jump to navigation

Google Is The New Age Wikipedia May 24, 2016

Posted by simarp in : Google, SEO , add a comment

What is Google and what is its claim to fame? Answer is bound to be “Google is a search engine with a few significant and insignificant properties tied to it as an appendage”. I am sorry, this is a wrong answer. Google has always been in awe of  huge destination site focus of Wikipedia and slowly Google has  been integrating Wikipedia with itself. While Google was at it, it also started slowly integrating destination site features on its own, albeit current and happening. For instance, weather of different cities, flight schedules, time, name of head of states and so on. Google watchers, including this blogger, correctly interpreted Google’s desire to solve many “problems on its own” and reported it as and when they sighted it.

Why is Google doing it?

Google is doing it to keep traffic to itself and be seen as smart and up-to-speed with knowledge and information needs of today. Google is also doing it for your next subsequent business query. Yes, there is business out there. If you are checking weather or time or flight schedule, there is a high degree of propensity for you to search for travel, hotels and other such “high advertising rate” travel key-phrases. Google understands that it is traffic arbitrage which several made-for-adsense websites do and has learned from them. Google now does traffic arbitrage itself. It desires to convert non-commercial queries to proper business transactions.

How is Google doing it?

Google is re-imagining SERP. Yes, the money spinner Search Engine Result Page is being elaborately re-purposed for making more money for Google. Google is moving beyond in-your-face advertising by embedding business, and it has succeeded in almost 50% plus “vaguely and seriously” travel-focused search queries.  A couple of years back I had written an article on “Top 10 things to do in Sydney”, since then it is one of my search terms to check how various Google algorithms respond to server, content, update, photographs and proximity. Base of this study is this search term which I used. My reaction was, “Google’s nailed it. Here goes millions of dollars of SEO money, traffic arbitrage ends in one more segment”.

Has SEO traffic arbitrage been given a body blow?

Yes, it has been, but it may just survive. Countless integration events and re-imagining SERP by Google have made this hugely income-oriented technical SEO a very risky proposition and is going to take it to the next level. Google has started working on killing “Top 10 segment”, which indeed was very profitable but then there is life beyond that. Hundreds of thousands of special purpose top 10 websites would slowly start folding. These websites have done lot of hard work in growing this segment. Of course, Google gets to keep a large chunk but there would still be a lot left on the table to chew.

Who would get to chew what Google leaves on the table?

Current and credible websites which consistently update themselves would get huge cuts from this pie. Google is re-purposing content, not creating it.  Hence, the creators with their magicians wand can spin a magic. Integrated multimedia content is likely to call the shots and Google is definitely going to work with them. The question is just about to change from – Are you solving a problem for Google?  to Are you the best solution for this problem?

Are you the best solution for this problem?

Google just moved the bar significantly higher and, having done that, changed the question. Many summers ago it ceased to be about content, it became about solving the problem. Now with zillions of solutions around and basic solutions embedded by Google itself, being the best solution is key to surviving and thriving. To be “the best among zillions”. For the best solution, one is required to slice and dice the problem in several parts and fragments and offer solution for each of them. That is going to be the differentiation which is gonna keep cash registers running. A lot more questions need to be asked before content goes to drawing board now.

Google is the New Age Wikipedia,____ might as well learn quickly to live with it.

Play with Google Search and Experience ZeroG January 27, 2010

Posted by simarprit in : Uncategorized , add a comment

Playing with search engines is my passion and just an hour of playing around and you start feeling that you are using the search engine for the fisrt time in your life. You get that high, that high feeling of flying something like zeroG, a bird flying higher and higher – just on top of the world.

I have experienced it before and I experienced it once again. Wondering, what was I doing? I was playing with the date command of Google under advance search and creating a time-matrix on random search terms. Google Search has a pure genius under its belt and finding that pulse and populating it with feed brought in tremendous predictability in search terms. I felt like saying Eureka!!!

Google must step up its own command language and take it into account users needs of integration of many of the advanced features on the command line. Google may standardize on a special symbol which makes command language work. If Twitter can create itself with just a smart use of # tag, Google can surely make SFO & Florida searches unite on command line with a single special character usage. That’s for another day, but my day was made with what all you can do with the date command.

Google Yahoo or Bing June 9, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Uncategorized , 8comments

I have got going with my 100 parameter study chart. These 100 parameters for searching and analyzing have been developed by me on the basis of over 13 years of active search experience and experimentation with creation of search engines and web directories. I have also learned a lot from criteria selection by other algorithm experts and white papers on search methodology.

Here is my first 25 parameter analysis. I have placed one term against each criteria, while I have used multiple terms to reach my findings.

A weight of 10 has been allocated on the basis of merit across the three search engines.

P.No Parameter Google Yahoo Bing
1 Absolute Search: “San Jose” 5 3 2
2 Addresses: 111 North Market Street 7 1 2
3 Adjacency Checks: San Jose Amusement Park 6 1 3
4 Adult Filter: I want to eat cherries 9 0 1
5 Anti Domain Squatting: I searched for Bangalore – Bangalore.com shouldn’t have shown up 2 7 1
6 APIs: My early assessment 6 3 1
7 Blog Search: Sonoma Chicken Coop review 5 3 2
8 Brand : D & G 5 3 2
9 Bridge Page Filters: Hotels in Las Vegas 6 3 1
10 Bug Free: Rapid Search approach 4 4 2
11 Buzz 3 2 5
12 City Names: San Jose, Seattle, Boston, Houston 6 3 1
13 Cloaking Check (It is improper to disclose the terms and glorify those who get away) 6 3 1
14 Complex Search : how far is sacramento from san jose 5 1 4
15 Consistency in results: On the basis of a brief study 4 4 2
16 Crawls: Google Bing Comparison by Simarprit 6 3 1
17 Customized Search 3 5 2
18 Time (Google tells me the time of the place on the basis of my IP) 9 1 0
19 Date Filter (Air France Wreckage) 6 3 1
20 Dead Link Checks and done with events: Obama Hillary primaries 5 3 2
21 Deep Search (Hotel near airport in San Jose) 4 4 2
22 Default Weights: Cats 8 1 1
23 Depth: Barack Obama 3 6 1
24 Dictionary Results: Meticulous 3 4 3
25 Directory Structure (Couldn’t locate one in Bing) 4 6 0
130 77 43

Google emerges as a clear winner with miles to spare when we talk pure collate, query, retrieve and deliver parameters. I would be completing this report over next couple of days as each parameter takes about an hour to assess and conclude. I am publishing these findings as i am through with two levels of cross verification for the whole set and the third level for this set.

Your feedback and suggestions are most welcome.This list is alphabetically sorted.

Google Vs Bing – The Real Picture June 6, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Uncategorized , 10comments

I loved doing Google Vs Cuil Comparison, I bow and thank all who agreed with my very early comment that Cuil isn’t cool. Once again I take a neutral stance and begin to do a beta of what I would love to do. I would do some searches and post some early observations. I am now working on Google and Bing together – and bear my passing comments.

  1. Bing Homepage scores hands down- Google looks like some sleepy college project. I may choose to go to BING for its homepage, other things remaining constant – Weight 10, Google 1: Bing 9 Running Score – Google 1: Bing 9
  2. Search: Chicago Airport – Observation: Bing is crowded with so many ads, it just looks unreal – the result is pushed below the fold. Both Bing and Google get ohare.com as the first result. However Google also serves a related link to Conditions at Chicago Airport, which I think is cool, Weight 10 – Google 7 Bing 3 – Running Score – Google 8: Bing 12
  3. Search: Cairo Speech – What is Bing doing, why should they exclude YouTube- thumbs down to Bing, Google gets the White House alongside most which Bing does. Weight 10 – Google 8 Bing 2 – Running Score – Google 16: Bing 14
  4. Search: Jobs back at Apple – Oh No! Bing doesn’t understand everyday English offers me local job related ads – it does give me what I am looking for, but it is down-under. Google gets the context right, absolutely right. However the first irrelevant result from wikipedia about Steve Jobs was unnecessary. Weight 10: Google 9 Bing 1 – Running Score – Google 25: Bing 15
  5. UI: The UI of Bing while searching is far superior to Google – you need to get a hang of it though. I like the left panel and a “website like”navigation capabilities. Eliminates the need to go down or go up every-time you need to navigate away from the page – Weight 30 – Google 7 Bing  23 – Running Score – Google 32: Bing 38
  6. Search: Nokia n97 – This is search we are talking My Dear Bing, what is it – your results are a joke. Bing suggestion bar is not based on search trends, it suggests me n95 while the world is moving to n97 while keying in itself. Further I don’t like Bing’s approach of throwing too much advertising on me, is advertising on Bing free. Google scores better in terms of results also. If  I put irritants aside I would give Bing 8 and Google 6, but irritants define internet and usage so here we go – Weight 10 – Google 8 Bing  2 – Running Score – Google 40: Bing 40
  7. Search: Where Am I – Bingo for Bing, Google is lost. Bing pulls up a map and shows me Chicago, Google doesn’t understand and comprehend what I mean. This is awesome. Bing gets it bang on the dot reads my mind, though doesn’t get my exact location – but Google is in 1900′s – so sad – Weight 10 – Google 1 Bing  9 – Running Score – Google 41: Bing 49
  8. Self description: I searched for Google on Google and Bing on Bing – Google doesn’t think there is a need to define itself properly. Bing defines itself in a very articulate manner – Read this when search for Google on Google “Advanced Search · Preferences · Language Tools · Advertising Programs – Business Solutions – About Google. ©2009 – Privacy”and now read this when searched for Bing on Bing “Bing is a search engine that finds and organizes the answers you need so you can make faster, more informed decisions” – Weight 10 – Google 2 Bing  8 – Running Score – Google 43: Bing 57
  9. Search: New York – Bing is clumsy, what a mess of a simple search term Bing displays second result as New York Casino Las Vegas – OMG. How can they do this! Google gets the map right, the official site and other sites right and also gets the videos right – - Weight 10 – Google 10 Bing  0 – Running Score – Google 53: Bing 57 – That is big negative for Bing – UI/ Navigation is all fine, but if you get your main algo wrong – God Bless… and continue blessing
  10. Search: Red Wines – Google and Bing are twins – with Google few minutes elder and slightly wiser. Also Bing is more about monetization and hence here we go – identical results, nearly identical scores – Weight 10 – Google 6 Bing  4 – Running Score – Google 59: Bing 61
  11. Search: Trending on Twitter – Google suggestion bar reads your mind and brings home all absolutely relevant results – Bing suggestion bar doesn’t catch the trend. However when it comes to results Bing does come up somewhat.  Weight 10 – Google 8 Bing  2 – Running Score – Google 67: Bing 63

Final Scores Google 67 and Bing 63 – Game to Google

With this I come to an end of my 2 cents on Google Vs Bing – Google is better, but Bing does well, very well for Johnny come lately. Bing is good garnishing on average cut, Google is better cut of a better block anyway.

As always, I love comments and observations. My final report based on extensive research may take few more days.

Twitter and the Software Giants March 11, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Twitter , add a comment

A quick post:

What is the similarity between Microsoft, IBM and Apple? They all have Twitter accounts with followers but none of them are active.
I am sure with Google going strong with its Twitter account IBM, Microsoft and Apple would all have to think on those line. Google’s followers have gone beyond 100,000 and that also when there have been very few updates only 39 in 14 days.

Matt Cutts was using Twitter very effectively for announcements, counter comments and discussions, with now Google officialy running no wonder the account should reach one million followers in net couple of months. That would Twitter Google’s most powerful aid for interacting with Google community. Currently Google is acquiring 6 new followers every minute (on daily running average basis). This number can easily go up to about 10 per minute by today evening, and should be close to about 20 by end next Monday. At this speed Google would need 24×7 set up to proactively manage their Google account on Twitter.

I expect not only Microsoft, IBM and Apple would quickly respond to this development, I expect all corporates worth their salt and their bail-out dollars would see wisdom in being here. They would not like “You are not on Twitter? Are You?

Google, Twitter and Future of Search March 10, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Twitter , 2comments

Search engine world is full with its fair share of migraine inducing challenges, one of these challenges is prioritizing the shortlisted results. All search engines have worked on complex mathematical models to overcome this challenge, Google came to dominate the search engine world on the basis of one of its mathematical models which is commonly known as PageRank. The complexity of today’s search indexing and retrieval has compelled Google to look beyond the PageRank, Increasingly one can find results in Google’s top listings which are mint fresh and have no history on the net.

In the past Blogs brought in a tough challenge to Google’s retrieval capabilities and Google handled them very well. The success of microblogging website Twitter, where most of the micro-blogs embed a nano-blog is the new challenger to Google’s highly complex and hugely successful mathematical models. Twitter is changing the game and raising more complex questions, the question I am battling with is Should Google “Power” the Search for Twitter or should Twitter “Power” the Research for new additions and indexing for Google. The tough question is both the scenarios look very likely and bring in their benefits and both the scenarios have larger than ever conflicting complex equations which need to be resolved.

Many researchers and search engine specialists attribute Google’s success to its PageRank and anchor text weights in its master search algorithm, while it is true – the importance of other significant weights within Google cannot be undermined too, and it is these other parameters which would hold the key as Google moves into what may be called the Twitter era.

Search.twitter.com is exciting but it is not on the same page as Google Search to be considered as a challenge to Google Search. They are currently as apart as a shoe is from a spacecraft – you can wear a shoe in a spacecraft but you can’t compare the two. However search.twitter.com does give Twitter a much needed toehold  into search space and also makes Google consider Twitter a bit more seriously than few random tweets around. Google is a very evolved search engine, it is almost human, it has its own mind and it resolves queries intuitively. For Google it is the other parameters and filters and independent projects like Google Latitude which may give it as edge and save the day.

A closer look at the two and what they stand for:

Google has always been good in proximity search. Twitter thrives in proximity.

Google has mastered the art and science of crawling, indexing and rating blogs. Twitter is the art and science of microblogging.

Google holds just about every content physically with itself in encrypted compressed form in its repository. Twitter treats almost all content as, use by minutes and hours – highly perishable.

Google crawls. Twitter receives.

Google understands the Internet. Twitter is creating the new Internet.

Google has conquered many operational challenges including the challenge of scalability. Twitter has tough time handling challenges and managing scalability.

Google has fueled its growth by creating and acquiring. Twitter is making its APIs do the trick for it.

Google largely works on what has happened. Twitter is more about what is happening right now.

Google is more like a monologue – Google telling you. Twitter is a public speaking platform where everyone speaks and everyone listens.

Google’s core competence is to collect, index, query and present. Twitter’s core competence is to offer an evolving platform to communicate and share.

What if, if tomorrow Google starts asking – What are you doing now and here? What if, if Google puts a Twitter bar with a tiny logo of Twitter and starts asking – What are you doing? What if, if Twitter acquires Ask.com or someone else and puts a second prompt – What are you looking for? What if, if Twitter goes ahead acquires a crawler and starts indexing pages which don’t belong to it? What if, if Twitter just replaces its own search with Google search?

All the scenarios are likely, the scenario of Google powering search for Twitter and embedding Twitter’s real time feed into Google search results looks the most winning scenario for all stake holders. Google wins, Twitter, Google regular surfer wins and and Googles committed tweeps win.

Google is rolling, Twitter is rolling, together they can rock and rock for atleast a decade.

Still writing…

A for Apple and only Apple Inc March 8, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Domain Names, Google, Search Engines, SEO, Uncategorized , 6comments

Working further on understanding Domain Name and its growing importance within Google, I went back to the basics: A for Apple.
When you search for Apple in Google, Google is 100% certain that you only want to know about Apple Inc and their products. So eight of ten results are from http://apple.com – try this http://uurl.in/Apple – the other two results are from Slashdot and Yahoo and both are again about Apple Inc. Now where does this leave the poor Apple, I mean Apple the fruit, I mean Apple the inspirational fruit behind Apple Inc – no where.

So what would have I liked, Google should create, or maybe even now has  “A Conflict Filter”

Conflict Filter can be a web 2.0 creation allowing surfers to suggest serious conflicts, like this one – which dries up all juices from the real apple. This conflict filter can then act as a base for forking and offering a choice, maybe splitting the screen to show two important conflicting terms. The results on Apple Inc can be in one window and the results on Apple the fruit can be in another window and if possible accommodate a third window which covers images of the two conflicting results.

If A is for Apple Inc, O is for anything but Orange the fruit in Google search results. B for BAT throws the first result as BAT.com the British American Tobacco Company website, fortunately the wikipedia result quickly follows at number two and saves Bat the mammal. Wikipedia also comes to the rescue for Cat the cat, but looses first position to ironically Caterpillar, yes it is Caterpillar Inc, which owns the domain cat.com

Google has been taking the challenges head on and I am sure something exciting would cover up for this.

Google Search – Domain is King? February 28, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Uncategorized , add a comment

Is Domain the King in the new Google Search – looks like it is almost there.

I must admit I had to tweak it abit to get it going. About 70% I got right the first time, for 30% of the terms I had to search.

