Forum Moderators: open
Now, for the most part, I think users are still happy, but there is no doubt that computer-literate folks I know are beginning to use other search engines if they don't immediately find what they want on Google. This trend is likely to continue unless Google gets a grip on its problems.
I will kick off with the following suggestions.
1: Read javascript links (or publicly admit PR is broken and won't be fixed). Also, where possible, read cgi-links. (Where the link contains an url beginning http:// or www. this is easy. However, this might open a door to cheating SEO so this is debatable.)
2: Fix the link: tool so that it shows all links are displayed. Also change it so that it works like ATW and AV and can show backlinks for an entire site. It need not show more than, say, 200 but it should give the total count. This would allow webmasters to feel more confident that Google is working properly if nothing else.
Kaled.
PS
Please vent unhelpful comments and waffle in other threads.
I'm guessing that Google used DMOZ (and probably Yahoo! too) as a starting point, didn't it?
Kaled.
Not so long ago all sites got deep crawled regularly. As a result the sites with low PR could rely on their new or revised pages being indexed or re-indexed once a month. Now this no longer happens, new pages take an age to get indexed, and there is no guarantee they ever will. Also previously indexed pages can become obsolete.
Similarly, although the site administrator may be actively seeking new links, the links obtained may be on pages that rarely get re-indexed. It can take a long, long time to build up PR and get out of this trap.
This may have arisen because of resource issues, but I would like to see some action taken to readdress the balance.
Once upon a time Google was the tool people most turned to for useful information, but now it is in danger of getting swamped by the bigger commercial players.
Harry
I didn't say
Google gives more weight to a site listed on a directory page (say with PR 6) than from a site page with the same PR?
You wrote that in post 88 - reread post 87 - I didn't write that.
I wrote
Directories aren't just about the PR as a link 'like any other link'.
I wrote about 'reality checks' and 'directory descriptions'. i.e
you got the directory listing reflected as your Google description
Links give PR - whether or not DMOZ links more or less or the same PR than any other links - I never commented on that aspect.
I commented that they gave you a directory description in the google serps. Can any other links give you that?
By all means feel free to question anything I write Dave - but at least question what I actually wrote.
A plea from the little man...Not so long ago all sites got deep crawled regularly. As a result the sites with low PR could rely on their new or revised pages being indexed or re-indexed once a month. Now this no longer happens, new pages take an age to get indexed, and there is no guarantee they ever will. Also previously indexed pages can become obsolete.
That is not my experience.
Last April I developed a new site, devoted to an obscure sub-sub-field of my hobby. It has a couple of links from my main site, a link from dmoz, and a link from a very sepcialized directory. That's it.
Google has indexed every single page of that site, while atw and Ink have only indexed the index page. And, due to the lack of competition, several of my pages are at the top of their respective SERPs.
I think that Google is still the "little man's" best search engine. By a huge margin.
When you wrote; "Directories aren't just about the PR as a link 'like any other link'."
with 'like any other link' being in quotes, I thought it was in response to my statement "The PR etc gain from DMOZ, and other directories, is no better than from any other page with the same PR"
I commented that they gave you a directory description in the google serps. Can any other links give you that?
No, but I see no advantage in that. Like I said earlier, you can ONLY use your company name as the anchor text in DMOZ. On other web pages you can use keywords, so I see the listing in DMOZ as probably less value than from a page with the same PR as the DMOZ category. Bottom line, anchor text is more important than a "directory description in the google serps".
Dave
Please make Google able to read flash files like its able to with HTML. Then the design restrictions of HTML will be gone forever HURRAAAHHH!
Last April I developed a new site... It has a couple of links from my main site, a link from dmoz, and a link from a very sepcialized directory. That's it. ... Google has indexed every single page of that site
I am not sure when Google stopped deep crawling, but you may been lucky. All it took then for Google to take all your pages was a single link so that Google knew about your site.
Since the demise of deep crawl things are very different. The number of pages indexed now in any one month depends on your PR. My site was fully indexed every month before this happened.
Until last week only about 10% of my pages were taken in any one week. Last week this improved to 24%, although I have no idea why as my PR hasn't changed.
Harry
> Fix the link: tool so that it shows all links are displayed.That would only encourage "algo investigation."
Brett_Tabke
This just takes ths biscuit. It really does.
Is this forum an inside job?
What the hells wrong with Algo investigation.
This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard in my entire life.
So does everyone agree that it should all be a big secret
and no-one should know how google works? If so this forum is entirely pointless.
I think think this issue will lead do google's ultimate death.
I cannot accept using a system for which no-information exists on how it works. It's wrong.
Brett is vastly more knowledgable than I on these matters so he may well be right, however, I believe that the link: tool doesn't work properly because Google bodged it.
Kaled.
PS
The intention of this thread was to suggest improvements. If people wish to bicker, there are many other threads available.
2. Make the "open link in new window" actually open the link in a NEW WINDOW not in ANOTHER WINDOW.
3. Remove duplicate news stories from google news. How hard is it filter stories when they have the same exact headline and content?
Thanks for listening.
Make the "open link in new window" actually open the link in a NEW WINDOW not in ANOTHER WINDOW.
I think that's a bug in your browser. In IE 5.5 and 6.0 it works for me, though IE does usually have trouble knowing what window to open a favorite in.
Fix the link: tool so that it shows all links are displayed.
I agree. Either make it show all the links, or get rid of it entirely.
That would only encourage "algo investigation."
No, it would only be showing what pages are linking to a page (and contributing PR). What's the harm in knowing that?
Make the "open link in new window" actually open the link in a NEW WINDOW not in ANOTHER WINDOW.
I think that's a bug in your browser. In IE 5.5 and 6.0 it works for me, though IE does usually have trouble knowing what window to open a favorite in.
I just checked the source code of a results page. It would appear from a quick inspection that Google opens results in a window called nw. This is not a bug in the browser.
I was also surprised at how bloated the source code appears to be. It appears to include click-tracking but I didn't look too closely.
Kaled.
Bring back relevant results!
Yes, Please!
I just did a search 5 minutes ago with a quoted "" search phrase. Is Google now ignoring quotes because very rarely was my quoted phrase in the results? Instead, Google displayed what it though were relevant pages that weren't what I thought were relevant pages. Admittedly, my quoted terms were generic but when I quote something, I want only results with the quoted terms, not synonyms, not the terms spread across the page, not high-pagerank irrelevant sites... I want the results of exactly what I quoted!
What's going on here? It used to be that keyword proximity and phrase matches mattered and provided relevant results. Now, I can't even get a phrase match using quotes. High Pagerank seems to be all that matters. Pretty soon Google can go to a database of only 1000 sites because the same ones will be coming up for every search.
To open (almost) any link in a new window, keep the shift key pressed. This works in (internet) Explorer and Opera but not Netscape. However, some links that involve complex javascript, etc. may fail. There is no problem with Google.
Kaled.
It would appear from a quick inspection that Google opens results in a window called nw.
Ah, right you are. Open in new window is an option in preferences that I never turned on before. Nw should be _blank.
To open (almost) any link in a new window, keep the shift key pressed. This works in (internet) Explorer and Opera but not Netscape. However, some links that involve complex javascript, etc. may fail. There is no problem with Google.
I know. The problem is that Google's option says, "Open search results in a new browser window" when what it really does is open the results in another browser window. If it doesn't open in a NEW window, don't use the words "new window". Just a pet peeve.
I guess Google should offer three options for opening pages, same window, another window, and new window.
Kaled.
For my part, on all the search terms for my site (four areas) I see no significant problems, in fact, I can see no significant changes at all.
Kaled
