homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.131.154
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 351 message thread spans 12 pages: < < 351 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 > >     
January 2003 Google Update
The real deal.
my3cents




msg:153995
 4:45 am on Jan 26, 2003 (gmt 0)

I am seeing no backlinks for yahoo or dmoz on www2 or www3, also serps are changing. Is this it?

 

troels nybo nielsen




msg:154205
 12:17 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

> uneventful update

Errh.. not quite. I have been seing fresh tags during the whole update. That experience is new to me. But the changes in SERPs seem undramatic. A couple of #4's were #3's, a #7 was #4, a #8 was #6, a #21 was #14, a #269 was #244 etc.

werty




msg:154206
 12:29 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

the SERPs for me keep changing...every time i check it is a different result...

i went from not in the top 10 SERPs to page one, rank one. dropped again... too stressful to keep checking... glowing monitor keeps luring me in

i guess i will just have to check in the morning to see if my ranking has improved...

werty




msg:154207
 12:34 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

another thing i have noticed is that if i do the search in opera, my results are different from my IE results(google toolbar turned on)

anyone else try this?

freejung




msg:154208
 12:38 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

troels,

I disagree, during last update there were fresh tags and even fresh results during the update, but a day or so after the update ended the fresh pages suddenly disappeared and we were left with the actual indexed results.

Maybe they took the fresh tags down at some point, I'm not sure, but I'm positive that last time the fresh results were in there for several days while the update was going on. I had several pages which were in during the update but disappeared a day after it was over.

What I'm seeing now is, fresh tags, but the results don't seem to be fresh, that is, the relevancy calculation doesn't seem to be based on the freshly crawled versions. Hard to tell of course.

But I definitely think that you'll have to wait longer for your "first fresh update" that you've been predicting!

4serendipity




msg:154209
 12:47 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

okee, I'm claiming rights to a new phrase for post Google indexes

PR Envy

LOL! I can't believe it hasn't been used here before...

I just googled "PR envy" and only got 5 returns.

It's wide open :)

Brett_Tabke




msg:154210
 12:51 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Updated the Google Update History [webmasterworld.com] page.

mack




msg:154211
 12:58 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

I watch the update from a UK perspective using google.com and I havent noticed any of the changes this month. I am still seeing the same page count for yahoo.com with a link:www.yahoo.com search query. I cant get to see any difference on the serps no matter what my search query on any google DB Anyone else noticing this?

getvisibleuk




msg:154212
 1:35 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

yeh mack - I agree no changes!

1:30 AM here and need to get up early to do some client work so calling it a day.

Expect it will update in the next couple of days.

I believe which database we are given to search depends on location (amongst other factors) so ... just gonna have to wait.

Lee

freejung




msg:154213
 1:37 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

>uneventful update

I think that one reason why the update seems uneventful is that there has been so much freshbot activity this month. Frequently throughout the month Google has been leaving the fresh results in without fresh tags, so that it looks like the fresh results are perminant.

It looks like this update is putting most of my pages in about the same place they were right before the update. But before, those results were fresh, whereas now they're perminant. Not much change in SERPS from yesterday to today, but there's a world of difference between these SERPS and the ones which appeared (briefly) after the last update, before freshbot came around.

This makes a lot of sense from a Google perspective, as it makes the update much less visible for the user. What you get is, your fresh listings become perminant, but there's no apparent change because the fresh listings were being used before the update.

What I'm hoping is, when freshbot comes around again, there will be as much difference as there was after the last update when she came to visit! At that time, I went from around 100 uniques per day to around 1000. I'd love to see another factor of 10, come on freshbot, crawl me baby! :)

chiyo




msg:154214
 1:55 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

freejung.

Interesting observation. We noted last update that new pages that were published or spidered just a few days before the update stayed in after it. This is contrary to conventional wisdom, (and mine last year), that after the update all freshed pages from the month before are deleted as your pages are a snapshot of the spidering around a month before of the updated.

The same thing seems to be happening to our sites this time. Im not sure whether there is some otehr criteria involved (such as PR) which destermines which fresh data is kept and which is lost.

However i think you are right freejung, I think we may well have seen an archetypal unconcious (if you excuse the expression!) shift in Google updates, where we have moved to the monthly update from now being far less critical. Certainly in our case the rush to update pages every month around update time is a thing of the past.

We are still noticing that monthly updates are more significant than those inbetween, and we are talking of something more general and less specific than the mid-term "super-everflux" (copyright peterb i think!) but Google updates are certainly no longer the once a month proposition it was. Maybe one day we will no longer have the monthly Google update thread, or at least it will be far less obvious.. Many months ago, googleguy mentioned that "google likes minty-fresh pages" outta the blue. Many months on, freshing has a far more significant impact on SERPS and page inclusions in several ways.

freejung




msg:154215
 2:31 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Chiyo,

Thanks for getting the joke in my name! ;) If you look at the site in my profile, you'll see how I got it: it was automatically assigned to me by my webhost as my default name when I registered my domain. It's by far the coolest automatically assigned handle I've ever seen, and I liked it so much I decided to keep it. I rather like Jung. And a good understanding of archetypes sure helps in SEO!

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Fresh pages surviving the update, that sort of thing. It's weird but I like it, as it helps new sites a lot, and gives anyone involved in active development an advantage.

