homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.206.80
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Accredited PayPal World Seller

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 45 message thread spans 2 pages: 45 ( [1] 2 > >     
eWeek asks "Is Big Daddy Choking Google?"
tedster




msg:730076
 6:44 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Many have remarked here about the lack of press regarding what seem to be current problems with Google. Well, it's not exactly CNN, but eWeek now has an article online.

Is Big Daddy Choking Google?

Web site operators are clamoring to understand what can best be described as an ongoing disturbance in the Google Force.

Google's search engine, once a clean, lean indexing machine, from a Webmaster's perspective has been slipping badly lately.

Starting about two months ago, site operators have complained that their Web sites have suddenly disappeared from Google's index for no reason, tantamount to disappearing from the Internet.

[eweek.com...]


 

g1smd




msg:730077
 6:50 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

El Reg had some stuff last week, and they quoted some stuff from WebmasterWorld too:

[theregister.co.uk...]

g1smd




msg:730078
 6:53 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

... and this just in:

[theregister.co.uk...]

tedster




msg:730079
 6:58 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

That second Register article offers a very interesting take -- that the important technology war is not Microsoft vs. Google, it's search engine spammers vs. Google!

jbgilbert




msg:730080
 7:11 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Appears to me that Google is choking Google!

The shear size of the organization is a detriment to their ability to act (on anything) with any expedience -- be it technology or business matters.

There was a time when an SEO type would have given his right arm to sit down with "an" engineer and get some real answers on the Google Ranking algorithm.

DON'T try that now! You would have to get 30 engineers in the room and NOT ONE of them would know anything! Because, the other 29 engineers probably just implemented algorithm changes that override (or at least negate to some degree) anything only one of the engineers thought he knew...

crobb305




msg:730081
 7:16 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

From the article:

That explains why sites disappear, for instance, a few days or weeks at a time.

And this is one factor that frustrates the users...inconsistency. They are often unable to find the resources they saw indexed for the same search query the day before, because of the ridiculous inconsistencies among the dataceneters.

BillyS




msg:730082
 7:43 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

It's very difficult to make the transition from a small and nimble company to a large and bureaucratic organization. Purchases need to go through accounting, procurement analysts need to get involved...

There's an old book on the topic something like - Teaching the Elephant to Dance.

oddsod




msg:730083
 8:01 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Theregister makes me want to laugh sometimes.

They missed so many of the big stories with Google and SERP disasters (hijacking, canonical problems etc)... then they come up with a gem: Google doesn't make money from search, they make money from ads. A brilliant insight into something that has been puzzling all of Wall Street since Brin bought up all Google shares, de-listed, and took the company private!

No, wait! El Reg didn't come up with that conclusion themselves. Jellyfish did... and they quote him. No, wait, Jellyfish got inspired by a previous theregister article to come to the conclusion that Google makes money from ads. No wait....maybe El Reg was thinking of something jellyfish said earlier in the week. Arrgh!

theregister.co.uk, it wouldn't have been news last year this time, guys!

gregbo




msg:730084
 8:02 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

My general opinion is that in most things G does, they don't seem to take into account the economics of the Internet. It's cheap to create web sites; it's cheap to create links; it's not obvious that (for all queries) a given set of links constitutes spam or just ordinary linking.

rohitj




msg:730085
 8:17 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

jbgilbert -- where are you making these conclusions from? do you know anyone who works at google or are you just presuming that because of there large size it takes longer to implement new technology? Because my understanding is that they still advocate small teams and give a lot of voice/power to the engineers to push stuff into production.

wmuser




msg:730086
 9:35 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Nice find tedster
Maybe they are more concentrating on tools like Desktop and others?
I dont think thats the right wya to go

jbgilbert




msg:730087
 10:05 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

rohitj

Remember, I started with "looks like" and it's only my opinion -- I have never had the opportunity to discus "ranking algorithms" with 30 Google engineers...

You are absolutely correct in saying "I am presuming that because of there large size it takes longer to implement new technology", but your statement: "my understanding is that they still advocate small teams" has a flaw inherent to their new size...

