Forum Moderators: open
60% of Google users said they would switch search engines if a better service were introduced.The survey also had bad news for Google's planned free email service, with fewer than 25% of respondents saying they would be very likely to use it.
<I know of a few clients right now that if I suggested to them that they install the Yahoo! toolbar and uninstall their Google toolbar, they would. It's that simple. We can make a difference!>That is so true. My clients live and die by what I tell them and imagine the power we have collectively if we were to try and change the tide.
That says more than most everything else in this thread.
People like those who hang out here are at the core of a lot of "viral" campaigns, and that's the new search engine of the net.
I'm just a base-line, borderline geek, and it frightens me how much impact I can have with an off comment. On another forum, someone asked me about some feature of IE, and I just answered "I wouldn't know, I use FireFox"... Within a week I was fielding questions about how to tweak and customize FF, from people I'm pretty positive had never heard of it before then, because they just aren't that up on tech. I did some casual questioning, and there were a half dozen people I could pin down who admitted they changed because I made that comment.
6 people may not seem like much, but that's just the ones I could get to admit it. And the way influence chains work, that will work into hundreds of people switching of IE.
The perpetually on-line geeks and freaks are the new search engine. If anyone who comes here started dropping lines about a certain website in other BBSes, casual conversation, or the odd e-mail, THAT's what will drive traffic.
And if we start talking about that "New" engine, call it "Found What I wanted First Time Without Knowing What a Boolean Modifier Is Search Engine," then Google would get wiped off the net in a matter of months.
IMHO
And if we start talking about that "New" engine, call it "Found What I wanted First Time Without Knowing What a Boolean Modifier Is Search Engine," then Google would get wiped off the net in a matter of months.
That is not true. There are plenty of examples of the general public sticking with crapy things when a better one exists. I'm not saying that there is something better than Google or Google is the best I'm just saying that your statement is not true.
The general public does not put much thought into things. Once something gets into the American mind it stays there. Google is in the Americas mind. Think about it. Google is number one they don't have a free mail system, they don't have another product that gets visitors, they don't come default on anything. People have to open their browser and look at MSN or Earthlink home page, Dell home page, yahoo, or aol for at least a second or two. All those home pages have search engines on them. These people then type in www.google.com to find things.
Now if the rest of the world changed to some new eninge and America did not because of what I said earlier Google would still be important. We still have not switched to the metric system and it is way better than what we use.
a) my being a much more cynical SOB than I was before entering that world .
b)my amazement that anyone ever gives the proverbial rats ass ...>
( how many do they have ..do rodents have more than one? how many are there to the dollar /euro /yen?..what do you think , or not , do you (in fact ) think?
..please tick relevant boxes and don't forget to include your "socioeconomic group" or "that which you aspire to" ..if known )
<cont ..about being asked or what others have supposedly replied and what that supposedly means
It proves Google's almost spooky popularity amongst the general public. 40% won't switch if they know something is better. What about if there was a gun to there head... would 20% more percent switch... what about a gun plus $10,000 dollars, maybe 30 of the 40% might switch.
The thread title is totally backwards. A huge number of people are loyal to the point of mental illness. Two out of five people would need to have Google pried out of their cold, dead fingers. If this survey is to be believed, these are very sobering numbers to MSN and Yahoo. How can you compete if a market share ballpark-equal to Yahoo or MSN's current share won't come to you even if you make a better product?!
If the quality of SERPS goes down sufficiently people will switch no matter what. Some may take longer but they will switch. Even those using MSN purely because it's a "default" on their PCs will eventually switch if it's really useless.
Although internet use is rising, there are still a lot of very light users around who may mainly only be using email anyhow. Spending time looking for the best SE just isn't an economical use of time for everyone.
Keep wasting your time looking at that green bar - Have fun looking at it and basing your reputation on how full you can get it - and hopefully I'll still see you in the SERPs, and in the industry, 12 months from now.
In my experience, Yahoo traffic has risen (through acquisition) while Google's traffic has basically stayed the same. However, the data is still showing Google light years ahead of Yahoo for search traffic. (note: the only real shift was when Google lost the Yahoo traffic. Yahoo users just stayed with yahoo. Hardly surprising)
Yes, their PPC might be unmanagable on many mainstream keyterms, but that's market forces as Google doesn't set the price. You're seeing the same thing on overture as well.
