28 Responses to: Why Google Search is #1

1. David Cramer (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 3:53 pm

   1

   I agree, MSN and Yahoo fail at the internet.

   p.s. your comments design is sleek, go polish ibegin now

2. Mirko cro cop (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 5:36 pm

   2

   Ibegin needs a revamp, the color suck’s!!

3. Ahmed (l337)

   March 31st, 2007 at 5:47 pm

   3

   Not sure what it has to do with this post, but a new design is coming for it (soon).

   @David: Ask seems to be struggling a bit too

4. yoyo (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 8:24 pm

   4

   google’s objective is to save everything you search for including gmail all tied to your IP address - wonderful indeed - especially when the courts or Gubment wants the data

5. Jono (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 8:31 pm

   5

   @yoho: This post is about search. Noone’s asking you to use any other Google services if you don’t want to. Would you rather have Microsoft or Yahoo do the same things anyway?

6. shortarabguy (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 8:37 pm

   6

   @yoyo:
   http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/taking-steps-to-further-improve-our.html
   “Unless we’re legally required to retain log data for longer, we will anonymize our server logs after a limited period of time.”

   Yeah, and it’ll be fun for Google to watch the government sift through gigabytes of useless, anonymous data.

7. whatever (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 8:37 pm

   7

   yeah, keep believing yahoo and microsoft doesn’t do the same, and both would bend over for courts/feds.

8. Why Google Search is #1 | Name This Blog (ghost)

   March 31st, 2007 at 8:55 pm

   8

   […] Tech Soapbox has an article describing Why Google Search is #1. The article does a good job of showing what we all should already be suspecting: Google’s spidering system is superior. It is faster and smarter; therefore it is both more current and more accurate. Bookmarking Links: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]

9. Norman (newbie)

   March 31st, 2007 at 9:19 pm

   9

   Has everybody forgotten the story about the tortoise and the hare ?

10. Vinny Lingham’s Blog » Blog Archive » links for 2007-04-01 (ghost)

    March 31st, 2007 at 9:20 pm

    10

    […] Why Google Search is #1 - Tech Soapbox

11. live tv (newbie)

    March 31st, 2007 at 9:40 pm

    11

    faster doesn’t mean better, it’s good that they’re evolving and keeping out riff raff but they need to start indexing dynamic pages otherwise they cut out like 2/3rds of the indexable web.

12. joe (newbie)

    March 31st, 2007 at 9:56 pm

    12

    Well, Googster has over 50,000 computers/server doing the spidering - which is why they are faster. With all this data coming in from the spiders, they better be smarter at indexing and using networked computing.

    The other guys just don’t have the existing infrastructure in hardware and software… yet! But even when they catch up, The GOOG would still be a year or two ahead (since they have already even considered power needs and putting their data centers near powerplants!

13. scurry (newbie)

    March 31st, 2007 at 10:26 pm

    13

    Joe, you’re retarded.

    eom

14. s3archfi3nd (newbie)

    March 31st, 2007 at 10:33 pm

    14

    @ live -
    dynamic pages using ajax or flash are impossible to index because there’s no way for a spider to determine what’s on the page. having been in the search industry, i can’t tell how frustrating this can be. but frankly it’s more of an issue for the site than it is the search engine considering the search engine is basically doing other sites a favor by giving them some level of visibility.

15. zaid360.com » Forget Google killer - just build a google first, may be? (ghost)

    March 31st, 2007 at 10:50 pm

    15

    […] Indeed, this guy tracked how many times bots from Microsoft, Yahoo and Google hit his PR7 website. These are the results: […]

16. MasterWebGuy (newbie)

    March 31st, 2007 at 11:33 pm

    16

    Every webmaster knows, or should, that nothing compares to Google for volume of pages searched, but many prefer MSN and Yahoo for the fairness and intelligence by which results are displayed in key-word searches.

17. Ahmed (l337)

    April 1st, 2007 at 1:04 am

    17

    @yoyo - Not sure what your point has to do with mine. It’s like me saying ASP.NET is great, and you complaining about MS Windows. I say - what?

    @live tv - that is why I backed it up with hits to the index page. Googlebot was smart enough to move on, whereas Yahoo was completely obsessed with it. Plus Google is already fixing out pages hidden behind JS - I know, because they’ve crawled JS-only links.