When Google was ONLY Sergey and Larry working on the algorithm, that was a small team!

Only presuming now, so don't shoot me here when I say that the current "small team" is huge compared to just the two geniuses and founders.

legallyBlind




msg:730088
 10:20 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

who reads eweek? tech savvy people. If you have a cnn or fox reporter read what eweek is reporting, you will see google stock drop faster than you can say "what happened". Google has choked and now it's suffering from brain damage. I hope they clear this mess soon, I truly cannot find what I'm looking for easily on the internet anymore. Yahoo and MSN in their current state are not an alternative either.

catch2948




msg:730089
 10:24 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

hmmmm ... Although Google is notoriously short on giving out any information, IMO, we as webmasters only need 2 pieces of information to figure out what is going on, and why it is taking so long to get it rectified.

The first is something that we already know, that being the general starting period when all the problems with Big Daddy started (about 2 months ago).

The second is something that Google HAS to release to the public in the very near future; that being their earings reports from Adwords, etc.

Anyone care to take a "stab in the dark", as to what the earnings reports for the period in question will say?

ispy




msg:730090
 11:56 pm on May 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Sorry, we have been complaining about this for over 5 years now.

Need More Hits




msg:730091
 12:12 am on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>who reads eweek? tech savvy people. If you have a cnn or fox reporter read what eweek is reporting, you will see google stock drop faster than you can say "what happened"<<

Give it time this started from smaller e-news sites and is going up the food chain this has only been sense last week or so when a CEO made his “Google is full / broken blunder”

Phil_Payne




msg:730092
 8:31 am on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

"Teaching an elephant to dance" is Lou Gerstner's book about his time as IBM's CEO.

Those of us who were watching IBM for a living back then regard it as not particularly accurate.

a_chameleon




msg:730093
 1:43 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hi,

I'm mostly a "lurker", and this thread caught my eye. About a week ago, my site shot up everywhere, and then slipped, and then disappeared from several SERP completely.

I have a friend who does, in fact talk to people at Google, although he doesn't use the inside access often, not wanting to wear out his welcome, i'm sure.

His people in Google told him, he says, that they were having some issues with sites that had sitemaps in Google, that Gbot wasn't visiting new pages, and that once a sitemap had resided there for a while, Gbot really slowed down on re-crawls.

Is any of this valid? germane? All hogwash?

aleksl




msg:730094
 2:22 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

tedster: that the important technology war is not Microsoft vs. Google, it's search engine spammers vs. Google!

Nope, that is not it.

The important war is not MS vs. Google, or even spammers vs. Google. It is "Google together with AdSence spammers" vs. Webmasters.

Microsoft is just getting warmed up here and watches which side to take.

tiori




msg:730095
 2:37 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

His people in Google told him, he says, that they were having some issues with sites that had sitemaps in Google, that Gbot wasn't visiting new pages, and that once a sitemap had resided there for a while, Gbot really slowed down on re-crawls.

Is any of this valid? germane? All hogwash?

I have placed only a few of the sites that I manage in sitemaps. They are showing home page only for site:mydomain.com.

All of the other sites (that are not in sitemaps) have also been reduced to only home page and they are not being crawled often either. So, who knows!

moose606




msg:730096
 2:44 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Spammers vs. google. This will be the never-ending battle as G tries to remove spammy content from the index, and spammers develop new and improved methods. The spammers will always be a step ahead, IMHO. Innocents will be caught in friendly fire, AKA Big Daddy.

freshpromo




msg:730097
 3:16 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

His people in Google told him, he says, that they were having some issues with sites that had sitemaps in Google, that Gbot wasn't visiting new pages, and that once a sitemap had resided there for a while, Gbot really slowed down on re-crawls.

Is any of this valid? germane? All hogwash?

Funny you should say that. I have a site that coincidentally disappeared from Google's index (600+ pages) at the same time I submitted to SiteMaps about a month and a half ago. Now all that's left is my home page in their index. I suppose at this point a test wouldn't do much harm, as in deleting my SiteMap and seeing if the Gbot crawls again at a faster speed.