Can all that change? Sure, and it probably will, but to say that Google is junk and not worth the time and anyone not thinking so are stupid simply because you've been unsuccessful is a bit OTT. Google is just one tool among many, but it's still a damn good tool
Altavista went through a somewhat similar cycle.
Yahoo was losing share a few years ago until they stemmed the tide by offering Google results.
Google gained share rapidly because they produced better results. They have suffered somewhat because at the same time they became dominant, they also became the sole target of SEOs. Over time, this has made some areas of their index, ummm, less than pristine.
I think it's a foregone conclusion that significant differences in search quality will cause user migration over time. To its credit, Google has built a tremendous brand identity which will help it through the occasional rough spell. And I don't see their technical people completely losing the search technology battle (like Excite). If they can keep the quality competitive, they'll hang onto plenty of the market.
So now y'all know someone who was polled.
FWIW, I have been polled by Gallup. They asked the standard questions (prez approval, etc.) then asked a series of question on my view of abortion and immediately followed those questions with "Do you think Elvis is alive?" Needless to say I was a little taken back by the abrupt change in topics.So now y'all know someone who was polled.
That would be freakin hilarious if they had included that when they announced the Gallup poll on CNN. "x% of Americans feel abortion is wrong. Of those, 14% believe Elvis is still alive and kicking." Hahahahaha
I'm curious though how did you get to participate in this poll? Did they call you? How did they get your number? It ticks me off seeing all of these "public opinion" polls on the news which are usually lean to the extreme OPPOSITE of what I believe in and what everyone I've ever talked to about believes in, but somehow this crap gets on the news and makes people think other people are thinking this way. The "fickle" subject of this thread applies more to people who will switch because they think OTHER PEOPLE are switching after reading the poll. Not because it's better for them.
Honestly the whole survey process ticks me off ... you can't take sample data from 1 Million people and say "this is how the world feels" it just doesn't WORK that way. If that worked, Alexa would be 100% accurate.
How did they get your number?
It ticks me off seeing all of these "public opinion" polls on the news which are usually lean to the extreme OPPOSITE of what I believe in and what everyone I've ever talked to about believes in, but somehow this crap gets on the news...
You and me both. Try living in the most right wing conservative part of an otherwise liberal democratic country. The people I hang out with don't say things like "People who practice abortion are up there with the terrorsits that cut off that American contractor's head." (A local member of parliament came out with this gem). Huh? What? You CAN'T be serious? But alas, he was, and given the nature of this region, a lot of people would agree with him. None of my friends would, but that just shows "opinion clustering" in social circles.
Anyhoo, back on topic.
I still say that the power of the Geeks and Semi Geeks rule in a lot of technical decision making.
That 40% that everyone keeps talking about: Without knowing the way the poll was set up, that 40% could very well be people who don't do searches anyway, so they wouldn't switch, because they have nothing to switch away from. Who knows? Without access to the full questionaire and all the results, the numbers quoted in the article are pretty much irrelevant.
For now, Google is God because it produces the most organic results, least (read: not at all) dependant on paid inclusion, and somewhere in the SERPS is something you were looking for, even if it is on Page 2 or 3. Sure, the SEO crowd are constantly trying to "game" the results, but the googleplex is constantly trying to work against that.
BTW, the King lives!
Okay, the real reason I had to post is that, thanks to the "out of the blue" mention of Elvis, I now have the Mojo Nixon song "Elvis is Everywhere" stuck in my head. Hopefully some of you that read this are familiar with the song and you can now share in my predicament.
If the implication is that Google would still be as good as it is today, and something better came along, then I suspect that they may have been the more thoughtful and truthful respondants than the majority of the 60%.
If Google remains "good enough" why should my mom switch? She already knows how to use Google. Why learn something new when you don't have to.
Most users were not around when AV, Excite, Yahoo, Lycos or webcrawler nosedived. Those of us that have been around are basing the assumption, at least in part, on Google's quality declining.
But what if that part of the equation wasn't there? What if there is no suggestion of declining Google quality? What if these users tend to search in area where Google currently returns excellent results?
Then they would have to expend effort remembering the new URL, learning the new interface, and missing out on the entertaining holiday logos when they currently don't see the need.
Now if you asked the question so it more or less represented what happened with AV, that Googles results became almost useless overnight and a new, better search engine came along, would you switch? Then it might make sense to that 40% to switch.
(And please don't go on about how Google is already broken. It might be in some areas, but my mom seems to do pretty darn well when she searches for garden and museum information. Not everyone searches in the battleground areas.)
