homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.227.20.250
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Bing Search Engine News
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: mack

Bing Search Engine News Forum

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: 45 ( [1] 2 > >     
Microsoft Expands its Reach - part 2
Continuation of http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum97/278.htm
Pass the Dutchie

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 10:51 am on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

SERP results on MSN Beta for my targeted key phrases are soooooo poor. Not because my sites perform better in other SE's but because websites that link to my sites are out ranking my site. These sites are not optimised by any means for these search terms. In some cases these sites are only relevant to my topic because of my link text!

 

brixton



 
Msg#: 288 posted 12:14 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

my opinion about that new beta whatsoever MS$.Thats the the most unrelevant kinda of SERPS....There is no way in the next 5-10 years that Yahoo or Msn will overcome Google....The end user uses and WILL use G as a SE for the years to come.So who gives a s.....t about other SE's.

kapow

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 12:36 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

...better* pages ranking higher than lower quality pages is what the engines have to strive for

Imagine you own a popular engine... what the engines have to strive for is what makes them the most money for the longest time. And that depends on the searching publics opinions and behaviours (not webmasters). So the engines need to do what ever converts the searching publics opinion and behaviour, that might be: Relevance, TV-advertising, stupid flashing things on screen, nice clear screen, IPO that dominates the news for an age....
By 'publics behaviours' I mean - what they click e.g. an Ad or a free listing. Imagine you own that engine (just try not be be an SEO for a minute) what does the engine owner want them to click?
And what makes more Ads? a sandbox perhaps.

We can all think its bad that a significant site is not ranking on Google, but do the searching public really notice? My referral logs suggest not. google, google, google (don't you just hate google).

What webmasters/SEOs have to strive for is whatever gets the most traffic (and the right kind of traffic) to their site. You might get excited about ranking No1 for 'keyword keyword' in MSN, but does it bring you the traffic you need, compared to ranking No1 for 'keyword keyword' in Google?

Currently I rank in the top 3 for my target phrase on Google, Yahoo and MSN. What scares me is most of my customers find me in Google. I wish more people would use Yahoo and MSN because it would make it easier for me, but wishing and liking doesn't pay the rent. So currently I'm not that fussed about Yahoo or MSN, but I'm watching public preference and waiting for algo changes (on the engines the public prefers currently).

pincher34

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 1:04 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I vote for Google.

MSN beta shows quite a few irrelevant pages and even more spam pages for the phrases I target...And my SERPs are much better on Google, which everyone knows is the most important factor in deciding which engine to prefer.

murugan

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 4:32 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I want all the SE's...

But when i searched for "my keyword" in msn beta it ranked #1 which has 1,300,000 competitors in google.

The highlighted thing here is i never submitted that site to SE's.

Google not even indexed that site.

So what i feel is MSN beta is very aggressive than google as of now.

Lets wait and see the game.

dvduval

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 4:47 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

With MSN, the filters for search are in your control. If you don't like the results, you can change the filters. As people learn these tools, it will change search as we know it. What is especially important going into the future is that people will likely use different filters, so you will not be able to optimize for just one set of variables. This is where Google is lacking. They are trying to use one set of variables, rather than empowering the searcher. You can bet MSN will further refine their search, and empower the user even more.

(Meanwhile, we have Google using one set of variables, and people complaining about the sandbox.)

It may not seem like much of a challenge yet from MSN, but as they continue to grant the user greater flexibility to control the search, more people will use their engine, simply because it offers more power.

northweb

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 5:03 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

My vote goes for MSN. I find the results to be very accurate and on topic.

helenp

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 7:17 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

The only thing I can say, though it is imposible to check for my keywords, though msn do not have any filter at all for networks, its so awful view almost all results from the same network, with diferent domains...all crosslinking each other

chopin said: and I am going nowhere with my keywords in Google, Yahoo,

i.e Yahoo has the same sandbox as Google....?

steveb

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 9:47 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

"It amazes me that so many here gripe about G, but they still continue to use it themselves."

How can this amaze you? There are three search engines. They all suck one way or another. What are you gonna do, not search anymore? Google has problems, but overall it is certainly no worse than the competition.

Tigrou

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 10:50 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Google is nothing more than a middle man between webmasters and the general internet community. If they aren't accommodating to the needs of both, somebody else will step in and take their place.

Very, very valid point. But what WE consider the needs of the users and what the USERS consider their needs might differ.

