google rant. please read all before taking their side in a reply.

[Kyle]

When does Google become responsible for their actions? The arguement always comes up "Google is a FREE search engine. They care about their users, not webmasters using them. They owe nothing to the webmasters."

I think it's extremely careless for Google to hold no responsibilty for screwing things up for Internet businesses. Google, a company I had loved for years, is beginning to show signs of that 'cocky geeky arrogance'. Not familiar with what geeky arrogance is? Go read their blog. Almost every post has some lame joke that no one laughs at, its just "HEHE WE'RE GOOGLE, LAUGH WITH US".

I'm going off topic with these jokes, but here are some examples...

"Some Cardinals fans also enjoyed the hands - but none of those photos are suitable for posting (the hands we provided all started out with five fingers, I swear)."

"So I got involved with the 'fusion' initiative by joining the team working on a personalized homepage. We launched today, so now I can return the Python books I bought my lazy friends. Check it out and tell us what else you want to see. We just might code it up." - Just STFU, thx.

Ok, the joke thing is completely off topic. We all know the Google blog was never going to talk about anything useful.

Extreme fluctuations in search engine rankings. Is this appropriate? How could an extreme fluctuation be correct? Everyone uses Google right? I haven't been reading any news stories of "Jane Doe Google User" searching on "father's day gifts" and getting porn instead? Whats the emergency that requires Google to do these massive fluctuations in their rankings. In Google we trust right? Well ever since their toolbar broke (its still broken) with no announcement, gMail was hacked, and update after update of extreme ranking changings, I have lost my absolute trust in Google.

Oh ya, there is one news story. Icebane Doe searched on the term motorcycle the other day, and found BUYDOMAINS.COM!! at #8 on Google. Of all companies, BuyDomains?

[Kyle]

More jokes that make me want to pinch a loaf..
"Does Google have a strategy, or are we just a bunch of mad computer scientists running around building whatever we want?"

Tee hee!!!!!!



And correction, Google toolbar is working now.

[Chris]

I think Google has lost their focus.

Previously Google seemed to take the stance of ingoring the webmaster/seo.

Now they seem to take the stance of anti-webmaster/seo.

Instead of working on making the best algorithm, they're instead working on making SEO harder or less reliable.

Its really kind of silly. SEO isn't bad if it gets an appropriate site to #1, yet Google seems to think so.

[Kyle]

Chris, I was afraid you were going to slam me for criticizing Google. Thanks for your reply.

[James]

FjcCK U GOGGLE iZ GAWD!

I agree, they've gone too far towards other things, so far that the search engine's really starting to suck. They know the parts of a site that can make sure that you're getting the right page, and the right content, but they just kind of ignore it.

I could agree with it if they split it into 2 companies, or areas, and had everyone in it dedicated to that, but this doesn't seem to be the case, and the quality suffers.

[MarkB]

Google grew quickly because of webmasters like us promoting them with free search boxes on our websites, etc. And Google can be toppled (hopefully, yet not overnight) by promoting OTHER search engines. There's still Yahoo & MSN (both of whom I believe offer better results).

I've pretty much given up on SEO for my own sites; client sites are another matter - they demand it, and demand being on top of Google, so I usually have my work cut out for me :)

[ASP-Hosting.ca]

SEO isn't bad if it gets an appropriate site to #1

The problem is everybody think that their site is the most appropriate, and yet
there are only 10 results showing on the first page :).

[MarkB]

Ahhh, but he didn't say *most* appropriate, just *appropriate* :)

</nitpick>

[ASP-Hosting.ca]

I was merely pointing out that "appropriate" is very subjective. We all complain because we think we deserve to be #1 :).

[eMEraLdwPn]

what about ranking #1 for some terms, and not even ranking at all for others, with seemingly no explanation? that's where it gets frustrating...

[chromate]

It seems to me, ever since Florida, their search results have got progressively worse. Having said that, I still don't think they owe anything to anyone, other than people that spend money with them.

I've kinda given up with focusing on Google and instead look for other sources of traffic.

[James]

It seems to me, ever since Florida, their search results have got progressively worse. True.

I'd say that search engines really need to work on themselves. If they were all really good, there'd be the same results in all of them. Truth is that my sites, some I'll be one-10, others I'll be past the 1000s.

[Kyle]

Update to original post.

It has been 1 1/2 months, BuyDomains is now #15 on motorcycle.

[Cutter]

I think we could call this the "Microsoft effect." No one likes something if it gets too big.

You can't blame this all on Google, part of it is the SE spammers faults too -- just like hackers making Windows insecure.