It proves Google's almost spooky popularity amongst the general public. 40% won't switch if they know something is better.
Been thinking about this ... and I'm less and less surprised by that 40% number.
As a people, we don't always gravitate to whatever's best out in the marketplace. I don't sit and watch Discovery Channel or PBS all night, even though I know the programming is better there than on the channels I watch. A lot of people buy bland music even though there are a lot of better singers and artists out there. How do you define better?
With Google, people have developed an unusual level of comfort and trust and so they use it. So when someone says "Would you switch if a better search engine came along?", you or I might say YES automatically, but Joe Surfer might decide better doesn't necessarily mean "as comfortable" and "as trustworthy."
What about your web clients? What if someone told them a better web development shop or SEO service was in town -- would all your clients immediately pack up and leave? Hope not. Good relationships (like habits) are hard to break.
I realize these analogies aren't perfect. It's much easier to start using a new search engine than to find a new web development shop. But there's a larger, sociological point I'm trying to make (and not doing a good job, perhaps) about why we shouldn't be surprised that the prospect of something that's "better" doesn't lead to a 100% change of behavior. It's not unique to Google.
I still say that the power of the Geeks and Semi Geeks rule in a lot of technical decision making.
But how many generations away from you does this work?
You probably have a big impact on those that you have direct contact with. But many of those are also geeks and they will make up their own mind, while taking your suggestion into account.
The non-geeks that you do influence will simply not have the influence over others or the inclination to try and convince them to switch.
Yeah, if it really is significantly better, it will probably take over as top dog over time, but it certainly will not happen "in a heartbeat".
Just look at the other browsers out there. Geeks love them. Personally, I will never go back to a graphical browser that doesn't have tabbed browsing. Nor will I ever use a mail client that does not support threading. I've changed a few people over, but most people stick with IE because as far as they are concerned, it isn't broken and they already know how to use it.
Well duh, who WOULDN'T switch if a better service were introduced? Does anybody have an argument for not switching if something better became available? And why is it only 60%? Would the other 40% really stay with a service they knew to be inferior to the new one?
Yeah I remember back when they first started they did search, right? Back when you needed a separate search engine. After search was integrated into the OS they focused on ads and what not. I think they are working with those credit card info database people now, aggregating consumer data or something.
"if you don't got Mojo Nixon then your store could use some fixin'"
On topic, Google has just as much of a chance of being dethroned as they did becoming the king of the hill. If someone better comes along I will use them as quickly as I started using Google.
A survey of how many people have left "G" due to their current search results would be interesting...
-s-
BTW, the King lives!
As I've said already ..the fact that anyone thinks that this poll is relevant to anything at all says a lot about the lack of "Burning subjects for threads" and the need of posters to post ..not to mention the naivety of many about polls and why they exist.
My excuse for posting 3 times on the subject?
..I'm trying to avoid starting a boring but lucrative project so temporarily I choose not to have a life ..
Bring back the dances!( and move this thread to Foo )
A survey of how many people have left "G" due to their current search results would be interesting...
There's a recent ClickZ.com article [clickz.com] that suggests Google is growing market share while others are losing it.
Or are you referring just to how many WebmasterWorld users have left G?
My excuse for posting 3 times on the subject?
..I'm trying to avoid starting a boring but lucrative project so temporarily I choose not to have a life ..
who can resist posting after that call to arms? google seems to inspire passions rarely seen outside of mac circles, I remember the first time I heard about them, hotbot was the best I could find, I knew little about computers, except hotbot gave me the results I needed, then google got better, and gave me the results I needed, almost til I came to count on them as a bookmark, then everything degraded starting november/december, more often I've gone to yahoo to find some basic result, people, non geeks, tell me they can see the decline, maybe google will pick up their quality, maybe they won't, but one thing you can be absolutely certain about is that nobody except geeks cares at all what search engine they use, as long as the results are reasonably useful, my guess is msn is going to be reasonably useful, quickly, and google's market share is going to drop, quickly, since really people could absolutely care less about how they get their results.... only AOL gives them their guaranteed share now, what is that, about 30% or something of the us market, if google loses that I'd sell my stock asap
by the way, thanks for the frequent reminders that a pr guy is a pr guy no matter what he's called
No.
Just goes to prove that being the best doesn't neccessarily make you the biggest.
Marketing and existing market size matter.
I still say that the power of the Geeks and Semi Geeks rule in a lot of technical decision making.
Nonsense.
