| 3:07 pm on Jul 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
LOTS more of my clients stuff in techpreview today.
Various search results constantly jumping around for me.
Some good, some not but at least there is movement.
[Sure looks like they do NOT like search words repeated in title tag. Penalty for "too much" KW optimization.]
Anyone figured out algo for MSN yet?
Or are y'all just having too much fun figurin' it out to keep up this discussion?
| 3:15 pm on Jul 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think that they have to implement a better spam filter.
Searching phrases that contain as one of the keywords a location are inflacted with Hotel sites.
| 6:36 pm on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
To the fundamentalists who seem to suggest that the new MSN is no good because it doesn't list top ranked Google and Yahoo sites quite as prominently, while that may or may not make the results ďobjectivelyĒ inferior (there are certainly a lot of sorry sites in those directories with high rankings), promoting different results is a very good model for MSN. What incentive would people have to go with MSN if itís not fundamentally different than Google or Yahoo? Different results will help them build a better base. I personally hope that the big three will be as different as possible. What could be worse than having the net brought to you by three identical filters?
| 8:02 pm on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Well said Rollo! Couldn't agree more.
Let's hope it happens sooner rather than later.
| 10:51 pm on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"Different results will help them build a better base."
Well eventually you hear everything around here.
Having crappy results is not an advantage. I can see the commercials now "Microsoft search: our results are all different, we rank the worst sites first."
There is no benefit at all in "different". The only benefit is in "good".
Microsoft's alpha is a horrible not because the results are different; it's because they blow chunks.
| 11:55 pm on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Well, I think "good" is a pretty subjective term now isn't it? Obviously MSN has a ways to go, the clustering problem is horrendous, but they haven't even launched yet. Three search engines producing different "good" results is better than three search engines producing similar "good" results. I reject the notion that only one sort of algo can produce "good" results. Thatís ridiculous.
I think MSN results are going to be great in a year or so. Better than Inktomiís to be sure.
| 1:10 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I made a complaint about geograhical profiling to MSN and they appear to have an ear.
Our major market is in the USA but we are hosted in Canada. Our listings was crap, as we were placed below all the sites hosted in the USA.
We are now listed much higher up in the beta listings, so it appear that MSN has turned geographic profiling off.
Sites should be ranked by the market they serve, not where they are hosted, and it appears that MSN has
gotten the message.
| 1:55 pm on Jul 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
just saw I have my homepages indexed twice.
It is indexed as / and as well as /index.htm.
I reported it in the feedback on the resultpage.
| 6:05 pm on Jul 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>>> There is no benefit at all in "different". The only benefit is in "good".
How about if MSN use similar algo to rank sites like Google before Florida? Would it be good or bad? Isn't that G algo in the past that makes G so big today?
I would like to ask for more opinions.
| 1:06 am on Aug 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|<I've found a couple searches that give an excessive number of results from the same domain.> |
Ditto. Too many times.
Me too, I'm still seeing sometimes literally all 15 page one returns be from the same domain, often 4 or 5 from same domain. How hard can it be to insert a 1 return per domain type filter? This lack suggests it's still very alpha, that doesn't seem like rocket science, if it is that hard for MS Search to figure out how to return only one domain per search page, maybe google doesn't have very much to worry about...
Do I like the results except for this? Yes, I like seeing one of my sites up there with 7 out of 15 top, it's funny, even if it won't last, it's still nice. Might just reflect a small slice of the web being searched, the optimized part, the heavily linked part?
| 7:33 pm on Aug 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone had sites added to the MS Tech Preview index, in the time it has been up? Not just additional pages from sites that were already included, but existing sites that were not in the index, but have been added & now show up in the serps?
| 11:38 pm on Aug 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
yes thump, I have
| This 252 message thread spans 9 pages: < < 252 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  ) |