What is the mid-month thing you're talking about? Last month I noticed that relevancy was recalculated around the middle of the month, but this month I kept waiting for that to happen and it never did (either that, or my changes weren't as significant as I thought!). How long can you expect to wait for changes in keywords (title etc.) to take effect? Sometimes it seems like I see effects within days, but this month relevancy seems to have stagnated, at least for me.

Chris_D




msg:154216
 2:57 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

I thought the update would be much later this month - as the last dance was Jan 1st. We sent some new pages live last Friday - all minty fresh botted by Saturday - and showing well in www2 and www3 now!

Thanks GG - I owe you a few nice cold beers next time you're down under!

Thanks!

Chris_D
Sydney

Alby




msg:154217
 3:11 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Toolman
Once again buying text links wins the game.
So what happens when we all buy ads and everyone has 1.2 million backlinks to their site?

I have to disagree.

I have PR6 and I am outranking a PR8 site that has bought hundreds of text links from a "real" PR8 site. All those links have the right anchor text etc. but still he is below me in the serps...

troi21




msg:154218
 3:17 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

my site is cached, not showing fresh tags, whereas the sites ahead of me on www2 and www3 have fresh tags for the 25th. does this mean anything? why doesn't my site have fresh tags when my logs should daily crawls from google? this update is not going well for me so far because on www2 and www3, i have gone from page one to page three for my most important keyphrase :(

troi21




msg:154219
 3:19 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

my site is cached, not showing fresh tags, whereas the sites ahead of me on www2 and www3 have fresh tags for the 25th. does this mean anything? why doesn't my site have fresh tags when my logs should daily crawls from google? this update is not going well for me so far because on www2 and www3, i have gone from page one to page three for my most important keyphrase :(

qball0213




msg:154220
 3:40 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Well I lost 900 backlinks, I guess google has changed how they count backlinks a lot, or a bunch of people quit linking to me, hehe.

steveb




msg:154221
 4:01 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Instead of like last month when Google only showed my outgoing cgi-redirect backlinks to one of seven sites that advertise on each of my pages, this month three of the seven show those backlinks. I am guessing this is due to both google following cgi links far better than a few months ago, and due to the destination URLs being constructed in the simplest fashion, rather than a complex string of characters... which leads to my links to www.site.com/index.html?173 being shown as backlinks to www.site.com

ExtremeExports




msg:154222
 4:04 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

I have one quick question. I was looking at one of my competitors new rank. He only has 22 backward links and has a PR of 6. I have 76 Backwrd links and I have a PR 5. How does that work?
Petra

steveb




msg:154223
 4:15 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Its not the number of links it is the quality. Give me one link from yahoo's main page and you can have a zillion links from PR0 pages.

kwburke




msg:154224
 4:24 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Can you assume that the www2 results become the main results when the dance is over?

pmac




msg:154225
 4:29 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Can you assume that the www2 results become the main results when the dance is over?

It may flux a bit, but yes, www2 and www3 for the most part will become the new database.

stevenha




msg:154226
 4:30 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

The update is seeming pretty stable to me. Do you think it's mostly over now? Have any of you had PR change, which seems stable now.. or is the PR update aspect not completed yet?

And another question. I've followed Google updates for 9 months, and always saw similar results on www2 and www3. Is it just me, or is it rare for www2 and www3 to differ, and if so, why do people check them both anymore?

kwburke




msg:154227
 4:52 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

How long does the dance usually last before the www2 becomes the new database? Thanks.

kwburke




msg:154228
 2:59 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

If you are coming up high on the www2 and 3 servers after a major site redesign, and nowhere on the main server, can you assume when the dance is done that you will retain some of the www2 rankings? I am seeing great results on the test servers using the google dance tool. Should I be excited?

finditnow




msg:154229
 3:05 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

yes!

kwburke




msg:154230
 3:13 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

So I may assume the test server results will be used shortly?

taxpod




msg:154231
 3:16 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Absolutely.

Look for the ground to stop shifting Tue-Thurs, something like that. From now until then, occassionally WWW will show the new serps. So if you see spikes in traffic every so often, you're lookin good.

kwburke




msg:154232
 3:27 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Thanks. Certainly hope you are right.

pmac




msg:154233
 5:00 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

>How long does the dance usually last before the www2 becomes the new database?<

Usually takes 4-5 days. Check this [webmasterworld.com] out for a detailed explanation as to how Google does things.

Alphawolf




msg:154234
 5:04 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

I clicked the "Do you want e-mail notification of replies" in this thread. :(

Is there any way to reverse that feature? Gettin' a billion e-mails about this thread. ;)

TIA

AW

amznVibe




msg:154235
 5:25 am on Jan 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

Every time I see that chart that Brett did I have to admire a really nice job.

So it looks like we had a "rare" Saturday update, only two previously in recent history. Now we need an ultra rare Tuesday update to round out the statistics :)

I guess its impossible to use things like the "wayback machine" to figure out Google activity in earlier years eh? It's something you have to observe in real-time or its all just a guess otherwise?

Maybe oneday there will be an ex-google employee who can give us deeper insights into their past. I know more was learned (and hacked) about AOL with ex-employee than was ever learned before about their internal structure.

Is anyone watching the 2003 Google wishlist to see if they are headed towards any of that?

This 351 message thread spans 12 pages: < < 351 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved