| 12:49 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Change SEO? You betcha!
I can already see my competitors pages in a few weeks.
widget for s
widget for sa
widget for sal
widget for sale
widget for sale i
widget for sale in
widget for sale in c
widget for sale in ca
widget for sale in ca c
widget for sale in ca ch
widget for sale in ca che
widget for sale in ca chea
widget for sale in ca cheap
lol, I cant wait to see what they come up with.
| 3:55 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I immediately thought of those gimmicky title tags that seemed to move as the page loaded. You just needed about 30 title tags like your example.
| 4:01 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Indeed, optimizing for partial words could become a new form of spam.
| 4:18 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
lol. That was priceless Drall...
| 4:26 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|I immediately thought of those gimmicky title tags that seemed to move as the page loaded. You just needed about 30 title tags like your example. |
But, haven't you read that google has lowered the importance of "title tags" and "exact matches"
However, I do agree that this will help the spammers and the blackhats more, as I definitely feel that google has made it a lot more easier for them now.
Well let me repeat again here, what I did in the main thread:
Google personalised search, google suggest and now Google Instant.
Are these attempts to cool the overly heated google servers?
Are these attempts to kill long tail?
Are these attempts to ensure that only authority sites or sites which can rank for "short keyword phrases" can live on the web?
Are these attempts to shrink the web?
Are these attempts to be a monopoly on the web together with its partner publishers?
or are these attempts to kill google?
or is this a suicide or a genocide?
| 4:32 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
optimizing for the partial words isn't going to help you.
If you watch the long youtube video you'll see that someone at google tried to develop something along the same lines years ago, but it gave the results of what you were entering at the time, not the predicted search query, so it didn't work well.
Now, they are showing the results for the predicted query, not the partial query.
| 5:13 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Yes...briggidere is right...
what google is probably doing with google instant is to show the result for what it suggests via the "Google suggest"...I see it more as an extension of google suggest...
some innovation may take you to the height of glory...
some innovations may bury you deep...
| 5:16 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
drall, this URL will be flagged for overuse of the phrase 'widget for sale' LoL
| 5:34 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Let's keep this thread for discussion of Matt Cutts' comments and use the main thread [webmasterworld.com] for other general discussion of Google Instant.
In his comment: "it's possible that people will learn to search differently over time", Matt focuses on what I think will be essential data gathering and analysis for SEOs. We can guess, and it's fun to pontificate here on Day One - but let's face it, we just don't know.
Google was testing Instant Results in the recent past and I'll bet they do have some idea of what we'll be seeing. Vut even they can't know what weeks and months of use will do to common search behavior.
Another comment from Matt: "with Google Instant I find myself digging into a query more." Me too, at least here on Day One. I was wasting more time on Google than I do on Twitter.
| 6:03 am on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
@tedster You and Matt are both technical people. Its quite likely that technical people might drill down further using instant search. I doubt the average user would, though.
In all likelihood the average person will forgo the long tails and settle for the narrow range of suggested results. I think the end result will be shrinking the scope of search terms, higher ranking for one and two word queries, and a much tougher time for young sites to gain serp position. I hope I'm wrong.
| 12:25 pm on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Time will tell - note the new report we've got of Google testing only three results per page [webmasterworld.com]
| 2:26 pm on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Hehe I love that you search for "widget for sale" and there it is, this thread 1st page :D
| 2:48 pm on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Why does Matt feel the need for people to learn to search differently and the way Google wants them to.
This is a feature only eggheads will appreciate and it's going to cost them users. So what if all the techy eggheads use Google, the average searchers who make up the bulk of the search core will tire of this and simply switch search engines.
I've had clients call me and ask me what's wrong with Google. The results are all messed up. Instead of explaining it, I just told them to go to Bing or Yahoo.
In a non Google reality, the average surfer only wants to find what the are searching for and doing that on Google is getting harder and harder to do.
Google is in a current state of Atention Deficit Disorder.
| 7:39 pm on Sep 9, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Maybe will be better if search suggestions will not appear while typing a query.
This will allow more long tails searches and some traffic for small sites (because short queries are of big companies) and more relevant results for user.
| 5:51 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I hate it. I ALWAYS know what I want. Get out of my way.
It is an annoying distraction, which, if you look at it, just slows you down. Type a letter, look at the results, type another letter, look at the results, type another letter, look at the results, type . . .
Ridiculous. Gimme a break.
I always use this Google complete=0 bookmark -
If that option ever goes away, I will use Bing exclusively.
Not all of us are confused, bungling meatheads. Stop demeaning me, by assuming I am an idiot, and treating me that way.
And the blanked out links on the search page until mouseover = incredibly annoying. This doesn't speed up anything, it slows everything down.
| 7:37 pm on Sep 10, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|I always use this Google complete=0 bookmark |
| 4:57 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Stop demeaning me, by assuming I am an idiot, and treating me that way. |
Exactly...I would like to have tools/robots that listens to my instructions instead of giving me instructions (suggest and instant) of where i should be going...
| 6:35 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
> itís possible that people will learn to search differently over time.
It won't change my searches. I already turned it off.
| 7:58 am on Sep 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing a serious lack of plural options in my regular search terms from Google Instant. There are specific terms that are always used in plural, but Google only offers the singular search term in their instant scroll option. This will certainly mean some target redesigning if it continues.