TheMadScientist - 5:24 pm on Jan 13, 2013 (gmt 0)
You're not understand the whole 'size of the web' issue claarky and taberstruths ... It's too big to get enough information to rank the whole thing from people's browsers.
Maybe they're up to .008% of it now ... It's just plain too big.
How much faster do you think they can spider than a statistically meaningful sample of people in general (never mind people using Chrome) can even visit sites or pages (assuming people know the they're there, never mind finding them)? Very generously, even with all the computing power Google has, they might have .01% of the web indexed (that leaves 99.99% they don't have) and they can spider in a hurry (way faster than people can find and visit) ... Waiting for a statistically meaningful sample of people (using any browser) to find and visit a site or page to determine a position for ranking it would likely be futile.
If the data from browsers dictates the rankings of sites, where's 'discovery' come in? You don't have data from new sites and pages, so they wouldn't ever be part of the equation if you promoted pages/sites based on 'browser positives', because the 'no browser info' pages/sites would always be ranked too low for anyone to find, so they might as well stop spidering anything not 'already positive', because it won't ever show anyway if they use browser info to directly influence rankings of pages and sites.
It's really not very bright, in my opinion, to use browser info to control the algo, because like I said previously, it leaves too many holes, but you can think they do if you like.
I would lay money on the fact that they are not ranked in the top 10 for any quantifiable search term either.
Uh, I would guess it, like most of the rest of the pages on the site ranks at the top for some specific search terms, which is why it was built the way it was. But if you choose to 'put blinders on' and think there's no way it could be helpful to anyone or that Google doesn't rank the site well, that's fine by me ... You have no clue what the site is about anyway, but I can tell you it's linked to by some major colleges and universities (over 50 last I know of) because it does some things quite a bit better than any other site like it, including the .gov...
Chrome users will be more likely to fit into certain demographics, just like IE, Firefox, Opera etc users might be more likely to fit into different demographics. You'd be skewing the data based on that fact for sure.
Oh, so the sample isn't representative of the whole? If they had a bigger sample size % would it likely be more representative? I'd think so.
We're both saying the sample isn't accurate, and I put it too simply and used a bad example for some to 'get' earlier, sorry, my bad.
Even setting all the other arguments aside, it still doesn't make sense to me (especially when they Don't Need to) to 'promote or demote' pages or sites based on:
1 out of 3 people who visit this site seem to like it...
What about the other 2 out of 3? No clue...