Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: mack
The Google which is notorious for frequently changing their algo and wickedly dumping the new websites into so called sandbox and supplement result you may give any argument for supporting Google like Duplicate content and identical meta tag etc etc...But that not the problem with my and many other sites whose pages are caught in the Google supplement result.
Next comes the Yahoo I feel they are nothing more than a bunch of economically motived people who does everything for money starting from directory submission to page indexing after one month of indexing my website into their database they have included only three pages out of 40+ pages. Which are very well listed in Google. I heard that newer websites perform good in Yahoo but if this way Yahoo will index my page I hope not to get a single visitor from them.
MSN has lower search contribution of around 20% from their site. MSN took little more time to find my site than Google and Yahoo did. But I was impressed with it's daily crawling and regular updating their database for my site. As MSN give less weighted to inbound links after optimizing my site for keywords I am getting Top SERPs position in live.com result.
But I haven't received any visitor referred from MSN search. What can be the reason they aren't the worst because they contribute 20% of search marketing.
You cant be serious that msn is getting better? Its the same junk now and poor algo that has been operating for at least 12 mths and it looks to me like they have given up on even trying to put forward a quality search facility. I think this is more a case of you rank well in msn and not so well in yahoo/google?.
But putting how you rank to one side, The live search is at best dire. It has loads of good authority sites not listed / missing from its serps, its easy to game and the serps prove that. 80% of the time the results are so weak you cant do anything with them and you are forced to use a proper search engine toget the information you want.
I find using the search facility so bad that its a last option resort after google, yahoo, ask, gigablast, mirago and mamma!.
Im still waiting for a member here to sticky me ANY search they have done in live that produces results that are at least on par with either Yahoo or Google and i set that challange in this forum about six months ago!
sorry but msn live is not getting better its as bad as ever. On a positive note however, at least the serps cant get any worse than they are now
Now of course "they should have not been so pathetic in the first place", but they plainly have improved a lot.
Would love to agree with you, but i just cant...
I think the msn serps when they first went live, were better than the serps now with all the filtering from the learning algo they invented in place.
Its the volume of junk in the serps thats the issue, far to much authority is missing and far to much junk is ranking - They have no way of knowing whats quality from whats junk.
Currently they are still a write off as far as providing a quality alternative to google & Yahoo and thats why they are losing even further market share which you wouldnt think possible.
It was a better facility when they carried Yahoos serps. I think they should either drop search and go back to how it was under the Yahoo arrangement or ditch the current algo and start again.
I get plenty of MSN traffic now, but I've given up trying to hit a moving target with more optimization.
I'll be fishing and chilling for awhile.
C'mon that's just impossible, unless you think subdomains, especially of blogspot, should have an infinite number of results.
they've adopted a few policies that make the results plainly better. they still have massive problems not indexing domains, being morons about 301s, ranking trivial junk, not identifying the best page on a domain that answers a query, etc etc etc. However, those problems aren't the same as having 10 results from the same spam domain on the first page.
Yes, im saying that the serps were better when they started than they are now - they have removed far to much authority in trying to remove junk and it just hasnt worked.
Sure some sub domain junk has been eliminated but at the same time some authority site sub domain content is missing. Likewise some good authority sites are missing and loads of junk sites are ranking well.
We both know that thin content sites outrank authority and if i know and you know what msn is looking for to rank sites, you can bet everyone else does.
The stickly i sent you shows how sub domain junk still ranks well - But i dont think sub domains are the issue - its the fact that msn cant tell an authority site from a junk site and its this area it needs to improve on
I still say that Live search is at best "Dire"
Not only me I know some webmaster who have there sites listed right at the top in google but do not even have site indexing in MSN.
So, I dont think MSN search is getting better by nay means.
In some cases the top 10-20 between google/msn are pretty similar. and they no longer are overwhelmed with blogspot spam or subdomain spam. Personally i think msn results have improved alot and are better then yahoo... and no im not ranking great in msn, but get clicks and like their traffic.
but hey, the reality is, all of this is very subjective.