Forum Moderators: open
Froogle tab is now on google homepage.
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 3:36 pm (utc) on Mar. 29, 2004]
Nice how AdWords now look a little more like normal search results; may result in more clicks for advertisers.
At higher resolutions, the search results should fill up all the white space up to the AdWords results. Or, at the very least, AdWords should be bumped to the left so that any white space is at the far right of the page, like many other sites that aren't a liquid layout.
Call me crazy, but a think a few of the Google colored balls as light background images on the bottom and middle of the homepage would add to the attractiveness of the page. Kind of like the Deskbar background. Speaking of which, I would have thought the Deskbar would be mentioned on the Toolbar pages by now.
Is the "Search Within Results" new, or has that been around for awhile? I haven't noticed it before. Great feature for narrowing results!
On the whole, I can take it or leave it. I use Google for speed and results, and really don't notice the interface much. Curious as to why Google thought a new design was necessary.
It seems to have a crispness to it, yet it is not tough on the eyes.
I like the keywords or stemmed words being bold in all the places they appear, title, description, url and adwords.
My only real non-positive thought is that I'd like to see more than 10 listings per page. I think 15 or 20 would be better all around or something to entice seachers heavily to look beyond the first page.
When I google something, the quality of the first page tells me whether or not google has served me what I'm looking for. Only if I feel the results are relevant will I look beyond the first page to try and find the specifics I'm looking for. However, with some enticement, even if I feel the results aren't the best, I might look beyond the first page to see if I can still find a site that might have what I'm looking for. Take this for what it is, it's just an example of a searchers behavior and not a critic of the overall serp quality......at least not at the moment.
By the way GG, I also wanted to take a moment to say thanks for listening. Nov, Dec and Jan had to be tough hearing all the negative comments and the constant complaining we all did. But G took our harsh feedback and seems to have fixed things for the better. It may not be as we all would like it, but it has gone in the right direction. I'd like to see my site higher, I think it deserves to be, but at least it's there.
I used to like the Dmoz link in the search results as gave a web site credability.
All results look the same now, before the Dmoz links would space out a listing and it would appear that the site was worth clicking on.
In general the results appear more compact and tidy less clutter, maybe Dmoz was seen as clutter :o)
Still room for a Directory link next to more>>
Google: Please, just why not at least include an option in the preferences? It wouldn't hurt anyone. 'Little' things like this all add up. If you're worried about cluttering up the preferences page, then by all means, include a "more preferences" link at the bottom.
[edited by: dwhite at 1:44 pm (utc) on Mar. 29, 2004]
I did rely on the directory tab when searching in very spammed out terms. I wish that tab would come back to where it was before this new design.
After an editor spammed me and was telling me about getting me higher in Google because of where he could place me in DMOZ, that pretty much confirmed that the directory has problems.
I'm glad to see Google is not relying on something that is so corrupt.
The new look does seem crisper. Don't know if I really like the way the adwords are displayed.
Am I the only one who finds the keyword highlighting in the green URL unnecessary and slightly disturbing? The rest of the design is nice and clean, though.
I had a look at the HTML. Good thing that they're using the <label>-tag with radio buttons, in a way that even IE understands. Improves navigation and accessibility. However I wonder what the <font>-tag is good for... it's soooo 20th century ;)
They could have added an accesskey to the query input field. After all, all it takes is adding 'accesskey="q"' to the tag. Makes many people happy, hardly any extra bandwidth.
Personally after re-looking at a search I did that contains my own site, I think my sites CTR might actually go up because of the prominence the new design gives my listing even though it's not on the top of the page.
Try to keep up. This has been clarrified multiple times already in this same thread. The results are still associated with DMOZ. They still rely on it. Only the GUI has changed. Google is just hiding the DMOZ links.
I'm glad to see Google is not relying on something that is so corrupt.
Such forceful language.
My friend, when the numbers get large enough, incidents of corruption are seemingly inevitable for humankind. Does that mean a community - a town or village - of 10,000 "is so corrupt" if one member of the community is a pedophile and another a bank robber? Would you say "The village is so corrupt!"?
Be mindful of public declarations. They are as often judged as shedding light on the speaker as they are judged to shed light on the subject spoken of.
*Too bad they took out the directory listing. I use it all the time. Hope they bring back something of that kind on the SERPS, not necessarily a tab for it. And when you goto "more" and then, directory, it still has the old look.. :(
*mm...personalized search & webalerts...wow! that's a toy i get to play with now. Thanks GG!
[edited by: Chndru at 2:12 pm (utc) on Mar. 29, 2004]
Lets just hope they also downplay links from DMOZ. Once the value of links from DMOZ are minimized the value of a DMOZ listing will be minimul then all the seo Editor mafia types will leave. It wont be valuable for them to "control" a vast number of DMOZ categories.
Think about people NOBODY really uses DMOZ for searches.. whenever anyone discuss the best place to search..DMOZ is NEVER included.
DMOZ only purpose is for link value.. no one trys to get into DMOZ for traffic..they try and get in for Link value..so Google will rank them higher..
I dont care for the new look at Google but I would bet that Adwords advertisers are going to be happy because the right side has expanded about 10 pixels and a persons eye's are drawn to that side.
But the results - very 1997, full of amazon and untitled, irrelevant pages - what happened?
Tried the SERPs feedback form a few weeks back - and it was BROKEN!
OR
Google should have a vote on its own site and ask users to vote about the new design?
Any comments!
The HTML is:
Froogle<sup><font color=red style='[b]text-decoration=none[/b];'>New!</font></sup>[b]text-decoration:none[/b]Which explains why it doesn't work in any browser (except IE of course). I wonder on how many different browsers all that testing was being done on.
GoogleGuy?
To all the DMOZ editors this is not meant as a go at dmoz ( but I am afraid you only need to look at any 50 random sections to see there are issues ) Just run a check across a few sections looking for same web site address to see what i mean
steve
Instead of changing the look and feel Google should spend a bit more time on its ranking mechanism. Because when it worked it was the best. By miles.
If I do another holiday search or a hotel search and get taken to a website that is an e-spotting/epedia/ keyword affiliate dump with links that error out, and then find Googlebot has just munched 50,000+ pages, I shall go Yahoo?.
Come on Google..at the moment SEOing your engine is a muppets game, and and there are lots about.
How about something less drastic than SiteMatch but equally different that would level the field and help distinguish professional SEO's from the rest.
Here's awating your next update.
Glyn.
The Google Directory link is no longer there.
The Froogle home page itself has changed it's look. Instead of the shopping directory - it now has the last few searches (albeit the successful ones - I guess) conducted on Froogle.
-Mervyn
Wonder why the directory is missing?
(and I see I am now a Senior Member...woohoo!)