They want relevant, useful information from sources they can trust. Does the sandbox help or hurt this? The average user doesn't have a clue about the "sandbox" issue, but you gotta figure if they did know about it, they'd be pleased.

Consider:
- Fortune 500 companies each put up hundreds of thousands of ORIGINAL content and constantly modify/add to that.
- News organisations each put up hundreds of pages of new stuff every day
- Universities, governments, NGOs etc. all put up masses of information
- Even small time hobbyist have normally been online a while

These groups they make up a serious % of the original, real content on the web.

And, honestly, how much of our content is better than the stuff found in the list I mentioned?

Our sites maybe cool to us, and may even sell stuff, but that doesn't make them better for the users especially when a lot (majority?) of custom build sites are based on synthesis of other information, or affiliate datafeeds or even minimal content black hat techniques, etc..

I don't blame the sandbox for filtering out some of these sites as "collateral damage"...automatic data shuffling of any kind means this is going to happen.

Does Google have the exact settings correct? No. Does MSN? No, but you can fiddle with it and get closer to your preference. But it is likely that people will like that, and even more likely that if it works Google will copy it. (What's to stop them?)

Again though, while the sandbox may be good for Users, SEs etc., I do bemoan the fact that SEO is becoming a society of established "haves" and wannabe "have nots". It's just not as fun.

Best,
Tigs
ps I left out blogs because they are kinda screwed by the sandbox. But still, if you're into blogs you'll hear about them through word of mouth, recommendations by trusted bloggers or blog portals/blog SEs/blog RSS feeds.

webhound

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 11:36 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

brixton - give your head a shake. what have you been smoking? can i get some? :-)

dvduval

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 1:12 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

MSN will offer users a choice, and the results seem to be of quality, and the the user can modify variables on MSN search, giving them power to adjust results by
1) how many other sites are linking to them
2) how close the keywords match
3) how recently the sites were updated
And this is just Beta!

Google does not give users a choice.

chopin2256

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 1:22 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

The reason I didn't optimize for Record Hall is because its not going to bring me traffic. I just thought it was interesting that MSN ranks me number one for it, (while not optimizing for it) and Google shows me nowhere.

chopin2256 started this thread, and with an interesting statement:
"As a searcher, I like Google, and continue to use Google as my main search"

I use Google because it gives me the info I need, and I am used to Google. I stated that as a "searcher" I have nothing against google although the results do stay a bit stale sometimes. However as an "SEO" I don't get along with google. Take a look at my site. My site SOO deserves to be ranked in the top 1000 at least for "recording studio" MSN ranks me in the top 3 pages. Of course I like MSN better as an SEO. I am trying to start a business here, and I am seeing results, even if they don't matter yet.

bobothecat



 
Msg#: 288 posted 1:46 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Steveb:"There are three search engines. They all suck one way or another. What are you gonna do, not search anymore? Google has problems, but overall it is certainly no worse than the competition."

Think this statement is probably the best one yet. It's honestly silly to sit here and try to debate who's better than who. Why not let Wall Street determine that... especially since all 3 have shareholders, and quarterly revenue reports that are public information.

newwebster

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 1:47 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

oldskool79>
"Think about this: imagine if Walmart refused to explain to manufacturers how to get their products in their stores. What if they simply removed certain products from their stores with no rhyme or reason - often without even telling the manufacturers of those products about it. Pretty soon manufacturers wouldn't even bother trying to get their products in the stores because it would be a futile attempt. And the shoppers would start to notice that Walmart no longer carried that great of a selection of products. Pretty soon another company would step in and take the place of Walmart -- by giving customers more choices and working with the manufacturers to help them get their products into the store."<

Walmart does remove items from shelves all the time without notifying anybody. Most of the time they do not even have contracts with vendors and pretty much decide what allocation if any they get in their stores. While some shoppers may get angry over this the other 99% do not even notice. Walmart thrives on a perception that it has acquired over time and can pretty much do just about anything that they want as long as they keep that 99% happy. Similarly, at this point, the large mass of end users associate Google with search and they can get away with a lot of idiotic things as long as their 99% are happy.

The only way MSN is going to take this perception away from Google is first: get results so much better that It does make Google look like kiddy play, second advertise, advertise, advertise, advertise...well you get the point.

