homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.211.70.79
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Visit PubCon.com
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 179 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 179 ( 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 > >     
Google announces Google Instant AJAX Serps - Live Now!
imbckagn




msg:4198559
 4:38 pm on Sep 8, 2010 (gmt 0)


System: The following message was cut out of thread at: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4198306.htm [webmasterworld.com] by brett_tabke - 11:42 am on Sep 8, 2010 (cst -5)


I also have the the new Ajax results when I am logged out. It says the phrase below in a blue box when I type.

Welcome to Google Instant
Feelings of euphoria and weightlessness are normal. Don't be alarmed learn more.

This is the learn more link [google.com...]

Google Instant is a new search enhancement that shows results as you type. We are pushing the limits of our technology and infrastructure to help you get better search results, faster. Our key technical insight was that people type slowly, but read quickly, typically taking 300 milliseconds between keystrokes, but only 30 milliseconds (a tenth of the time!) to glance at another part of the page. This means that you can scan a results page while you type.

The most obvious change is that you get to the right content much faster than before because you don’t have to finish typing your full search term, or even press “search.” Another shift is that seeing results as you type helps you formulate a better search term by providing instant feedback. You can now adapt your search on the fly until the results match exactly what you want. In time, we may wonder how search ever worked in any other way.

 

indyank




msg:4199806
 3:35 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

I have a question.Will the ads that google display along with the search results it fetches for every keystroke, count as impressions? Won't it result in huge loss of money to the adword buyers?

tedster




msg:4199820
 3:59 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here's the current answer, indyrank:

With Google Instant, an impression is counted if a user takes an action to choose a query (for example, presses the Enter key or clicks the Search button), clicks a link on the results page, or stops typing for three or more seconds.

[adwords.blogspot.com...]


Discussion in our Adwords Forum: So how will the new instant search results affect impressions? [webmasterworld.com]

skibum




msg:4199850
 6:02 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

I've been seeing it for a couple days and virtually never log into Google. Will be interesting to see what happens.

chrisv1963




msg:4199857
 6:33 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

It's a disaster. I already heard of a lot of people (average users)that hate this!

vivalasvegas




msg:4199863
 7:11 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

So far I don't see any noticeable traffic variations.

martaay




msg:4199932
 9:48 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

GI day +1 slight increase in traffic compared to the previous thursday...

Myself I have turned it off...

I'm not skilled enough to be able to look at the screen whilst I type (in an accurate manner) therefore its useless to me and just means more scrolling to get to my results, I would imagine most average joe users are looking at the keyboard also when typing, maybe google dont realise this?

I also perform most searches from my broswers search bar, so even with it turned on these new features are wasted on me

Robert Charlton




msg:4199941
 10:25 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here's Google's official take on it...

In user studies, people quickly found a new way to interact with Google: type until the gray text matches your intention and then move your eyes to the results. We were actually surprised at how well this worked—most people in our studies didn’t even notice that anything had changed. Google was just faster.

Google Instant, behind the scenes
[googleblog.blogspot.com...]

If this is the case, traffic should be essentially the same as it was with just Suggest. I'm not sure that in my gut I feel that this is so.

epmaniac




msg:4199942
 10:31 am on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

traffic is way down compared to previous thursdays.... instant is a disaster

walkman




msg:4199958
 12:08 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

My traffic up by 10%-15% and I am getting a wide range of referrals I didn't get before/

Whitey




msg:4199971
 1:19 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Some observations, that most have probably noticed already are that one third of the screen is taken up by the drop down search options , another third by Adwords and the balance by a Google map and directory listings.

To see any of the organic listing I have to scroll up and down, below the fold , which doesn't save a lot of time for folks that want to view organic listings.

Google is getting so robust at removing organic listing from the front page , it runs the risk of being like a TV or radio station running 24/7 advertising - you just want to switch to the other channel.

Not sure if i like this new toy.

Mark_A




msg:4200005
 2:30 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

We can blame mobile phones for this, it is predictive text after all.

Mark_A




msg:4200006
 2:31 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

I think traffic should be the same as before.

People searching for blue fat widget in Utah are still going to enter enough into the box to get what they are looking for.

mrguy




msg:4200095
 4:05 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Bing did this first by the way and did not scale it.

[content.usatoday.com...]

Good article, hope the mods allow the link.

tedster




msg:4200102
 4:22 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

In fact, the Bing exec says something quite complimentary: "The magic was they (Google) were able to do it at scale, for all of their searchers. It's an impressive technical accomplishment for sure."

