Google Directory size is about two times ODP size. Is it due to PFI?

[Alcogooglic]

It's generally accepted that Google Directory is based on Open Directory Project and a site will be added to G Directory after about a month since it's added to ODP. So, the size of G Directory should be a little smaller than that of ODP

However:

1. There is a simple and reliable test to check the size of Google index using keyword '+the'. In case of Google Directory, this test returns 6,870,000 results. But, ODP claims on its home page that its index includes only 3.8 million sites.

2. In general, the structure of the Google and ODP directories is quite different. Nevertheless, the Arts (and several others) subdirectories are very similar, except the number of listed sites, for example:

ODP > Arts
Animation (17,402)
Antiques (832)
Architecture (1,523)
Art History (1,985)

Google Directory > Arts
Animation (24153)
Antiques (1104)
Architecture (4077)
Art History (3096)

3. Direct search for some competitive terms using G Directory returns usually 2 to 5 times more results than that using ODP. (Note: Don't use too competitive terms to stay below 10000 ODP limit)

So, the questions are:

1. Where are these additional sites listed in G Directory coming from?
2. Is it easier and/or faster to get listed via this additional listing than via regular submission to ODP?
3. If this is an example of Google PFI [webmasterworld.com], then - how much does it cost?

Note: Both G Dir and ODP support quasi-double listing; a site can be reached by category or by region. But, this doesn’t increase the size of index.

Cheers!

[Powdork]

Go and search on Google directory for sour cream. Note that it says there are 1680 results. Set your preferences to 100 results per page and go to the last result, which you will find at #734. Google always says there are way more results than it actually has. Also, and perhaps more importantly, Google is better at searching documents than almost anyone I know. They should come up with more.
Also, Google Directory is a clone (albeit somewhat outdated) of the DMOZ at the time they took the available data from dmoz. There is no PFI.

[Alcogooglic]

For example, using some sour query mentioned in msg #2, one can receive:
1,800 results from G Directory, and
only 151 result from ODP (dmoz).
Is G Directory still a clone of ODP (dmoz)?

[Cossack]

100% clone yet. Just check on a small category - how Google counts ;)....

[steveb]

Google returns results from the pages while ODP only returns results from the title and descriptions. Obviously they are completely different.

In the categories, Google counts differently than ODP. Apples and oranges.

[Brett_Tabke]

Not 100% clone - there are some categories that get "chopped off" from time to time. Not all sites in that category are listed.

[Bluesplinter]

The biggest difference (aside from the actual search algorithm, which Google is FAR better at), is the way Google counts sites.

The Google Directory counts @links to other cats as sites, ODP doesn't.

[Cossack]

Thanks Bluesplinter :).

Anyway, I need to make a correction, the Google Directory isn't a copy of the ODP, it is a clone of an old and even very old rdf. The Google Directory is a clone ;). Almost 100%, except some hand corrections, which I think were mentioned before.

Note: I think the difference between "clone" and "copy" is clear ;).

[Shak]

and NO PFI is taking place in Google Directory...

Shak

[glengara]

IMO, there's a third factor in this, Netscape.
While ODP and G directory results are often different, Netscape and G are similar, which led me to assume G may well be taking the "dump" from Netscape.
Makes more sense to me than Netscape using G directory data.

[multex]

Netscape doesn't take Google directory data, they have their own ODP clone. Netscape does use Google for search results.