Search engines are going to evolve. Google's clock is ticking, but I think Adwords will keep them on top for another 10 years at least.

[Kyle]

You can't blame this all on Google, part of it is the SE spammers faults too -- just like hackers making Windows insecure.

Cutter, I'm sorry but that's a very poor way of looking at the issue. Microsoft made Windows insecure, not hackers. Hackers take advantage of the insecure operating system.

Windows hasn't just been insecure either. When the most common solution to fixing some unexplainable Windows error is to restart the computer, thats pretty f----- up.

[James]

Cutter, I'm sorry but that's a very poor way of looking at the issue. Microsoft made Windows insecure, not hackers. Hackers take advantage of the insecure operating system.
Without hackers, there's no reason to make something secure. So basically you're saying that its the police force's fault for not being omniscient, and not the fault of the criminals for doing the crimes.


When the most common solution to fixing some unexplainable Windows error is to restart the computer, thats pretty f----- up.
I dunno about Linux, but with Macs, too, it's a common thing.

[Kyle]

Without hackers, there's no reason to make something secure. So basically you're saying that its the police force's fault for not being omniscient, and not the fault of the criminals for doing the crimes.

Horrible analogy. I was simply stating that hackers do not make Windows insecure, Microsoft did. We cannot stop crime or hackers, so those are given variables that cannot be changed... only avoided.

I will not debate whether the police are doing the best jobs they can. For one that would involve political discussion, and I am not educated on that issue, nor would I ever want to be.

As far as Windows... it is a given that Microsoft did NOT pay enough attention to security. Windows was made for Suzy Q computer user who knows **** about securing her system (simple updates even). Only recently has Microsoft started to implement automated updates, and a builtin firewall.

If you say that Microsoft has done their job at securing Windows, I will not speak about this anymore with you.

[Kyle]

I dunno about Linux, but with Macs, too, it's a common thing.

You're right, I shouldn't have said that about Windows. Many operating systems are like that :).

[Cutter]

I was a member of Slashdot for years, but I refuse to believe that a company with billions of dollars in cash would be completely negligent in regards to the security of its software.

Computer security is a cat and mouse game. 100% secure is a computer in a locked building with armed guards and no outside connection.

Security, SEO spammers, Hackers, its not something I worry about. Its just there. I do what I need to work around the problems or even use them to my advantage. SEO spammer dominating my keywords? Spam report to Google.

[bassplaya]

There are alot of things MS can do to harden security of Windows.
It comes with all "enabled" by default, but the prob that there're too much stuff irrelevant for Suzy Q and her cat -- will she ever need DCOM, UnPNP, QoS, Netbios over TCP etc?

[AmbulanceBlues]

I don't see the point with Google. I've always used MSN Search because it's what comes up when I search from the address bar in MSIE. I know alot of people don't use MSIE but just what is the point of going to www.google.com instead of searching somebody (anybody) else from a toolbar?

[deronsizemore]

Well in response to the original post about Google. Personally, I've never liked Google as much as I have Yahoo. Yahoo has always gave me the results that I wanted so I was happy with it. Only in the last couple years when I got into web design/publishing that I even started visiting Google (mainly for their other services). But everytime I do a search on Google I get crap results, thus why I go back to Yahoo. It just really urkes me that the jackass spammers have seemingly not much trouble at all getting ranked high in Google for everything under the sun, and Google can't catch it? Even a little bit of it and put a stop to it. I see threads all the time where people are wondering why they cannot get a good ranking in Google, or even a ranking at all for that matter, but for some spammer it's not a problem. It may not happen anytime soon, but Google with self destruct eventually. They are getting way to big and are trying to do way to much, IMO.

EDIT: I do realize there are spammers ranked high in other search engines also...just seems like moreso in Google.

[KLB]

You know it is really sad when this post was started just over a year ago and I would have swarn it was talking about events of the last few weeks if I hadn't noticed the original posting date.

Icebane is right, Google really does have a responsiblity to web publishers. The insane fluctuations we are seeing in Google's SERPs creates a great deal of instability for legitimate web publishers making it harder to project traffic and income and thus making it harder to invest in more content. Users want quality content and services in search results. In order for Google to serve users better, they have to provide web publishers with reasonably stable search results so that they know how much they can invest in the content that users want. Without web publishers working hard and spending money to create original content there would be nothing of value for Google to show to users.

Google treats web publishers like pond scum and looks at us like their enemy. The fact of the matter is we should be partners in an effort to provide users with what they want.

The only people who are benefiting from the way Google is acting is spammers who scrap content off of other sites at little or no cost and roll out millions of pages of scrapped gibberish to see what sticks.