Well if that is true then I would think they would be moving to structured data in a hurry but that doesn't seem to be the case.
"In a hurry" is a relative term..and much happens behind the curtain..
Structured data would allow things to be grouped in subsets relatively fast thus achieving exactly what you describe.
Which is why I think they'll go there ( in the interim, they are "pre-sorting" , and "using" ( preferring if you will ) "pre-sorted" sites )..it isn't like they can Just say " hold everything, no searches for a month or so, and we'll be back with different structures"..They have to integrate changes into a live and evolving environment..
But what I am seeing is Google is extremely slow these days to index new data and they appear to up only small pieces of pages.
Which is what would happen if they were trying to reduce the amount of data that they were having to handle..
Almost like they don't have the computing power to index correctly.
That is what I said, both in the previous post ( and previous posts in other threads )..and just above in this post..we are in agreement on this aspect/ interpretation :)
Maybe are the searches so huge that it is slowing things down?
Only if they were to try to search everything in real time ( as they did for a while in the past )..rather than "pre-sorting", as they have been doing, for the last two years or so..
Well if that was the case then traffic would be up
Not necessarily..the likes of wikipedia and amazon do not report their traffic fluctuations here:) But look at the meteoric rise of Pinterest and ehow et al..and their increased traffic, is where the traffic of many, whose traffic has fallen, has been redirected to..
but we don't see that do we?
See my paragraph immediately above..
[edited by: tedster at 1:32 pm (utc) on May 28, 2013]