I just do not see this happening anytime soon. MSN may be able to rival Google at some point in the near future, but even if that occurs, they still have a long road to acquiring the image.

oldskool79

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 3:18 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Tigarou
Consider:
- Fortune 500 companies each put up hundreds of thousands of ORIGINAL content and constantly modify/add to that.
- News organisations each put up hundreds of pages of new stuff every day
- Universities, governments, NGOs etc. all put up masses of information
- Even small time hobbyist have normally been online a while

These groups they make up a serious % of the original, real content on the web.

I totally disagree with this. If I want news or some piece of content from a big corporation I go to a news site or the company's site, not to a search engine. It's only when I need to find something and I don't know where to find it that I turn to a search engine. In this case, about 80% of the time I find what I need on personal or very small website. If I can't find these types of sites through a search, whats the point?

Newwebster
The only way MSN is going to take this perception away from Google is first: get results so much better that It does make Google look like kiddy play, second advertise, advertise, advertise, advertise...well you get the point.

I just do not see this happening anytime soon. MSN may be able to rival Google at some point in the near future, but even if that occurs, they still have a long road to acquiring the image.

The advertising power of Microsoft is huge. They already have a very powerful brand (much more powerful than Google) and can easily leverage this to build a search business that will wipe Google out.

Once MSN finishes their search engine, I expect a massive advertising blitz to promote it. After that, I'm sure we will see an Adsense/Adwords type program that will be just as heavily promoted.

newsphinx

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 10:02 am on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

It looks many webmasters love MSN for their good ranking in MSN search while hate Google for Google does not rank their sites. Its so biased. :o There are few parents who feel other kids are prettier and smarter than their own kids and deserve more love. I have some sites which do well on Google, Yahoo and Msn Beta while some rank poor on Msn (Still in top ten though). I can not say which SEs are better, since search results on all three are relevant. But when I do some non-commercial search, I have to say MSN really disappointing. Most non-commerical searches I performed does not meet my expectation.

stef25

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 12:24 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

for what its worth, my non commercial site ranks at #1 for a few key words on google. the site has been online since may 04. It received a PR5 on almost all pages while i have less than a dozen backlinks.

on msn the site is nowhere to be found with the same keywords.

msn search to me has a real microsoft flavor. it feels a bit like using Help in MS software: you get some relevant results but it aint what you looking for.

afterburner

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 12:54 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

stef25

sticky me your url and your keywords and I bet I can find your URL in beta.msn

Hugene

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 3:25 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

First, the Google sandbox does not exist (at least not anymore). One of my clients launched 2 sites for the first time of his life, minimal content, basic SEO. I told him about the sandbox effect, as part of my sales picth, to convince him to advertise on my site. He agreed, I am running his banners, plus I added links to his site in my low to non-existant PR link page (with a million other links in there too, so its not passing any PR for sure)

To my great surprise, both his sites are in the index now, even though they are for very competitive keywords. Obviously, if you use the keywords, you wont find them on the top 10, but they are still there. If I was a search engine, I wouldn't rank them in the top 10 either, simply because the sites don't offer much yet.

With 8 billion pages and continus indexing, I think the sandbox has been removed. Now, if you go and build from scrach a site around a very competitve keyword (with the only intention to have it generate money) then forget about ranking high.

Also, I have said this a million times, MSN is here to destroy all other competition (like in all the industries they have entered) and will make webmastar's lives much harder when they are on top.

Fact is that MSN is somwehat scared, with G doing some really good buisness moves (buisness moves being usually the speciality of MSN). Gmail pushed Hotmail to 250mb, but I almost never use my hotmail anymore; they only reason I keep it, is because everyone knows it. Blogger is super popular, and there seems to be a bunch of other things cooking (msn is still behind on its desktop search for ex).

G admit it in a press release that their main disatvantage against msn and Y is that they don't offer the complete service, as the other portals do. Well, its seems they are heading this way, but with a different approach, which is very good.

Finally, to get back on topic, if you have any suggestions on how to get the MSN ranking, please post it here : [webmasterworld.com...] and not in the current thread (which is already too long to read by any sane person ;)

nutsandbolts

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 3:39 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

> First, the Google sandbox does not exist (at least not anymore).

For your sites, perhaps not ;)

Artstart

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 3:43 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

To tell you the truth, I don't see enough SEO work done to be on first 2 pages on G for 6 million results in a competitive area.

econman

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 4:45 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

My limited experience suggests there is definitely a lag in getting a new site to show up in Google's SERPs. One of our new sites appeared for the first time today (on page 59).

