Forum Moderators: bakedjake
Even a year ago AltaVista at least had their own results and were an alternative. The search industry on the web seems to be a duller place.
a very poor Yahoo search
What exactly are you comparing Yahoo to in order to rate it 'very poor' - certainly ain't Google or MSN from where I am sitting..
Shame about Altavista, though - shot their own foot off years ago and never really recovered. Their usefulness now is mostly as a 'see what can happen' warning for other search engines and a test bed for Yahoo if the so wish.
Problems with Yahoo,
a, not being able to even get a website indexed, when yahoo are crawling it everyday.
b, editors taking competition out by hand
c, ads, ads and more ads
d, you search on Yahoo and the whole screen that loads up is full of ads. You have to browse down the page to get to proper results. (not the case with google, proper results have most prominant)
e, yahoo just copy Google, with their image and news search.
[edited by: mikeD at 12:35 pm (utc) on July 3, 2004]
Certainly is Google, in no way is Yahoo better than Google.
There are plenty here who disagree with you, senior members and mods included - obviously they are all fools who fail to appreciate your superior intellect.
Some might be trapped into thinking that each has its strengths and weaknesses - glad to see that you haven't allowed such muddy thinking to cloud your judgement, or your opinion that you are 100% right.
There are plenty here who disagree with you, senior members and mods included - obviously they are all fools who fail to appreciate your superior intellect.
Being a mod doesn't automatically make you an expert on what makes one search engine better than another. It just means you have enough self-discipline not to call other people "jackass" in a forum, and are trust-worthy enough to police those who do. :)
I gotta admit though, Google does give me what I'm looking for 100% of the time. Yahoo doesn't. I also agree that Google's ads are much more pleasant.
[edited by: digitalv at 12:36 pm (utc) on July 3, 2004]
There is also a chance that senior members and mods here are biased also. I bet they all relay on their income from search engine traffic.
You are obviously as biased against Google as I am Yahoo.
If Google is so bad why have Yahoo copied them in most aspects of their search technology.
Everyone here would agree that Yahoo is far more commercial in it's ideals than Google. And that ads are far more prominant on Yahoo.
With Google most people can't get it because they have used risky techniques. With Yahoo you can't get in because you are a competitor. This is the big difference betweeen the two and why Google is better in my opinion.
How likely is that? Hahahahahaha! You will see a whale on roller skates first. -LH
It was great to be able to rework a page, submit it, and 12 to 24 hours later find it back at number one or two. Problem was that everybody else was doing the same thing and it made for many all-nighters. (Way too much coffee and too many smokes; six a.m. and why the heck can't I get to sleep?)
AV was a victim of its own success. Large user base and fast refresh put made it "the" SE to work against. Some of the steps it took to fight back (Hey, why don't we just give different results each time somebody searches for the same thing?), backfired.
It's attempts to monetize search (?first SE to do so?) are familiar now, the same basic techniques are used by most all SEs, but Google -- with its squeaky clean UI and no PFI -- came along at just that moment and delivered a crippling blow.
And let's face it, for the couple of years before the Yahoo takeover AV was barely a glimmer of its former self, not really a viable alternative. I don't mourn its passing at all.
It just means you have enough self-discipline not to call other people "jackass" in a forum, and are trust-worthy enough to police those who do.
Well I was a mod here until I resigned - so that blows your theory pretty well.
One thing that is true of the mods here, in general they are unbiased, unlike many of the members who only seem to be blinded by the Google spin.
Do your tests and compare the results - if you think it is 100% clear cut that Google is better than Yahoo across the board, fine.
Others will disagree strongly
Anyone doing the right amount of research can clearly see that it depends on the market sector you are searching - the new Google algo has holes in it in certain sectors - probably because the synonym dictionary is still a work in progress.
To call Yahoo results 'very poor' is just misleading
FWIW most of my income comes from Google - I think they are great, I just think it is absurd to call Yahoo 'very poor' - thats not biased, unless favouring the truth can be called biased.
[edited by: 4eyes at 3:27 pm (utc) on July 3, 2004]
I would have to say that Google is better then Yahoo!, but it seems to me that Yahoo! has gone down hill since it started. Am I the only one here that thinks that?
AV is now Yahoo, as are so many others, including at this time my beloved MS!
I'm very disappointed in this! Today we have only two real search engines, Yahoo and Google. The rest are as good as dead in the water. Even AJ has screwed up. It is almost like they were all suicidal.
Two search engines is not good for anyone, except for Yahoo and Google. We need more competitors. I hope MS eventually rise to the challenge, and I would like to see IBM in this market.
I don't like all my eggs in 2 baskets. I measure Yahoo properties with about 52% of the market and Google with about 47%. That is not good for anyone!
As for the quality of results, out side of the technical area I think they are about equal. Google wins by far for technical search terms.
It just seems rather odd why the commercial part of this website won't be indexed. I just assume Yahoo has a filter not allowing it or by manual edit.
Either way I think this is a step down from Google. Google don't approach other websites as competitors, Yahoo does.
I would like to state 4eyes that I am not accusing any mod on WW of being biased and either am I.
From my experiences with Yahoo I am disappointed, that's all I am saying.
I do admit Yahoo search is good on most subjects, I am more referring to how it handles commercial content.
You may want to consider that Yahoo is interested in pleasing the average searcher, and not commercial webmasters. Statistically only a very small percent of searches done are by people looking to buy something. Yahoo most definitely has a significant share of the search market. And I'm not convinced those searching looking to buy are all that dissatisfied with Yahoo.