Domain is King?    
Search Term Default Domain #1 Result #2 Result #3 Result #4 Result top 10 Result
Apple apple.com apple.com        
Buy buy.com buy.com        
Cars cars.com cars.com        
Dog dog.com   dog.com      
Egg egg.com egg.com        
Flights flights.com flights.com        
God god.com   god.com      
hotels hotels.com hotels.com        
Internet internet.com   internet.com      
Jewelry jewelry.com jewelry.com        
King king.com king.com        
Law law.com   law.com      
Movies movies.com movies.com        
NYC nyc.com nyc.gov        
Orange orange.com orange.co.uk        
Play play.com play.com        
Quest quest.om quest.com        
Rent rent.com   rent.com      
Shoes shoes.com shoes.com        
Time time.com time.com        
USA usa.com   usa.gov      
Virgin virgin.com virgin.com        
Wine.com wine.com   wine.com      
X-ray xray.com         xray-mag.com
Yellow yellow.com yellow.com        
Zombie zombie       zombie.com  

Rediscovering Google February 14, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Google, Search Engines, SEO , 1 comment so far

This one is a self-assigned project to understand how Google works for a “yet another surfer”

  1. Lovely adaptation for Valentine’s Day – Google logo played around looks good.
  2. Search term: Indian restaurant in San Jose ca
  3. Google Search or I’m Feeling Lucky
  4. I’m Feeling Lucky
  5. Wow – takes me to Yahoo local – http://local.yahoo.com/CA/San+Jose/Food+Dining/Restaurants/Indian+Restaurants
  6. I like what I see. I am done. 10/10
  7. Google Search
  8. I am happy with what I see, Local results and also with the first few listings. No spamming
  9. Results 110 of about 20,800,000 for Indian Restaurant in San Jose ca. is misleading – A higher degree of semantic search deployment may make results and selection more meaningful.
  10. Let me try…
  11. “Indian Restaurant” + “San Jose ca”
  12. Results 110 of about 15,100 for Indian Restaurant” + “San Jose ca.  Great, this is a more realistic number of content pages which can exist for this particular search term
  13. Image search for the term in 12. doesn’t excite me at all. http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22Indian%20Restaurant%22%20%2B%20%22San%20Jose%20ca%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi – maybe the SEOs don’t consider it worthwhile to work on keeping this one structured
  14. Let us opt for  Maps for the term as in 12. Nice, neat, useful  – http://maps.google.com/maps?q=%22Indian%20Restaurant%22%20%2B%20%22San%20Jose%20ca%22&sa=N&hl=en&tab=fl
  15. News – fr the term as in 12. makes me no wiser – http://news.google.com/news?q=%22Indian+Restaurant%22+%2B+%22San+Jose+ca%22&hl=en&sa=N&tab=ln – This is not expected, there should be some news, maybe
  16. 20 adds and no results when you opt for the Shopping tab – http://www.google.com/products?sa=N&tab=nf&q=%22Indian%20Restaurant%22%20%2B%20%22San%20Jose%20ca%22  Is it right?  – Yes and No. Yes because technically one doesn’t go to shop at restaurants. No because there are twenty advertisers showing up.

I am loving it. Would be back with more shortly…

SEO Unique Sources January 4, 2009

Posted by simarprit in : Uncategorized , add a comment

Over last 10 years on the Internet, I would have personally worked on over 300 sites. In some I had a bit role and in others I worked on the project since birth of the idea. In 1998 we made the site for the Internet environment, in 1999 we started making site for Yahoo and the Internet , from 2002 we have been making it for largely Google environment. and others. A change is in the air, I see myself working for the Internet again. Google is important, very important, but it looks like there are certain set of projects which need Google for growth not for their survival. What would be the relationship of these projects with Google. It looks like Google would need them more than they would need Google. Facebook and Twitter are two of the many examples which come up when you think of changing environment.

While working for Dil Khol ke Bol, our microblogging platform deployment – Google was not the central character of my To Market Strategy. My central character was Engagement. How do we engage even one person who lands on our site. If we can engage him he will engage others. If one website uses Dil Khol Ke Bol to promote their website, slowly hundred would and over a period of time 100,000 and maybe a million in couple of years. Google is like a honeybee, it is in act of enriching user experience of its own users. Where there is so much of action, Google would surely be proactive, it goes well with its character.

So what do I see as a checklist from an SEO purposes:

  1. Google/ Yahoo/ Live
  2. WordPress
  3. Facebook
  4. Twitter
  5. Quantcast
  6. Quarkbase
  7. Vertical Specific Blogs
  8. Geography Specific Blogs
  9. Vertical Specific News Websites
  10. Geography Specific News Websites
  11. Student Interaction Websites
  12. Other blogging sites
  13. Other microblogging sites
  14. Homepage of your site
  15. Each landingpage of your site
  16. Google Analytics
  17. Google Insights
  18. Your competitors homepage
  19. Your complimentary sites homepages
  20. Your Graphic Images

More to come…