| 5:20 pm on Jan 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've been comparing both of the MSN engines and I find a wild difference in results (comparing both side by side with exact same search). Where my sites ranked well on the old engine currently they are now buried, only a few ranking well. To a lesser degree Google results have been somewhat different..WHY? Yahoo, and then some of the other less used engines are still kind to me! In this ever changing business it's just the matter of me getting with the program as the new engine will be as it is!
| 8:26 pm on Jan 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Where my sites ranked well on the old engine currently they are now buried, only a few ranking well.
Because msn beta is crud. They should keep the old version. It is much better. I find some sites ( on msn beta) that are in the serps that are nowhere to be seen now.
| 8:39 pm on Jan 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
fyi, the old msn, is just yahoo
| 10:24 pm on Jan 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"fyi, the old msn, is just yahoo "
not entirely but based yes nearly the same
| 6:35 am on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|I see the new MSN screen live when going to |
This is very in the morning from Europe and I'm not using any new SP2 as I'm under GNU/Linux. :-)
The crawler is too running hot...
BTW2: They are load balancing behind Akamai's GNU/Linux clusters:
PING a134.g.akamai.net (188.8.131.52): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=38.8 ms
| 8:39 am on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing a tiny number of referals from .com and .co.uk since middle of last week from sites that aren't in the Yahoo index.
The beta search results may be of variable quality (although I've found them to generally acceptable) but the market needs another player; Google's results are poor and Yahoo is a glorified front end to PFI/PPC.
An additional source of referals is always welcome, and more importantly, it spreads the risk of over exposure to a single search engine (is Yahoo still considered a search engine?).
I can sympathise with webmasters who are losing position in the new index. Many of us experienced a similar problem when Yahoo switched from Google.
The switch to the new index can't come soon enough for me, and if they also take a small percentage of Google's searches and a massive slice of Yahoo's, I'll be really chuffed.
| 3:25 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I lost a lot of traffic when Yahoo switched to ink and carried forward an ink penalty on my company's website. This caused me to lose both Yahoo and MSN traffic. All emails to Yahoo to have the situation remedied, have remained unanswered.
Now, with the new MSN roll out my sites are doing even better than in Google, since there is no sandbox of sites. I hope MSN kicks Google butts and bury Yahoo in the process, both for their legendary arrogance.
| 4:19 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
still seeing spurts of beta results from regular search in log files..been about the same frequency the last few days.
| 6:02 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
For what it's worth, I'm seeing the BETA results from my computer.
| 7:06 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
acee -- good points.
It nicely encapsulates the issue:
|The beta search results may be of variable quality (although I've found them to generally acceptable) but the market needs another player; Google's results are poor and Yahoo is a glorified front end to PFI/PPC. |
I still wonder though, Google seems to play a game of "wait and trump" other SEs. They wait until Yahoo (etc.) act, then 2 days later they announce they are doing the same thing but better. Latest example is the Jump from 4 billion to 8 billion pages ... nicely timed after Yahoo's announcement.
Things like that might be done to win the PR war (woth it alone), or to maximise their PPC $$.
So when MSN does go live, I wonder what trick they will pull out? The end of the sandbox?
| 9:26 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I hope MSN kicks Google butts and bury Yahoo in the process, both for their legendary arrogance. - Lets hope so.
Im doing well so far in the serps a little more targeting me thinks.....
| 10:41 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This rollout is weird.
I just did a search using the search box on MSN's home page for a number of keywords. For one, I was #14, for another #10, etc.
After I went through searching for about 15 keywords or phrases, I deleted any cookies and went back to MSN's home page to search again.
This time, the first keyword came in at #5, the second at #2, etc.
IOW, I moved up in the results dramatically in less than 15 minutes.
They must be moving quickly between the "old" MSN search and beta, or the datacenters are very different.
| 10:46 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|for their legendary arrogance |
Like Microsoft will be any better on the arrogance front than yahoo or google? I think you need another white knight. If microsoft achieves dominance you won't feel any warmer to them then than you do towards google and yahoo now.
| 11:47 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
apparently they are working very hard. I made a post on the blog telling them that I had found a problem and got an email back from them earlier today. It's kind of cool to see them utilizing the webmaster community for input on their product.
| 11:51 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This beta process has been a non-stop demonstration of Microsoft arrogance.
- One way communication. Microsoft solicits URLs, and asks for help "making the search better". There has been no response in the SERPs to numerous communications I have sent detailing ommissions of numerous sites. That is arrogance.
- Vague and inaccurate tips for inclusion. If the tips were accurate, my pages would be listed #1 in MSN serps as they have been listed absolutely top #1 for 2 years on every other search engine. I have never paid the other SEs a dime, they rank my pages at the top because the pages contain more content about the keywords than any other site on the Internet. That is how SEs are supposed to work, and that is how users EXPECT SEs to work. Instead, my site has been completely "black listed" from MSN beta SERPs. I have checked well past the 1st 100 or so result links. That is arrogance.
