| 11:58 pm on Oct 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
So regardless of Google's efforts to maintain freshness, it seems that the oldest page has maintained at an average of 50 days.
It's an interesting study.
I always wonder about the balance between updated pages and old pages that contain timeless, very relevant information. That's why I think freshness can never have too much weight on an algo. Some, but not too much.
| 12:10 am on Oct 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Interesting to see, outside of the noted oldest listings of FAST, that alltheweb look very current, with Inktomi, as one would expect doing well, and Altavista, slowly stepping back into the fold.
Shame about Wisenut, when it was forst released it looked like it could rock some cages, but unforunately its not doing to well on keeping current.
Do agree with you 2_much, about the old pages which are extremly relevant being prevalent, and not downgraded becuase of age.
| 4:27 am on Oct 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It makes Wisenut and Teoma look older than my library.
With all their poohah about their index containing real relevant webpages, this must be a real show-down for them.
I just wonder, is respidering and reindexing really all that expensive?
| 4:30 am on Oct 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's always interesting to see new freshness studies! I'm glad that Greg Notess does them. I'm also glad that so many Google pages were fresh.
Mmmm--minty freshness. :)