Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: mack
Am I unhappy about this, you betcha! Because I am not in the top 5? PARTIALLY. I am mostly upset at the fact that all other SE known to humankind have ranked me in the top 5, but somehow "THE NEW" MSN has determined that 86 other websites are a better match and roughly 30% of them have nothing at all to do with making widgets in my state on the "new & improved" MSN.
My site contains NO spam, tricks, cloaking, keyword loading, and consise and honest METAS. I have take years building honest links and developing content specific to my industry. So now I get to spend countless (unbillable) hours trying to accomodate ONE search engine that wants to be different.
I think you should be happy with the top five positions on other SEs. Unless your site is the brand name searched for, I would say that these top 5 positions most likely don't indicate the relevance but rather the amount of work you have put on your site. As a searcher who is looking for cheap widgets, I will be happy to get a one page site offering really cheap widgets rather than seeing a 100,000 page site that has existed for many years, building and buying links, and amount of SEO work done on them, and not offering really that cheap widgets.
If all the SEs gave the same results, then there is no need for more than one SE. Instead, different serps help non-SEOed sites by letting some of them be in the top 10.
joined:July 19, 2002
I really like SOME of the results, they have some great sites on there, but come on guys can't you come up with something better then they just like it because there site is ranking good? :)
Amen. When I have some more time to spend on this, I'll take a deeper look, but right now my impression of this search engine, is: a true search engine on the level of google it is not. I think sometimes, though, our evaluation is all in the terms each of us picks for searching. More time, and more work by us will tell.
I am doing some searches on some business related topics, and I am seeing things related to horses in the top results.
suspect algo has lots of work to go wouldn't bother to even work out algo currently as would be much to early maybe wait till launched and then only after 3 months take some guesses
Most tests I ran were for non-commercial information, and those looked pretty bad. Such as posts on minor message boards containing the search term coming up high, while definitive, popular sites on the topic were buried. I can't imagine in many cases when the search terms are highly spammed by commercial webmasters things would look better.
Tests conducted by Microsoft and others show that the mere presence of the Google logo can boost a user's rating of the search engine's relevance by as much as 10 percent when compared with situations in which the logo isn't visible -- even if the actual results are the same, said Microsoft executive Yusuf Mehdi, an MSN corporate vice president.
"That's how strong a brand they've got," Mehdi said.
That brand, in turn, is one of the biggest obstacles Microsoft will need to overcome as it try to make inroads in the Internet search business.
That was a nice find. I don't have much faith in MSN's ability to do well in the search business. They have had years to tackle the problem though I will admit in most of those years Search did not have the priority with MSN they now give it.
That article makes a strong case for Google remaining the top search engine for a long time. They were virtually unknown in 1999/2000 even though they were pretty good then. It takes time to build a reputation and a brand. Google's #1 ranking won't go away for years, unless Google does something itself to destroy its rep.
joined:Nov 11, 2000
Tests conducted by Microsoft and others show that the mere presence of the Google logo can boost a user's rating of the search engine's relevance by as much as 10 percent when compared with situations in which the logo isn't visible...
This may well reinforce that perception.
Maybe they are using a dictionary? If not, that means that off-site criteria is far more important than on-site...
My own rankings were nothing unusual. Those for which the keywords weren't in the domain did unusually poorly, but it was otherwise similar to the other big guys.
I hope the algo keeps its basic 'feel' and if so looks good to me.
Whilst I am happy to have the whole first page of serps to myself and my sites they will have to go to 2 matches per site though.