It sounds like Bing not only didn't scale it, they didn't think they COULD scale it. No matter what your feelings may be about Instant (I have it turned off for most searches - I'm already too hyper), it certainly is a technical tour de force.

dickbaker




msg:4200103
 4:26 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

So far I've seen no difference in traffic, nor any difference in the percentage of referrals coming from Google. I have to think that this is going to affect things at some point, though.

For years I've been using Brett's rules for getting ranked in Google, and it's worked. With everything that's happened this year, I think much of that may be out the window.

doughayman




msg:4200107
 4:45 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

LOL Ted. Microsoft management sees it for what it's worth - another Bell & Whistle that will turn off the masses to using Google, and increase the defection to their Search Engine. I think they are using a tad of reverse psychology here in their "official" statement, and are probably popping the champagne cork in the executive boardroom as we speak.......

I agree with Whitey above - less screen real estate for valuable information, and there is way too much noise on the screen now. And Google has brass ones for enabling this feature by default, IMO.

For what it's worth, my wife and kids, who are average search engine users, absolutely hate it. As more of an advanced search engine user myself, I didn't bother disabling it, because I don't use Google any more....I guess the morbid curiosity draws me to reading the banter.

jimbeetle




msg:4200117
 5:05 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Bing did this first by the way and did not scale it.

Yahoo! had it back in '05 and also didn't scale it. A post [uniquehazards.tumblr.com] by the Y! engineer that led the team.

mrguy




msg:4200231
 7:14 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Yahoo! had it back in '05 and also didn't scale it. A post [uniquehazards.tumblr.com] by the Y! engineer that led the team.


So, both of Googles competitors had it before them and did not try to bring it to scale. That should tip you off to something.

Here is my thought on why they didn't. Bing and Yahoo probably did focus groups with people that are ACTUALLY average surfers and they all hated it.

Google does their focus groups with all the tech heads in the plex and they all loved it.

That's the way it is with a lot of the stuff Google releases and also why they have such fantastic bombs after talking about it will change the world. In their tech Google goggle haze, they think all their stuff is the wave of the future.

But, its not, just look at Wave, Buzz and now add instant search to that list.

Google has lost their edge in a big way.

mrez74




msg:4200236
 7:36 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)


So far I've seen no difference in traffic, nor any difference in the percentage of referrals coming from Google. I have to think that this is going to affect things at some point, though.




Today I'm noticing the effect of Google Instant. A couple sites that my main keyword is 3 words long(but singular form instead of plural form) traffic is zero up to this point today.

Both of these sites are at #2 and #3 for their search term and had been getting moderate hits daily. However, now when I start doing the search in Google for my main keyword by the time I type in the second word and begin the first letter of the 3 word only the "plural" form is suggested, and not singular. So people now will just go for the plural form instead of typing the whole singular form. I guess my move would be to start optimizing the site for the plural form now and see what happens.

From now on I guess if we are trying to go after a say 3 or 4 word keyword then once we type the second word of the keyword and/or first letter of third word if Google Instant does not bring up that keyword in its suggestion then it might be hard to get traffic for that term compared to before.

What do you think guys think about this?

ron15




msg:4200267
 8:32 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here is my thought on why they didn't. Bing and Yahoo probably did focus groups with people that are ACTUALLY average surfers and they all hated it.

Google does their focus groups with all the tech heads in the plex and they all loved it.


Do you really want to be the Googler pointing out that you think it sucks, when others are chewing it up with big grins on their face? Going against the grain might be a career limiting move.

mrguy




msg:4200275
 8:56 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Do you really want to be the Googler pointing out that you think it sucks, when others are chewing it up with big grins on their face? Going against the grain might be a career limiting move.


Good point...

Hmmmm..... You wouldn't happen to be one of those Googlers in cognito now would you ;)

tedster




msg:4200292
 9:46 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here's an interesting article about Google Instant from a professional designer's perspective: Google Equates "Design" With Endless Testing. They're Wrong [fastcodesign.com]

Some important professional commentary here, I'd say.

scottsonline




msg:4200300
 10:01 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Absolutely everything done by Google in 2010 has been designed to drive users to google adwords. Instant isn't going to make my job as a consumer easier, all it will do is help steer and sculpt my searches towards search terms for which they conveniently are getting the highest CPC. Long tail is the enemy of an organization that wants to maximize ad revenues because it allows some to get by without paying.

With instant we will all have no choice. We will now all have to pay to play as we figure out the algorithms google users to steer our long tail customers to the keyword combinations that they have already figured out generate the most revenue for them.