The duration of that lag seems to vary widely, for reasons that aren't apparent to me. Perhaps this inconsistency is contributing to the controversy over whether or not a "sand box" exists.

webhound

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 4:59 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I like the fact that MSN will show new sites for the more competitive areas. In Google it's virtually impossible to get a new site ranked for any of the competitive 2 or 3 keyword queries we deal with.

And Yahoo seems to be full of blatent spam these days.

Can't wait for this thing to launch and for there to be more competition in search engine world.

hunderdown

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 5:12 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

In my area, I don't see significant differences in the results on MSN Beta vs. Google. The same sites are showing up on the first page, perhaps in a slightly different order...

ownerrim

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 6:17 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

"Can't wait for this thing to launch and for there to be more competition in search engine world."

I'd be careful what you wish for.

oldskool79

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 7:32 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Fact is that MSN is somwehat scared, with G doing some really good buisness moves (buisness moves being usually the speciality of MSN). Gmail pushed Hotmail to 250mb, but I almost never use my hotmail anymore; they only reason I keep it, is because everyone knows it. Blogger is super popular, and there seems to be a bunch of other things cooking (msn is still behind on its desktop search for ex).

IMO, Google hasn't made any great business moves. They were able to leverage the popularity of their search engine to build a large PPC network. Google's search engine became popular out of good technology and lucky timing -- not due to any brilliant business tactics.

The only new thing that Gmail has to offer is more storage than their competitors. I don't think that's going to knock anyone off their feet, especially since any email company can offer the same thing whenever they want.

G admit it in a press release that their main disatvantage against msn and Y is that they don't offer the complete service, as the other portals do. Well, its seems they are heading this way, but with a different approach, which is very good

Google's main disadvantage is their users have no reason to remail loyal to them. If a better search engine comes along, what do I lose by switching away from Google?

In the near future, MSN will have the advantage of having their search fully integrated into the operating system. Users of the next version of windows would lose a lot by switching to another search engine.

4eyes

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 8:50 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Users of the next version of windows would lose a lot by switching to another search engine

err.... you wanna read that again - seems to be lacking in logic to me.

Why would I not be able to use any search engine I wish in conjuction with whatever MS chose to thrust at us? (rhetorical)

IE is embedded in Windows, but I still choose not use it.

If MSN's new search isn't better than Google or Yahoo then I won't use it and I won't lose anything either.

What they gonna do, send the heavies round to make sure I don't use 2 search engines at once? (yes, I know they could probably afford to, but its not that likely, is it?)

So, what exactly is it that I am going to lose?

Tigrou

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 9:34 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)


I totally disagree with this...In this case, about 80% of the time I find what I need on personal or very small website.

oldskool79, I guess I wasn't very clear in my post. I agree with you that small sites can be extremely useful. My post simply said that "new sites" often aren't. If a site was worth being up, normally it was put up over a year ago (blogs excluded). Large % of new sites (not new content) were webmaster-generated junk. That's google's opinion at least.

Problem is that the sandbox doesn't solve their problem...it just delays the decision. The rate of new crap sites may have gone down, and some may be entering the SERPs (on page 59 or whatever) but the absolute number of new sites is increasing. Google still hasn't indicated to us how they plan on letting only the good sites out of the sandbox and keeping the crap ones in...

(and yes, I know there are sneaky SEO techniques to get out of sandbox but that's not the point for someone setting up a cool hobby site in a competitive niche and wanting the world to see it.)

Best,
CF
ps Stef 25, love your summary of MSN :-)

adamxcl

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 288 posted 12:31 am on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

People drift to the better search engine over the course of a year or two. It doesn't matter what we build and which search engine we build it for. People have to find it and become a customer. A #1 ranking in MSN above a bunch of crap doesn't do much good if no one is looking at it. The best results win for the search engine and it doesn't matter if we are number 1 or 1000 for our terms. My neighbors don't care what we think or what we build. They want a good website with what they are looking for at that time.

And I don't think the sandbox is there any more for Google. I just launched two sites, just content, no seo effort, could even say zero seo at this point because I haven't done anything to finish them so I was not expecting to deal with them much for months on Google. In 10 days, I'm on the second page and am caught off guard with business.

This 45 message thread spans 2 pages: 45 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Bing Search Engine News
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved