon Brett you could have broke it to sun818 in a nicer way . What happen to Euphemisms. The Google dance has moved off into the endlessly unfolding confines of the past, its a one way train and is never coming back. But now Google is now alive ... and frehser than ever ..
[edited by: Interent_Yogi at 12:17 am (utc) on Aug. 21, 2003]
| 12:17 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Webmasters watched it, bloggers watched it, and even the general press watched it |
General public never watched it. i never knew there was something called google dance till i came here...that's the difference...most webmasters will be relieved..and google just gets to do their business as usual.
| 12:35 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I wonder how long that will last, Chndru. The only reason Google became so big so fast is because they were doing the search engine thing better than anyone else. If that stops, so will they. This has happened many times before with other search engines. We just all have to move on to what comes next. Not sure what that will be yet, but I have a feeling that we will all be "slurping" in the near future, judging from my raw log files. :)
| 12:44 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|The only reason Google became so big so fast is because they were doing the search engine thing better than anyone else. If that stops, so will they. |
Agreed. But what makes you think they will stop doing their serps better? I would think G is miles ahead of others in terms of understanding its users and the way the web works. As long as they get that right, technology is just a tool..what one can do..others can replicate...I see many people here predicting G's demise in very near future...I would think not, even when Y ditches G and MSN makes it's search integrated to its OS. My understanding is G is undergoing major upgrade of its methods and will be much better when others close the gap.
| 12:59 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|My understanding is G is undergoing major upgrade of its methods and will be much better when others close the gap. |
I hope you're right. This is one time, I'd love to be wrong.
| 2:29 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
wow... I must be getting old.... somebody said excite and I remembered waiting for that every other week index.... I would stay up and wait for it... sit there on the phone with SeGuru and drink beers and look at each others listings.... back then it would have never occured to most of us that that whole engine would just freeze up tight, and after months of waiting for the next update, it would just keel over and die... shocked the hell out of us... like that feeling when you are at a movie and it ends abruptly and the lights turn on and everybody just looks around at each other like a bunch of idiots.
In hindsight, yeah, I guess the real smart guys may say they saw it coming, but I don't think too many of them did... just like now. just like Google. All you youngsters can't even imagine search without Google. Let me tell you, somewhere, right now, somebody is thinking up a way to revolutionize search as we know it, figuring out a better way to go about it. a smarter way. When you are number one the only direction to go is down. Even Ceasar died. Don't get me wrong, Google is far from dead, but to think it can't come crashing down is a mistake... I remember when Google was tiny, and I thought to myself, 'should I optimize for this little thing?' eheheheh '...nahhh'
[edited by: dogboy at 2:34 am (utc) on Aug. 21, 2003]
| 2:31 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Dogboy. I'm glad I'm not the only old fart around here. :)
| 3:40 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Don't flame me, but I'm a bit amateur in this stuff...
What does it means "the dance is dead"?
As far as I understand, each time google updates its index, there is a so called "dance".
Is it then that we are in a continuous index update?
Some input will help this poor soul to understand what seems obvious to all of you.
Thanks in advance
| 4:48 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Enrique : Yes you have summarized it right. Details are buried all over forum 3.
| 5:28 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My life is boring now, bring back the update! :)
| 5:32 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'd *much* rather have a continous update than something gimicky like a Google dance.
The only problem is, although NEW pages and pages that are regularly visited by freshbot are updated within 48 hours...how often are other pages updated?
I have a few pages with "recent" changes that don't seem to have been updated by Google in a month(Maybe longer).
At least with the Google dance and the monthly deep crawl we knew what to expect.
But still, you have to admit that a continous update(if done right) has FAR more advantages over a monthly update.
| 5:40 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|General public never watched it. |
True...but who got them to Google anyway? ;)
| 5:54 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm going to propose an idea here that I don't think has been talked about much. Why don't the major search engines ban together financially and all use one giant crawler?
Each search engine could use their own algo for how the results are presented. Basically that's what happens anyway, but each one spends tons of money to crawl the Internet on a 30-45 day basis.
It would help most webmasters too by saving bandwidth. Rather than having five or six bots crawling around the Internet on a daily bases, there would be one giant crawler system where the cost is divided five or six ways.
Fast, Slurp, Alta Vista and Google all find the same pages anyway, but each is paying a large amount of money just to find the pages and follow the links each month. If there was one big crawling system for all of them, it would make sense that all their efforts would be on making the same database return relevant searches using their own algo system and this system would allow the Internet to be crawled effectively and efficiently on a monthly basis.
I'm just talking out loud here, but in theory it does seem to make some kind of sense for all of the major search engines to do it this way. One big crawler could do all the major work and the SE folks could just focus on serving up the search results in a way they think will best serve their customers.
| 6:13 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"I'm going to propose an idea here that I don't think has been talked about much. Why don't the major search engines ban together financially and all use one giant crawler? "
God, I hope that doesn't happen! I can just see it now - the crawler misses a website - and thus you end up out of ALL the SE's until the next crawl cycle. At least the way things are now, if you happen to be ignored for a cycle by one SE, the other's will help cover it.
Perhaps if there was an Iron-clad way of making sure all pages of all sites were indexed this might work, but I can't see that happening anytime soon.
And, as far as the dance goes, good riddance. Once Google gets all the kinks worked out of their rolling update, it can only help them - by allowing them to properly place new pages in days that otherwise may not have been seen for two months or so. It's just a matter of getting the kinks and bugs worked out.
| 6:24 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Webmasters watched it, bloggers watched it, and even the general press watched it. The dance was a monthly intense focus on Google that other companies could only dream about in their wildest fantasies. |
I can only tell for myself, but my impression is that you overrate it. I'm "on the net" since '88, working in webdesign since '96, taking an loose interest in SEO since about 2 years (my site got good rankings WITHOUT any optimization). I only heard about the dance some 2 or 3 weeks ago.
Germany - where I live - is not really a backwater, but I NEVER saw any press coverage on the dance, I NEVER came across a discussion forum or specialty webmaster website which covered it, not even SEO specialized sites. I only learned about it HERE and my impression was that it was a mere inconvenience to webmasters and that the new system looks to me much better.
| 6:43 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
A 'rolling' update has to be good for webmasters, Google and the search public!
More relevancy and shorter time lags never hurt anyone ;)
| 6:48 am on Aug 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Fast, Slurp, Alta Vista and Google all find the same pages anyway |
Actually, I do not find that to be the case from my experience. If I am performing research on a widget, I see different sites listed if you compare Google with FAST.
| This 94 message thread spans 4 pages: 94 (  2 3 4 ) > > |