Forum Moderators: goodroi
Google's service will charge a $10 annual fee and only handle addresses ending in four suffixes _ ".com," ".net," ".biz" and ".info."
full story: [chron.com...]
(i hope posting this link is fine)
This seems to be an interesting development. Does anyone know of a google link where we can see it in action?
The reason it paid a $2,500 application fee and $6,500 to cover six top-level domains is that it "wants to get a better understanding of the domain name system [and so] increase the quality of our search results".
Reading between the lines, maybe keywords in domain names won't mean as much in the future.
maybe keywords in domain names won't mean as much in the future
I wish it were true. Keywords in domain names are as easy to spam as the meta descriptions and meta keywords. It makes very little sense to use them for ranking algos. All those Google PhDs should implement other criteria that makes more common sense...
They signal, in an unmistakeable way , the intent of the website to webusers
They signal, in an unmistakeable way , the intent of the website to search engines
They make it possible for low budget entrants into a market, like me, to compete with established brand names, branding is enomously expensive to attain, an maintaining brand recognition, well , those expenses must be scarey
So, heres to hoping google, msn, yahoo continue to like keyword domains for a while longer :-)
[edited by: SEOPTI at 12:45 pm (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
Kaled.
They must be planning to do it "differently" somehow,
[edited by: LifeinAsia at 4:24 pm (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
But it has only been few markets, where they have seem to be interested in getting large share of the procentage. The rest, it seems they simply only want to be present... for now
"Register through us and we'll index you even without inbound links."
Right now I have a holding page up for a domain that's been indexed without one single, solitary inbound link.
Ditto.
.
[edited by: jtara at 6:39 pm (utc) on Dec. 15, 2006]
"wants to get a better understanding of the domain name system [and so] increase the quality of our search results"
There a curious group, and this gets them a little closer to being able to peek under the hood. I don’t think there’s ever really been any ranking ramifications to it all, i.e. protected who is, domains by proxy, bogus who is, ect vs. open accurate info. However, clearly they could stop a lot of junk by getting a clearer picture of ownership; without question, theres a signal or two of quality in that data. Don’t have a problem with it here.
Speaking of that, any takers on when we'll see the first related conspiracy post on WW? "I registered my domain through Google and it was indexed right away."
Or maybe, "I registered 10 names via Google and put up sites and now they have penalized me for having a network of crosslinked sites.
FarmBoy
Ugh GoDaddy.
Their airbrush artist sure did a good job with Danica Patrick's hair on their home page.
FarmBoy
Then you could use a domain purchased from G with your site hosted by G.
They want to merge with GoDaddy, so they have all the letters for their new name, GOD.INC
It would also tie in nicely with Google Page Creator (pages.google.com). Then you could use a domain purchased from G with your site hosted by G.
Ditto. (Technically something like that is already possible without G being a registrar: by using a CNAME / DNS alias.) It also seems a logical addition to Google Apps for Your Domain.
Right now I have a holding page up for a domain that's been indexed without one single, solitary inbound link.
This nothing new. Google has been doing this since they became a registrar. I have at least 10 domains that are indexed with just a place-holder, and no links.
such things do help to see what they do and how they do it ..and not to rely upon what they say ( fud ) about what they do and how they do it ..:)
would I ever buy a domain from G ...really don't think so ;-) ..eggs and baskets ..
edit typo
[edited by: Leosghost at 5:54 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2006]
Do they now have more information on who is cross-linking their sites?
Maybe they're throw in "guaranteed" indexing? "Register through us and we'll index you even without inbound links."
Speaking of that, any takers on when we'll see the first related conspiracy post on WW? "I registered my domain through Google and it was indexed right away."
Even though the above statement is a guess or theory I do think that this is something google would do. And in my mind this is exactly what Microsoft started to do... Bundling things. Google is starting to throw it's weight with one product into another giving an unfair advantage.
I would agree that google is getting greedy and is still neglecting their main function of being a great search engine.
They could buy GoDaddy.com. Maybe get better models.
The service is good and websites stay up.
cheers
If anyone could offer digg & /. proof hosting it would be the big G.
How about Amazon?
Take Amazon EC2, and somehow make it transparent. As load increases, they just add more servers. You can contract for higher average loads at lower cost, but bursts are handled at a reasonable premium.
Obviously, would only work in a constrained environment. (Specific server-side tools, modified to work in the EC2 environment.)
Both Microsoft/MSN and Yahoo! have been into both domain registration and web hosting, and neither of their properties or services has caused this much of a stir. So what's the problem? Why is Google so diffeent, anyway?
