Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 5:30 pm (utc) on Sep 29, 2014]
[edit reason] Fixed link so time linkage works [/edit]
Any other someone can think about?
lol, so essentially it's near worthless. I don't even understand why they made any announcement in the first place.
Then you need to think further on why they made the announcement. I doubt it was accidental.
I wonder if they measured the uptake, and from where that came. Drawing up a map might be easier with just https.
Google's https posting confused half of the web, evoking wrong expectations and interpretations. Like many other "information posts/videos"...Would have been easily avoidable, just by writing more, being more transparent, precise and concrete, considering their experience with webmasters, their perception, wishes and fears.
Still, maybe it would have been better if they'd said nothing at all. "Transparency" sometimes creates more problems than it solves.
More than 200 ranking factors.... considering as single factors almost every one is "light", just because there are 200. Not only https
some people can't or won't understand that "lightweight" means "lightweight."
I believe Google only serves ads with https landing pages to sites that are entirely https.
I have switched two of my websites and i lost 90% of the incoming coming from Google.
It's possible that the 301 to https from http isn't as bad as a 301 from one url to another - because the url isn't changing just the protocol. Entirely speculation though as to whether that's true.