Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: phranque
joined:June 27, 2000
I have to say though, the concept is a good idea. But what really makes me wonder: why didn't Microsoft advertise it to death to train consumers/ surfers how Realnames works?
It reminds me of a company my husband worked for who had a contract with MSN a few years back. The contract stated that MSN was to pay the company a certain amount of money each time the software was sold for one year. After the year was up, the software became property of MSN, and no fees had to be paid.
So, for one year, Microsoft didn't do anything with the software. No advertising, nothing. Exactly on the day after the contract was up, MSN started advertising the software as their own and began making an effort to actually make it known.
So, this just makes me wonder: what is Microsoft really up to?
I have pounded the RealNames/ SmartTags connection to death in these forums to the point people are sick of it, but I can't get away from the idea that somehow, someway, they are connected. The concept is so similiar behind the two of them. SmartTags is like Realnames 2.0.
With RealNames biting the dust, I have to wonder: is this the trigger that will make SmartTags ubiquitous?
ubiquitous: existing or being everywhere at the same time : constantly encountered : WIDESPREAD
(I had to look it up too.)
Pay for placement is now widely accepted as the way to make a site rank well. Microsoft needs something new and fuzzy to advertise to combat the anti Microsoft sentiment. Why wouldn't they push SmartTags as something that 'Helps you find what you need on the Internet'?
Is Realname part of some search engine algo?
Angiolo, hardly part of an algo, but search on MSN for "barbie". And the "first" listing, a "featured site", with the little round sign on the top left is a real name type, I believe. For the rest I have never encountered any extra weighting of realnames in Search engine algos, certainly not in Google, but I remain to be corrected.
joined:Oct 23, 2000
Realnames/Internet keywords what-ever have been up for debate so many times, and the conclusion was always that their business model and their sales people were way out of line. In Denmark we have numerous examples where the reps litteraly tried to scare the potentiel customers into buying that overpriced stuff.
>there goes my 2 hits
Wow, you got 2 hits out of it?
Most recently I saw the keywords for sale on directnic and a friend and I looked through the information and definitely had some questions. When I called they either had someone manning the help line that didn't have a clue what was going on or they just weren't giving answers for some reason. It was almost funny the run around we got. Of course, we declined to give them any money since they couldn't/wouldn't tell us what we needed to know.
No great loss I think.
Awhile back someone sent me this link regarding Realnames which influenced my decision.
Few Net surfers use RealNames' keyword service
joined:June 27, 2000
I have read the thing about SnapNames three times, and I can't figure out what it is they sell:
SnapNames.com, Inc., the provider of domain name infrastructure
technology and authoritative industry data and analysis, uses its
patent-pending technologies to facilitate an equal-opportunity
secondary domain name marketplace.
What is a secondary domain name marketplace?
To your quesiton, angiolo, at one time, having a realname put the search result at the top of the page of many searches much as Overture sponsored searches are today. However, that ended when MSN took them over. I have not heard of any realname affecting an algo, though.
First of all I have never seen any proof of value that justify the price they charged – not even in the old days when it was $100. But most important, I have been fighting the product because I simply don’t like the idea of any single company having the sole rights to a naming standard on the Internet.
This product would only have become successful if most Internet users had stopped using regular domain names and switched to RealNames. That was realNames goal. What a nightmare!
Imagine having a private enterprise like them owning one the rights to one of the most fundamental part of a the Internet – the addressing standard. Do you think they would continue to charge “only” $399, $499 or $599 a year? Why not $10999?
I am so happy I don’t have to waste more time explaining customers why they should not waste their budgets on RealNames. It is much simpler now that they are gone :)