| 5:15 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If you want traffic from me, which you already have plenty of and wish you would share more, be prepared to fork over some money.
| 5:56 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
why the heck would I want to send traffic to my competitors and more money to Google for that matter! :)
| 5:57 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So it goes something like this:
- I get a visitor from google.
Visitor looks at my site but isn't finding what he/she is looking for (wasn't the algo broken?).
But hey, you know what, I have some related links, also prepared by google (they do deserve a second change, don't they?)
| 6:00 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"How long do you think will it take till this tabbed link presentation will find its way into Adsense?"
My first impression was the Related Links looked very similar to Chikita's mini mall.
If there was an incentive for Publishers, I'd slap them on some page.
| 6:01 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You could always spoof it, recreate it by hand and link to your own sites. Most likely a waste of time though.
| 6:05 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
sure, I'll make it much easier for my visitors to leave and visit my competitors.
| 6:32 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I installed it on one site. I don't mind. It's in a not well updated part of the site where the information is not as good as it is at my competitors.
I believe in good karma. I just wish there was more flexibility with this system. Not enough customization and size available.
The search is useless for users, unless you want them to go back from where they came from in the first place...
The news is where the real goodies are for my visitors (whom I don't mind if they leave - can,t keep them forever, right). I wish I could display more news items rather than one in several rows. That would be really useful to my visitors.
It's not a bad system and is really harmless. But then, I belive in good karma so what do I know?
| 6:38 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
When the related links unit can't come up with anything related, it puts in a google search box. Just floating in the huge empty space -- with a border.
Would be nice if it had the same choices as adsense blocks: show solid color or show alternate content (or show nothing and collapse).
| 6:56 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I don't think people should use this.
I think this will do no more or less than make a few sites 10% uglier. If you want related information on a topic, please search using your own brain and fingers.
Not letting Google think for me 100% of the time, thanks.
| 7:14 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Cool! I was thinking about doing something like this for one of my own sites, and now Google has provided a nice idea for the layout.
| 7:17 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Google will obviously be getting income one way or another through this. Slightly disconcerting that they're not offering any revenue share to publishers. Certainly won't be using it or mentioning it to anyone.
| 7:23 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Why would anyone want this on their website?
It is as if a favoured Google employee came up with the idea and it has been pushed through.
very strange, why would you actually invite your hard fought for visitors to leave that easily?
| 7:37 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I don't mind giving users opportunities to leave, but I like to pick the opportunities so I have editorial control. Otherwise, they are free to hit their back button, search again, or go wherever they like. (and they do)
It does look like there's a "premium" option. Maybe relatedlinks-premium comes with some compensation to the webmaster.
| 7:50 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Oh, look. A tool that helps made-for-Adsense sites stick more regurgitated content below a page full of ads. :P
| 7:51 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It is really freaking funny, it has no sense, really, why we would put such box? for what?
Aren't we supposed to provide _our_ content in _our_ sites!?
| 8:14 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Worse, this let's webmasters be lazy--instead of providing their own links that they've gathered, let Google do it for them. Strange thing for Google to offer, since their search is heavily based on the true links between sites.
| 8:17 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
How can they bring "fresh, dynamic and interesting content links" if "fresh" is in the sandbox?
| 8:18 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
You got us, who would have suspected an April Fools joke on the 4th ;)
This is a joke, right?
| 8:52 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It kind of reminds me of the Y!Q contectual search but missing the mark.
Y!Q Search for those who haven't seen it.
| 9:05 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think this is the fix for the big daddy/supplemental/canonical issues that they are now quite visibly suffering from:
If Google can't fix it on their site then offer another search box on every other website because the user clicked on irrelevant listings the first time!
Stop wasting resources and get your main product fixed because it is crap.
| 11:07 pm on Apr 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
It's like AdSense but they don't pay you... lol.
Non-profit sites, universities, and people that don't want to be associated with advertising will like it though.
| 12:18 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
this may be a hard concept for some to grasp--but a good amount of websites on the web aren't on the web to make money. Or, a webmaster wants only those who actually will find their website useful to surf through the pages. After all, why waste bandwidth on a person who has no interest in the site. Some may argue that you still get a few impressions out of them--but what if you aren't getting paid by the impression but rather by lead or sale. In that case, it may just be better to point them in a more appropriate direction.
My guess is that someone made this on their 20% time--and this eventually got pushed out. More opportunities to brand and integrate their technology to assist visitors. Its not for everyone but its got good usage for select sites. overall another decent product coming out of their pipeline.
| 1:16 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Non-profit sites, universities, and people that don't want to be associated with advertising will like it though. |
So...you're saying that putting this on a site 'kinda' signals to Google that your site is just there to provide information rather than sell anything?
| 2:40 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|It's like AdSense but they don't pay you... lol. |
Yep - 'Google AdNonCents'
Another reason to slow your site down while pulling traffic and more info from you for nothing in return.
| 4:33 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I strongly suspect that this is intended as a trial for AdSense or something related - I mean, even the sizes they offer are typical ad sizes.
No major webmaster is going to use this, obviously, but that doesn't matter. The little guys who aren't out there to sell ads will lap this up like they do with everything Google offers.
As for this being a 20% project, I think that's very likely since Related Links is coming under the umbrella of Google Labs.
| 6:05 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|this may be a hard concept for some to grasp--but a good amount of websites on the web aren't on the web to make money. |
True, but Google isn't one of them.
|It does look like there's a "premium" option. Maybe relatedlinks-premium comes with some compensation to the webmaster. |
Yes? No? I don't care too much at the moment, but I'm still wondering.
| 6:36 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|For websites that have over 10,000 hits a day, please contact the Google team. |
what's 10,000 hits a day?
looks like i'd have to contact them with each site i have.
btw. aren't the related pages the same as those presented after clicking Similar pages in the toolbar?
| 7:12 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Maybe for those with 10.000 hits (and I agree it's not much) there is some sort of compensation for placing these links on your site?
| 8:44 am on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think there's something more sinister at stake than how are they going to make money from it, where is it going etc.
If it was successful (which I rather doubt) it would be another chance for Google to influence the web. The alternative model to their Related Links is of course good old-fashioned links provided by the webmaster or site owner. In other words the webmaster deciding who is related in terms of content, or otherwise of interest to their site visitors.
Although some of the comments about many websites not being motivated by profit (and therefore see a benefit to ready-made related links) make sense, Google are very much about profit. What's to stop them from delivering people to site's that, say, only have AdSense?
Although I think this project will fail completely I am not comfortable with the idea of Google determining link strategies across the web: they are here to read, list and make sense of other people's ideas about linking, not influence those same link networks. Once they start doing that, even on a small scale, then they are surely fair game for criticism since they will have lost any semblance of neutrality.
| This 40 message thread spans 2 pages: 40 (  2 ) > > |