homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.131.154
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe and Support WebmasterWorld
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 210 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 210 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]     
Deteriorating google Search
rajraj




msg:722874
 3:14 pm on Apr 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

We all love google coz we thrive and survive on it (due to traffic it provides).

But as a average user, I have been searching for various queries in (my) fav search engine GOOGLE, but the results which it has been throwing up were very vague due to which I had to go through 5 to 6 pages of the serach to get the content which I really needed.

Then I switched to Yahoo, using the same keywords and the search results was pretty relevant to what I needed on the first page itself.

My question do u feel that the serach in the google is deteriorating day by day.

The above example which i gave is not for just one search, I have been noticing this since 30 to 45 days.

what do u guy think about it?

 

colin_h




msg:723054
 3:57 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Going all the way back to Alegra, last year, when I was first hit badly. I have to say that I have yet to talk to anyone outside of the SEO community that has even noticed that Google has changed anything - for better or worse.

Maybe we're just all being a little over-sensitive ;-)

Reid




msg:723055
 4:18 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Maybe Google's #1 customer is webmasters trying to rank in Google.LOL
In the monthly keyword chart "Link:http://" made the top ten. What does that tell you? How many newbie webmasters are out there using the "Link" directive incorrectly.

wmuser




msg:723056
 4:20 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Google "changes" must be really over speculated by webmasters,for usual users not so much has changed excet that Google has started offering a lot of software/services like Google Earth and so on

colin_h




msg:723057
 5:04 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi Reid,

I think you're right, Google has basing its No.1 search engine tag on nothing other than a bunch of useless webmaster search statistics. It's a bit like me including spider hits in my client statistics. It looks impressive, but how many actual customers can my service provide their website? ... in Google's case no where near the amount that the statistics suggest.

All the Best

Col :-)

RichTC




msg:723058
 5:09 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Well thats where your wrong, because feedback im getting is that users are not as confident with Google search as they once were.

In fact two friends i know have changed to using yahoo as their primary search now, they are not in the business!. Whilst this is a low number if search users all over do the same Google will have a problem!

It will be interesting if Google notices any reduction in users over the next few months or not but i for one think its not as relevent now due to the high volume amount of pages missing from its index.

Whilst Google has the lions share of the current market and user levels are no doubt still high, it can still lose market share. Granted it will take something special to make a major impact but currently this BD roll out wont be helping their cause at all imo - They may well be sticking two fingers up to webmasters whilst they hold major ground, but its a two way street, webmasters will take so much and search users wont have any loyalty thats for certain - It will take a while, But it can lose significant ground from here if its not carefull.

Maybe Bill Gates has called this right after all?

colin_h




msg:723059
 5:19 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi RichTC,

All I'm seeing is a bunch of sore loser webmasters trying to use WebmasterWorld to get their hard luck story over to Google in a form that they might appreciate (i.e. If you don't put my site back to number 1 ... you'll be sorry).

He he he ... that should get them goin'

All the Best

Col :-)

ZoltanTheBold




msg:723060
 5:22 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

From colin_h

Maybe we're just all being a little over-sensitive ;-)

Yes, I agree. But the start of any trend, good or bad, will begin with the people closest to the data; namely, webmasters and SEO people on forums like this. Over-sensitive or not, there's enough comments to at least warrant concern.

From europeforvisitors

So yes, you can criticize, but you're probably criticizing something that doesn't yet exist--and your frame of reference inevitably will be different from Google's.

That's a fair point actually, but also the source of my concern - the utter indifference Google have. Their only real attempts at communication being through an employees blog. It neither instills confidence or paints them in a good light. I'm sure Google couldn't care less, but it's not impressive. If things really are going to be rosy with their 'improved' infrastructure then why not say so in a formal manner. Google never miss an opportunity to tell everyone how technically superior they are, so why the cloak and dagger approach?

They practically fall over themselves to announce pretty ropey BETA products, so why the clandestine approach to something so fundamental?

Anyway the point wasn't about Google's frame of reference, it was the idea that we're wrong to criticize so soon. Google will inevitably have their own timescales etc., but the total lack of insight provided by them, as well as the lame approach to communication generally, fosters rumour and speculation.

colin_h




msg:723061
 5:34 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi Zoltan the Bold,

"Over-sensitive or not, there's enough comments to at least warrant concern"

My main concern is that WebmasterWorld is being used as some kind of Google pressure group. Every time a group gets knocked of the top of the listings we are inundated with cries of "Google losing the plot" and "thousands are going to migrate to MSN & Yahoo". These users are using the fact that MC and his friends presumably track the forums and these comments might somehow cause Google to do a U-turn.