Brand A Line Name Widget ABC in red may have returned 10 clicks a month for a shop owner and converted well for them. That's bad news for Google because there wouldn't be much competition on a term that only generates ten clicks a month. With instant Brand A Line Name will be the first thing people end up on and there may be 500 clicks a month and advertisers paying for that search term. The more people they can funnel from the long to the short result the more money they can make.

IMO that's the driving force behind this.

If Google cared about user experience they'd have hired people to read spam reports in a timely fashion and remove all the junk from the index that has come back since Mayday.

I don't need to see my results 1/2 a second faster. I have kids running around, phone calls, emails and other distractions. The 10 seconds a day I lose over "instant" really isn't going to solve my problems. Remove the 5 minutes a day I spend clicking the back button when a search on a medical condition takes me to a page for viag*a through a tricky redirect that looked legitimate. Or when I search for a famous person and end up on another redirect site with all sorts of non-kid friendly imagery.

None of that will happen because the latter costs money, the former generates more money.

EDIT: And I 100% agree a lot of this is because you have a bunch of people at Google that think everything is wonderful. It's no different than Microsoft when they released such wonderful products as Windows ME and the helpful "Bob". At that time I was very friendly with a head of product development and would see some of this stuff before it got released and wondered what was in the water up in Seattle. I feel the same way since 5/1 with Google.

If the internet was just created today and we all had to decide which engine to use between Yahoo, bing and google in my opinion it would be Bing that would win. It's better now plain and simple. Google would be better than Yahoo but not by a ton. Google is where it is because they were first at being good. They've totally lost it this year and I cannot figure out for the life of me what the reason is unless the data we saw on search usage slippage is much more pronounced - IE they see a much sharper drop internally in the near future.

All they had to do is clean up the spam and they'd dominate, instead they're trying to reinvent a wheel.

mrguy




msg:4200325
 11:09 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)

Here's an interesting article about Google Instant from a professional designer's perspective: Google Equates "Design" With Endless Testing. They're Wrong [fastcodesign.com]

Some important professional commentary here, I'd say.


That's an excellent commentary and I think it pretty much sums up what a lot of us have been saying for a while now.

Good find Tedster!

aakk9999




msg:4200344
 12:39 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Has anyone realised that Google is doing spelling check inside instant search box? It is done for some words and Google underlines your word red at the point thinks it can predict what you are typing and thinks you have misspelled it.

Try to type in "accomodation" (with single m)
At "accom" google predicts "accommodate"
At "accomo" Google underlines the word in search box in red.

dickbaker




msg:4200373
 3:02 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Google is having problems with contractions, though. I'll type in "can't" and it will say, "did you mean 'cant'?".

tedster




msg:4200375
 3:08 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Been thinking on this - Instant should give Google a ton of extra, useful data about user intention. We already know they're watching for 3 second pauses to credit an Adwords impression.

Seems to me they've already nailed down any typing pause of 3 seconds or more as an important signal - something caught the user's eye, even if they keep on typing. If they type more words, that's one signal. If they revise the query at that point, it's another. Over time, they will get a lot more data to refine their "intention engine".

mrguy




msg:4200396
 4:25 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

We already know they're watching for 3 second pauses to credit an Adwords impression.
It will be real interesting to see over the next few months what that does to advertisers CTR and CPC since it stands to reason CTR will go down due to so many impressions, then CPC is going to go up to keep the same spots.

I don't think advertisers are going to like what is coming next.

indyank




msg:4200403
 4:43 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Thanks Tedster for the answers and the references....

In fact, the Bing exec says something quite complimentary: "The magic was they (Google) were able to do it at scale, for all of their searchers. It's an impressive technical accomplishment for sure."


Well, the bing team must be rejoicing now...they must be so happy with this disastrous move by google that they decided it is time to throw some "praises"....

trinorthlighting




msg:4200409
 4:53 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Time to check the suggested keywords and bounce them off of our targeted keywords and reoptimize a bit. Watch the singular and plural terms, that is what we are noticing on long tail seaches and we are busy making some changes.

potentialgeek




msg:4200426
 6:48 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)

Thanks for the link, Tedster.

This excerpt is a great point:

The chief mandate of design thinking is empathy -- and I'm pretty sure Google's engineers didn't have too much empathy for all those over the age of 28 who don't find it all that useful to have their eyes assaulted by information they weren't looking for in the first place.


The only thing I like about Instant is it centers everything on my screen. Why in 2010 everything is by default still on the left instead of in the middle is beyond me.

Maybe nobody at the Plex has a 24-in iMac.

This 179 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 179 ( 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 > >
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.
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