| 4:54 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>2100%... growth rate
Ah yes, I noticed a couple extra hits from them yesterday
| 6:33 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I find Teoma absolutely fascinating. And there's this gnawing feeling that doesn't go away, almost an instinctive pull to watch them. It's something like the feeling to put a $2 bet on a horse that's a long shot that'll somehow make it to the finish line and pay off.
| 7:47 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Bah, humbug. This press release is about the month Teoma's PR people screamed "We're gonna kill Google" into the ear of every tech reporter in the country.
This is what we used to call a "flash crowd". Make enough noise, and of course your traffic spikes. It says more about the skill of their public relations firm than it does about the quality of their site.
April means nothing, this summer means everything. The real news will be if Teoma keeps its April visitors coming back.
| 8:10 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I say humbug too. I just checked, and Teoma still lists my website at a URL it hasn't been at since February. Who wants to use a search engine that is that far out of date? So far, nothing about Teoma impresses me.
| 8:36 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
A revised page was uploaded round about April 20th, and by mid-May when I looked the new page was reflected, the site was ranking, and some traffic started rolling in. Not equal to Google or MSN, who are #1 and #2 referrers, but not at all far behind Yahoo either, numerically.
| 10:36 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Did you pay to get in, Marcia? Looks to me that is the only way to get their attention. Besides, at minimum if they were on the ball they would have at least found the URL my site was it in February is dead and deleted it. My site is listed in the DMOZ, and I promptly had them change the URL to the new one. The fact that they are missing DMOZ listed sites 3 and a half months later seems odd.
Also, I've tried using Teoma on searches and they have a habit of turning up uninteresting pages, and missing the good ones. IMO Teoma is a lot of hype, but what they deliver stinks.
| 10:44 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
All my Teoma pages are free.
I have no idea what they update and what the criteria. There is one site not getting in at all, if it still hasn't by mid July we'll do one paid page. The others get a lot of AJ action, but not that particular one; there have been many links added, we'll see if that will do it to spur some activity. It worked with a Lycos/FAST paid, so doing one can't hurt to try.
| 11:24 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
There is one area, in which Teoma clearly falls back compared to the heavy weights. That's international, non English indexing.
Take any generic non English query and you get somewhere between 20 - 50% max of ATW or Google's results.
Astonishingly Teoma is not even capable of handling non ASCII characters correctly.
Of course up to now Teoma just didn't need good international indexing - they are simply not present anywhere else than US and UK.
But to stand a chance on the www they will have to improve in that area. Remember, less than 50% of the worldwide online population are native English speakers.
All other big players, including AV, NorthernLight and Ink are far better equipped for international partnerships.
| 11:51 pm on Jun 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
teoma is cool, i dont like the paid submission thing however ALL of my sites even new ones are included in it without me submitting them so I have no problems with that. As far as traffic is concerned maybe 1 or 2 hits every other day, heh more than other engines I can sure say ;)
| 8:05 am on Jun 13, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>I have no idea what they update and what the criteria. There is one site not getting in at all, if it still hasn't by mid July we'll do one paid page. The others get a lot of AJ action, but not that particular one; there have been many links added, we'll see if that will do it to spur some activity. It worked with a Lycos/FAST paid, so doing one can't hurt to try.
If people have been getting sites added in the last 3 months without paying Teoma, their update criteria has got to be totally bizarre. Not only is my site in the DMOZ, but also Looksmart and the Yahoo directory. What decent search engine would overlook all those for months?
| 1:24 pm on Jun 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think you have to keep in mind that Teoma is the new kid on the block. 6 months ago they had less than 10 people, and almost no funding. So I think you have to watch it as an interesting experiment, and cheer for them if they can deliver something comparable to Google, FAST or Inktomi on a shoestring.
They certainly have some interesting technology; the question is (I believe) can they scale (how does the quality change as they have more docs in the primary index) and does AskJeeves really have the resources to support an effort to compete with the likes of Google, FAST and Inktomi. Search costs a lot of money to run.
Oh and yes, they have excellent PR. Before they got bought, they certainly had a flurry of articles about them (and a nice one by Danny Sullivan), and AskJeeves has always been good at marketing a large answer database.
One more item, easy to move up Jupiter Media Metrix lists until you hit a point when you need million+ more unique visitors to get one rank higher on the ladder.
| 7:36 pm on Jun 19, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well so far I considered Teoma as a nice stuff for the future but without any effect for now. I must admit that this is changing and we get "fair" referrals from teoma...
Well, IŽll post again when we get the first conversion through teoma...
| 2:10 pm on Jun 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Teoma is still way out of date on indexing my site. I posted a major overhaul to my site on March 22, 2002. Teoma still has about a dozen or so pages from the old version of the site. Not one of the 70+ new pages are in their index. I did not pay to be indexed. Teoma included my site last year some time through its early crawling.
Oh, and the old pages that are in Teoma don't rank at all even though they performed well in Google, INK, and AV. So far I am not real impressed.
| 7:17 pm on Jun 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'll second that "bah humbug"
I listed a site back in March this year. Yesterday I was sent an email about being added. I checked and what to my wondering eyes should appear.... pages that appeared from January 2002.
At one point in time (prior to my notifiation) the site was listed correctly, and ranked no 1. It's been a long time since they have had the site listed correctly.
Listing a pages from over 6 months ago is pretty pathetic in my book!