    @MasterWebGuy - thats your preference. No doubt about it though, G is way ahead of Y! and MS

18. pligg.com (ghost)

    April 1st, 2007 at 1:21 am

    18

    Why Google Search is #1…

    Easy explanation: Its indexing is faster and smarter

    Case in point: tracking spider hits for a PR7 site with 1+ million pages:…

19. ogletree (newbie)

    April 1st, 2007 at 1:49 am

    19

    This article is stupid. The writer knows nothing about why Google is on top. People could care less about how fast it is. I personally do not notice how much faster google is than yahoo or msn. A few years ago people used to say that Google was better than Yahoo when Yahoo was exactly the same. Yahoo search was provided by Google. Google is number one because it is the only search engine that looks like a search engine. People want to go to a clean front page with no ads. Yahoo and MSN are portals first and a search engine second. Google could start using Yahoo search results and still be way on top. Google will stay on top because they are now ingrained in pop culture as the place to search for things. I see the verb “googled” on TV every day now. People go to MS for MS products and people go to Yahoo to play games, read news, get maps, and book flights. People go to Google when they want to find something.

    How did Google beat Yahoo when they were exactly the same when Google became the top search engine.

20. Drakazz (newbie)

    April 1st, 2007 at 3:07 am

    20

    The article is kind of wrong.
    Now how can a search engine’s status be directly correlated with how much work it does? It can’t.
    Google owners were just lucky to have a massive growth because there was a big demand that nobody fulfilled.

21. Ahmed (l337)

    April 1st, 2007 at 8:29 am

    21

    @ogle - we started on SEO the same time - remember Stratos Group?

    This isn’t about history. This is about the fact that Google crawls far more content, and also does it more intelligently. Yahoo, MSN, and Ask? Not even close.

    @Drakazz - freshness and breadth of data are important. The other SEs don’t even come close to it.

22. Miracle Herbs (newbie)

    April 1st, 2007 at 3:04 pm

    22

    I agree for the Post. My site was indexed on the 3rd day of its existence . I couldn’t believe i was on top rank pages on some niche searches. My site is full of Information on Herbs and google was bang on target.
    Today after 40 days since I started my site, I am receiving about 80-150 visitors per day. All organic.
    Thank You Google.

    But Hey MSN is not bad too.. I receive visitors from there too and i am ranked on higher positions then that of google , But its the no. of searches that happens in both the search engines that matters. Even ranking lower on google, the no of visitors i get from it compared to MSN is more than thrice!!!

    Hail GOOGLE AND MSN

23. gordon (newbie)

    April 1st, 2007 at 6:35 pm

    23

    for some reason I always thought that yahoo indexed my sites faster than google. i like google because even if they don’t like you that much, they can still send you tons of traffic.

    g.

24. gordon brown (newbie)

    April 1st, 2007 at 9:02 pm

    24

    I seem to find that even though google indexes my sites more often yahoo seems to actually index the site faster. I think it took google twice as long to start showing pages opposed to yahoo.

    I still prefer google though to use as a search engine as it puts less rubbish on the search page (unless I sign in to my account and add rubbish to my personal page)

25. sebastien (newbie)

    April 2nd, 2007 at 10:40 am

    25

    Interesting experiment !
    I wonder if you had these stats for other less known search engines like gigablast or exalead.
    I did not really understand your experiment. Your site was brand new and you released it on the net with already 1 million pages. Is that it ?
    PR7 you mean Google PR 7. If so, no wonder that Google prefers it. Perhaps it is only PR1 on Msn and Yahoo. What is the quality and the variety of the incoming links to this site.
    Thanks for your answer

26. Ahmed (l337)

    April 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 am

    26

    And thats why I mentioned the Yahoo backlinks - having over 5000 backlinks should get you crawled a lot more.

27. InfotainmentCenter.com (newbie)

    March 19th, 2008 at 9:58 am

    27

    According to R & D by various companies it has come to a conclusion that the rank of Google is at #1 beacause of targetted traffic which is continuosly depending on Google’s Search Alogarithm.
    The structure that Google’s Use is of different than any other company in the world that why they are the fastest search result provider of the World and presently No.1 in Universe through Internet.

28. Mister Clarke (newbie)

    July 25th, 2008 at 9:54 am

    28

    So let me get this straight.. the reason you claim Google’s search is No. 1. is because of it’s spider. It’s faster and smarter, and Google handles search queries faster than any other.

    Well, that hardly reflects user experience does it. Google’s results are annoying in the extreme - unless you like to see directory after directory after directory. Try typing “plumbers in chesterfield” to Google (UK). There isn’t a single plumber on page 1, it’s entirely occupied by directory sites like upmystreet and thompsonlocal etc.

    Try the same search in Yahoo and guess what, you actually get plumbers in chesterfield!! The Yahoo search might be a few milliseconds slower - but they’re worth the wait!!

    Google has brought this sorry state of affairs upon itself because of it’s insistance on emphasising link popularity for ranking results. That policy might be good for networking and business growth (especially for directory companies!!) - but for relevant search results it’s very frustrating, and as far as I’m concerned they can kiss my hairy ass.