300m




msg:730098
 3:32 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

FINALLY! An article that I can forward to my employer. Nothing against the other articles floating, but I beleive he may subscribe to it. :) Thanks for the post tedster.

heisje




msg:730099
 3:48 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

.

much like AlataVista in the past, and not unlike the legendary Don Quixote fighting Windmills, Google have drained their resources fighting supposed "spammers" - their implicit definition of "spammers" being 90% of the webmaster community - instead of focusing on refining their algorithm so that it would help the more relevant results surface above the less relevant results.

these two approaches *not* being the same thing, and *not* to be confused as being the same thing - Google has failed miserably because the geeks therein have opted, much like the geeks at AltaVista in the past, for fighting Windmills rather than honing and refining their algorithm to the best feasible level.

and no, their search results are not the most relevant in the market, and no the Emperor is not wearing any new clothes.

"But he hasn't got anything on," a little child said.
"But he hasn't got anything on!" the whole town cried out at last.
(from "The Emperor's New Clothes" by Hans Christian Andersen)

asta la AltaVista,
heisje

.

freshpromo




msg:730100
 4:05 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

heisje,

Just curious.. What search engine do you consider the most relevant, if not Google?

heisje




msg:730101
 4:58 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

.

when I need relevant SE results for my personal use, i.e. for webmaster work as well as private matters, and have precious little time to waste searching, I definitely start with Yahoo - and scarcely ever need I to revert to Google, only to find then very disappointing results.

having said that, there is no doubt that, even so, Yahoo results leave much to be desired.

there is also no doubt in my mind that "search technology" is still at a very early stage in its development, and we should expect (and demand) much better results.

my point however, is that the folks at Google have been definitely on the wrong track, lack real vision for the future, and are anything than focused - already for some time now.

and Billy Bo is waiting round the corner . . . .

heisje

.

gregbo




msg:730102
 8:46 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

IMO, AV exhausted its financial resources on foolish investments such as shopping.com and lavish NYC parties. If it had managed its costs frugally in the beginning, like G did, it might still be in business, instead of a Y! property.

OTOH, spam is difficult to fight, especially if you have an agressive indexing policy ("we want to store the entire world's information"). A selective policy will cut down on spam but also deny "legit" sources of information access.

I think as long as it is cheap to create sites and links, and indexing is aggressive, spam will continue to be a problem.

trinorthlighting




msg:730103
 9:01 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

This is kind of funny, spammers versus google, yet google makes all their money from spamming pay per clicks.....

Googleguy, if you read this I do sympathize with you for being stuck in the middle of legit and spam free sites that provide relevant products and content. I also know you have a big boss who is focused on making money for his investors via pay per click (adsense spam).

Google once wanted a spam free index. This is now a thing of the past. Instead of finding revenue without spam, they opted for the pay per clicks on spammy sites....(adsense)

Everyone, if google did clean up all its spammy (adsense) results they would put themselves out of business... So webmasters, if you want to be on the top, get out the checkbook.

If google wanted to really ban a lot of spam it would ban all its adsense sites right? Yea, ok when pigs fly may be that would happen.

ulysee




msg:730104
 9:28 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Since the "data refresh" Dec the 27th which I believe was Googles preperation index for Big Daddy, allin: anchor, title and url don't make sense at least in my sector.

I can't believe that four months have past and Google has not corrected the blahing problem where spam/redirect sites and 404's out rank legit sites on many popular searches in my sector.

Google search is now just a shadow of itself lost in the woods with amnesia crying out for help but no one is answering.

Lorel




msg:730105
 10:29 pm on May 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Why would anyone want to read the register or any other online magazine when they can get the news right here on Webmaster World? All the register does is surf the forums and pick up enough to write an article--while those of us in the discussion know what's going on through experience. By the time it hits the register it's old news.

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: 45 ( [1] 2 > >
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