Comments on: Why Google Search is #1

By: Mister Clarke

Mister Clarke — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:54:38 +0000

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.

By: InfotainmentCenter.com

InfotainmentCenter.com — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:58:24 +0000

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.

By: Ahmed

Ahmed — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:36:22 +0000

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

By: sebastien

sebastien — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 15:40:00 +0000

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

By: gordon brown

gordon brown — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 02:02:23 +0000

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)

By: gordon

gordon — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:35:19 +0000

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.

By: Miracle Herbs

Miracle Herbs — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:04:32 +0000

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

By: Ahmed

Ahmed — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 13:29:34 +0000

@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.

By: Drakazz

Drakazz — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:07:35 +0000

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.

By: ogletree

ogletree — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 06:49:35 +0000

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.