- Whole categories of interest are excluded, especially in pop culture. With MSN beta, one is likely to receive SERPs with a hundred links to people other than a pop culture personality who happen to have the same name as the pop culture personality. When the pop culture personality is linked, it is more likely going to be a PFI listing by a tobacco company that has no content about the personality. That is arrogance.
In a way George Orwell predicted things like MSN search in his book 1984. What you have here is a major company, Microsoft, censoring Internet content. The implications of limiting what users may see is truly disturbing. Sites that contain non-conforming political views can simply be suppressed by the search engine. Hello Big Brother.
Fortunately, MSN is small island in the Internet for now. Only about 4% of my traffic came from using the old MSN search.
- Google (Images) 26%
- Yahoo 24%
- Google 23%
- AltaVista 5%
- Other search engines 11%
-- MSN 4%
-- Lycos 3%
-- AOL 1%
-- Mamma 1%
-- Overture 0%
-- Others 2%
At 4%, MSN is just a minor player in search now. Once word of the poor SERPs gets out in the user community, it will probably drive the few that are using MSN now to seek better alternatives.
As a long time Microsoft investor, this MSN beta has been a real PITA. Here MSFT had an opportunity to make a difference and develop an innovative SE. Instead, they developed a SE that is much worse than any SE I have ever used. When a development team is as arrogant and non-responsive as this one, and when the work product is this poor, there are only a few options. Fire the whole team and start over, or sell the whole mess to someone willing to do the job correctly.
| 1:02 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What we need is Yahho, Msn and Google in a constant battle, they can all keep each other honest that way hopefully!
| 1:05 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
work on your insite linking, it seems to play a big part in their algo
| 1:37 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
FINALLY...now I'm seeing beta results from search.msn.com and msn.com (I'm in Alabama). I don't know whether they are fully live, but in the last 12 hours I'm getting close to 3 times as much traffic from beta search results as from Google (even though MSN has only 4% of our pages indexed, and Google has them all...supposedly). In recent months it was more like 2:1 in Google's favor. I'm happy.
| 1:49 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
For the first time pulled up MSN and seeing the new results. We are on the east coast.
| 2:27 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
For the first time tonight, MSN beta is including one of our pages in a SERP, and ranking it as the #1 result, as all the other SEs have done for the past 2 years.
I have changed nothing in that page. I appreciate others trying to help with tips, but as I said before, the other SEs had no trouble ranking our pages #1 for certain 2 to 4 keyword searches, and now MSN beta is also ranking at least 1 page #1 now, where before that page was not included anywhere in the top 100.
There was clearly somthing broken in MSN beta, and now it is partially corrected.
| 3:35 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
csnet, i've actually had an ongoing dialogue with someone from microsoft after I offered up some help on their blog. I went through and explained a particular problem I was seeing with spam and showed the particular method used. I was told in reply by a developer who i won't name, "Fantastic info Mike. We have lots of examples but I'm building up a
large tracking/test set so we can test out our filtering/resistance and
this is exactly the type of spam I'm looking for to track."
Alot of money is at stake here, and I think microsoft knows that if it hopes to compete, it is going to have to put out a quality product. If you have a very particular thing and you can explain to them the cause of the problem, don't think that they wouldn't listen to you.
| 3:40 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can't really see an increase or decrease in traffic yet.
| 3:58 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I went from 300+ to 1st and 3 on 30 keyword phrazes. I hope it sticks...
god bless MSN!
| 4:00 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing the new search live on MSN from 3 locations in Georgia tonight and referrals are up for the first time. I think this may be it (knock on wood).
| 4:00 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yup I'm seeing it live here too. And yes the results look goods.
| 4:21 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
seeing new results in texas, my two words keyword "sell widget" 1st out of 25mil, in google sandboxed
| 4:26 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
From Bangkok: [search.msn.com...] is showing the new interface but [search.msn.co.uk...] is showing the old one...
| 4:31 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"- One way communication. Microsoft solicits URLs, and asks for help "making the search better". There has been no response in the SERPs to numerous communications I have sent detailing ommissions of numerous sites. That is arrogance. "
hahaha. Try telling Google about their redirect handling month after month after month. At least MSFT is not claiming to be "altruistic" or "not evil" .
| 4:43 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Also, just confirmed new MSN showing in San Diego.
This is either the largest beta test yet, or the real deal folks.
| 4:54 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can see it here on Oklahoma too.
| 4:58 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"And yes the results look good"
LOL i can't believe it ,that people find that mess as good results ,if was'nt against the TOS i could give you 1000 search terms and if you find the results relative i'll cut my neck,lets hope that because this is a beta ,there will be changes in the near future.The good news are that pages that where baned (from Yahoo...ligans)are back full indexed in the new MSN.
| This 245 message thread spans 9 pages: < < 245 ( 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ) > > |