IMHO I like that Google takes a line and generally tries to stick to it. In these days of knee-jerk reactions, I think it's good to see a company put its money where its mouth is ... and if the webmaster fraternity don't like it, they have two options - "Google's way or the Highway".

I'm available for weddings etc.

Col ;-)

europeforvisitors




msg:723062
 5:55 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

If things really are going to be rosy with their 'improved' infrastructure then why not say so in a formal manner

Why? They'd just be pouring fuel on the flames.

As for Google's market share (which was mentioned in another post), Webmasters have been complaining about Google's SERPs for as long as I've been a member of Webmaster World (about 4-1/2 years). Yet a recent comScore Media Metrix study shows that Google's market share of English-language search has been increasing (with Yahoo's and MSN's search share declining) over the past year. Danny Sullivan describes the study and shows graphs at:

[searchenginewatch.com...]

ZoltanTheBold




msg:723063
 11:06 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi colin_h

My main concern is that WebmasterWorld is being used as some kind of Google pressure group

This is the Google bit of the forum. Where else do we vent our spleen about the big G?

Every time a group gets knocked of the top of the listings we are inundated with cries of "Google losing the plot" and "thousands are going to migrate to MSN & Yahoo".

I'm with you on this - Google's demise has been predicted more times than I've had hot dinners. Short of a convenient meteor strike in several parts of the world at once, I can't see it happening any time soon. I've never been a doom and gloom type.

IMHO I like that Google takes a line and generally tries to stick to it

You mean like China, and censorship? That line (Do no evil) didn't even last until the first AGM. Anyway, I simply don't see evidence for this. I think the reason it took 4 months for Big Daddy was because there was very little sticking going on. I'm not a SE engineer, but nobody else seems to take as long.

I'm available for weddings etc

Don't give up the day job. Lol.

ZoltanTheBold




msg:723064
 11:11 pm on Apr 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

Why? They'd just be pouring fuel on the flames.

I didn't really make this clear. I meant it from a marketing point of view. Namely, if the new infrastructure is as good as they have hinted I would have assumed they'd be shouting from the rooftops. Hence the comparisons with stuff they quite evidently haven't thought through, yet hail as the best thing since sliced bread.

It's a weak point, and easy to demolish since there could be any number of reasons things are kept low-key in the uber competative SE market. But my own suspicion they do so is the lack of a clear plan, not potential espionage.

europeforvisitors




msg:723065
 1:32 am on Apr 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

I meant it from a marketing point of view. Namely, if the new infrastructure is as good as they have hinted I would have assumed they'd be shouting from the rooftops. Hence the comparisons with stuff they quite evidently haven't thought through, yet hail as the best thing since sliced bread.

But Google isn't in the infrastructure business (as, say, a telco would be). For Google, using search infrastructure as a merketing platform would be like Kellogg's taking out ads to publicize its latest generation of breakfast-cereal machinery. Users, investors, and the media want to hear about products and/or profits. They're interested in the "what," not the "how."

mattg3




msg:723066
 2:07 am on Apr 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Namely, if the new infrastructure is as good as they have hinted I would have assumed they'd be shouting from the rooftops.

I think one problem might be overestimating of what Google can do. While hard disk space might get cheaper, the billions of pages on the web are a massive amount of data that in end effect also has to be processed in some way. How much can you actually really do if you have billions and billions of pages, and a data amount, that is growing constantly? I haven't went into SEO much in my life, but from 16 years of programming and my PhD, I am not entirely sure if even masses of PhD's can work around certain data mass problems and restrictions of AI. Google has cleverly steared around AI problems with just sucking in all there is imo. As the old backlink algorithm is essentially defeated as one would expect from Game Theory as soon as cheaters [aka spammers are around] the inherent problem that Google will more and more face is, how to combat human intelligence with computer programs.

Google engineers have after all to deal, given the global nature of the web, also with the combined criminal energy of the web + an amount of data that is unprecedented in human history.

Hence I wish them all the best but remain sceptical, how this is gonna end if not more actual human based filtering is deployed, unless BD entails some digital lie detector with a < 0.01 error margin.

And even then according to the stats [cant post the url] there are 1,022,863,307 internet users. If on average everyone does one page, you still have 10,228,633 wrong detections aka pages on the web. Now most scientists dealing with organic data [aka produced by humans, animals, overcomplex systems] are quite happy with a 0.05 error margin. That's ~ 51.143.165 "errors". But this also means 1 times in 20 you are wrong. And your data mass is increasing every day every hour and is dynamically changing. Hence we have sandbox, sites being crawled by their PR, imo.

Maybe in the future the UK and India won't be the one huge call centre, but Google's data review outpost. ;)

So if each person in the UK looks at one page and rates it... but then again .. in all those people are cheaters again ..

In short, I think we are getting closer to what Google can achieve in precision.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:723067
 8:31 am on Apr 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

I just came across a site who's homepage consists of no more than a list like ...

We deliver widgets to Amesbury , Salisbury , Wiltshire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Amesbury
We deliver widgets to Ammanford , Dyfed , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ammanford
We deliver widgets to Anderton , Horwich , Lancashire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Anderton
We deliver widgets to Andover , Hampshire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Andover
We deliver widgets to Anfield , Liverpool , Merseyside Click to order widgets online for delivery to Anfield
We deliver widgets to Annan , Dumfriesshire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Annan
We deliver widgets to Anstey , Leicestershire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Anstey
We deliver widgets to Appleby-In-Westmorland , Cumbria , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Appleby-In-Westmorland
We deliver widgets to Arbroath , Angus , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Arbroath
We deliver widgets to Arlesey , Bedfordshire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Arlesey
We deliver widgets to Armley , Leeds , West Yorkshire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Armley
We deliver widgets to Armthorpe , Doncaster , South Yorkshire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Armthorpe
We deliver widgets to Arnesby , Leicestershire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Arnesby
We deliver widgets to Aros , Isle of Mull , Mull Click to order widgets online for delivery to Aros
We deliver widgets to Arundel , West Sussex , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Arundel
We deliver widgets to Ascot , Berkshire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ascot
We deliver widgets to Ashbourne , Derbyshire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashbourne
We deliver widgets to Ashby-de-la-Zouch , Leicestershire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashby-de-la-Zouch
We deliver widgets to Ashford , Kent , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashford
We deliver widgets to Ashford , Middlesex , Middlesex Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashford
We deliver widgets to Ashtead , Surrey , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashtead
We deliver widgets to Ashton Under Lyne , Lancashire , Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashton Under Lyne
We deliver widgets to Ashton-in-Makerfield , Wigan , Lancashire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Ashton-in-Makerfield
We deliver widgets to Aspley , Nottingham , Nottinghamshire Click to order widgets online for delivery to Aspley

And the above is just some of the "A's" in a very long alphabetic list of all the towns and counties in the UK. The only other content on the home page is a link into their online catalogue. Google sees this as OK so if they cannot suss that as spamming there must be something wrong.

simey




msg:723068
 9:07 am on Apr 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

"I think one problem might be overestimating of what Google can do."

Yeah, if G could do half of what people speculate it can do, there would be no need for speculation.

soapystar




msg:723069
 11:24 am on Apr 27, 2006 (gmt 0)

Yeah, if G could do half of what people speculate it can do, there would be no need for speculation.

Thats pure speculation!

gregbo




msg:723070
 12:42 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Yeah, if G could do half of what people speculate it can do, there would be no need for speculation.

IMO, it's unfortunate that there isn't more critical analysis of what G can and cannot do. Far too many people assume that because G has solved some difficult problems that it can solve all difficult problems.

egurr




msg:723071
 1:47 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Good point Gregbo. I tell you what, after i was involved in that research on relevancy I got a whole new respect for the guys at Google.
Think about it this way; you have over a billion pages of text and in two seconds someone wants you to find a spaghetti recipe, how to rebuild a carburator on a '57 Chevy, and an article on mitosis. And almost every single time, they find it.

mattg3




msg:723072
 2:28 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Think about it this way; you have over a billion pages of text and in two seconds someone wants you to find a spaghetti recipe, how to rebuild a carburator on a '57 Chevy, and an article on mitosis. And almost every single time, they find it.

You can do this easily with altavista with their fantastic and really geeky and/or/near syntax and probably with every standard text search engine.

The real challenge imo is to fight human intelligence in trying to game/spam/cheat the system.

What Google was really good at is taking you away from being geeky and just loosing the logic control syntax, aka playing to human laziness. I use Google too and used AV in the "good/bad" old days. Just type, don't think, was the winner imo, and speed as you say. :)

tigger




msg:723073
 6:39 am on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

yesterday was just a classic with Google. I needed to find some information out on a plant as its not well, out of the top 10 4 of the sites listed were 404's - talk about deteriorating or what! Come on G sort yourself out

frakilk




msg:723074
 1:43 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

I have asked members of my forum what their opinion is of Google search quality of present without telling them my opinion. 90% say they were wondering what had happened to the quality in the last few weeks/months. There were complaints of 404s and just general bad quality.

These are not really tech savvy people and probably have no idea of the workings of Google but they have noticed a distinct change in quality.

Believe me Joe Public is starting to notice.

europeforvisitors




msg:723075
 1:52 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Believe me Joe Public is starting to notice.

That hasn't kept Google from increasing its share of the English-language search market--not just over the past year, but also over the past few months. (Source: comScore Media Metrix, as reported by SEW.)

frakilk




msg:723076
 1:59 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Do you know what month the data was accurate up for EFV? Would be great if there was even the smallest decline in the next batch of figures

fred9989




msg:723077
 2:14 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

The fact that Google's % of the search market is going up doesn't mean they have high quality results - it could simply be an indication of the tendency of the market to assume "bigger is best". And I have no doubt there are many other reasons why companies get an ever-increasing market share, reasons which are unrelated to their efficiency and effectiveness in doing what they do, and totally related to the public's perception.
As for the quality of the search results, those users who don't initially find what they want and who are sophisticated enough can pull what they want with more complex queries; those who aren't so sophisticated are probably less discriminating and see what they get as an answer to their question, even though the quality is low. They may even assume there is no better information on the internet than that which they have been presented with by Google.
It's extremely clear to me that the quality of results in my field (health and well-being) has decreased markedly, and that the sites near the top are there by virtue of the sheer number of links into them rather than their inherent quality. These may not be "spammy" links, but they are often from low quality sites.
Complaining that Google's results are less good than they used to be may or may not be something that "losers" do, Colin, but that doesn't mean the decrease in quality isn't real.
Moreover, the distress, financial or otherwise, of those men and women who have honestly built good sites only to find they disappear for no apparent reason, is equally real. And it's utterly ludicrous to suggest that an "authority" site which has ranked near the top of the search results for several years, with constant updating and excellent information, can suddenly become so worthless as to fall out of the search results. How is such an apparently arbitrary process compatible with maintaining quality?
For the future, matter how favorable the culture in Google has been to producing good search results up till now, as the company expands at the rate it is now doing, there has to be some loss of focus, or some dilution of purpose. Remember the inevitable life-cycle of any company as taught in Business Studies 101?
Rod

tigger




msg:723078
 2:43 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

>That hasn't kept Google from increasing its share of the English-language search market--not just over the past year, but also over the past few months

they keep throwing up 404's that won't last and with the current lack of being able to crawl sites properly (SOME) the serps will soon become stale.

Pages that I have put up weeks ago are now ranking on both Y & MSN and G is still waiting to crawl them - what happen to the good old Gbot that would crawl a page within a few days

europeforvisitors




msg:723079
 4:35 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Do you know what month the data was accurate up for EFV?

The comScore Media Metrix market-share percentages were for English-language searches conducted in March, 2006.

Danny Sullivan's SEW article was published 10 days ago, so with luck we'll be able to see the April numbers in about three weeks.

decaff




msg:723080
 4:40 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

"...they keep throwing up 404's that won't last and with the current lack of being able to crawl sites properly (SOME) the serps will soon become stale.."

But Adwords won't become stale... ;-)

frakilk




msg:723081
 5:39 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

The comScore Media Metrix market-share percentages were for English-language searches conducted in March, 2006.

Danny Sullivan's SEW article was published 10 days ago, so with luck we'll be able to see the April numbers in about three weeks.

Cheers EFV :) Could be interesting.

mattg3




msg:723082
 6:19 pm on Apr 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hmm, many people might eat McDonalds, doesn't necessarily mean it's good/healthy food though. :)

I think, if you remove obvious spam, the web content as a total, even if unique, even if not a link list, might have simply deteriorated in quality. Maybe people themselves have changed, just taking the first link from G when they quote, which might have been of less quality and the SERPS loss in quality might be a social event and not only a software engineering event.

Web access is higher and many people do link to other websites, just because they found it, not because they are necessarily experts in the field, which will be slowly diluting process.

Anyway tried to find info about a Sony camera today, well in the end I went directly to Sony. I was still able to retrieve information about an extinct fish, but the text search didn't really give me what I was looking for. Fast scanning of the images search results , nevertheless led me on page six of the ISERPS to the right site.

ulysee




msg:723083
 2:54 pm on May 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Four months and counting since blackhat tactics have taken over a whole sector, still waiting ::rolls eyes:: .

This 210 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 210 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
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