Is google really better than yahoo/altavista?

[Zensunni]

I just put my site online a little while ago and cannot see it on google when I do a search for it using words that describe my site (with words used in my meta tags). But I can find my site using altavista and yahoo. Is it that I've compromised google's search ability some way? Or, is google really not the engine I thought it was.

I'm sure it's the former, but I can't stop thinking about how much easier the search seems to be on altavista and yahoo, now that I've tried them.

[amohanty]

--- DISCLAIMER: not intended to be flamebait ---

Quite frankly, I havent really seen much of a difference for quite some time. Its just that google is quite clutter free (but then so's search.yahoo.com) and of course google's 'street cred' among geeks. I personally use teoma (askjeeves next generation engine) quite a bit nowadays.

Just my $0.02
AM

[blueturtl]

I think Google uses some kind of a popularity algorithm when filtering those search results. That's why new sites often don't appear at the top of the list or even on the list at all for some time. For instance the search 'Madonna' shows the site of the queen of pop as the first result, although Madonna is also a historical person, and many other things. Those however come much later in the list because people more typically seek Madonna the artist.

[Zensunni]

Blue...

I think you've hit the nail on the head....

..think I'll start using other engines. I'm definately not looking for popularity and the norm when I'm looking up stuff.

[Kvark]

Google is a lot better then most search engines because it has just a logo, the search field and a list of results on the page. But I think the simple and fast page design is the only major reason why Google is more popular then other search engines.

Most users have no idea what the differences between search engines are in terms of search performerance and thus it doesn't really matter. What you want when you search is a couple random pages about the subject and thats what any search engine will give you.


BTW. Google has something called pagerank that determines which pages gets first. If you read up on that pagerank stuff then you can probably find a way to improve your page's pagerank.

[Malphas]

My site is massively rubbish and unpopular yet comes up when typing in two simple words and hitting the "I'm feeling lucky" button. It didn't come up at all for several weeks though, when I first made it, so perhaps it just a matter of time before your site starts cropping up in the search results.

[egon spengler]

Blue...

I think you've hit the nail on the head....

..think I'll start using other engines. I'm definately not looking for popularity and the norm when I'm looking up stuff.

What criteria do you expect search results to be sorted by? If the majority of people who search for the term 'madonna' are looking for the decrepit singer and not the the mother of Jesus then surely the singer has to come first in the results

[Whity]

First off search.yahoo.com uses the google search engine and has done for ages, so theres no point comparing them. Secondly it takes google 4 to 6 weeks to index new sites, so it might not appear straight away.

Google is the best search engine speed wise in my opinion.

[Brunellus]

First off search.yahoo.com uses the google search engine and has done for ages, so theres no point comparing them. Secondly it takes google 4 to 6 weeks to index new sites, so it might not appear straight away.

Google is the best search engine speed wise in my opinion.
yup; speed. Google doesn't serve up anything but search, and it serves it up fast.

I haven't used altavista since around 1996. I remember they used to brag about how they ran the whole thing on DEC Alphas....and then shortly afterwards, DEC ceased to exist.

[joflow]

Google places alot of importance on page rank which is basically link popularity. Its one of the reasons why many of the search results for certain keywords are cluttered with spam.

Some people also think there is a "sandbox"...which basically penalizes newer sites by keeping them out of the search results for set period of time.

[23meg]

Google brings up lots of ad-only and commercial pages while looking for info, and I find the ranking system unfair in the long run. I've started using Vivisimo in its stead and haven't looked back so far.

[Malphas]

Also, you [Zensunni] said that you searched for the words you had in your page's metatags. I think only a small minority of search engines actually use meta keywords anymore due to the potential for abuse.

[Elrohir]

actually, I believe you have to register it... when I finished my website (and I'm talking like a year ago or so), there was an option for loading your site into Google's database... cant recall where was that option... do a quick search thru the google's site...

[joflow]

actually, I believe you have to register it... when I finished my website (and I'm talking like a year ago or so), there was an option for loading your site into Google's database... cant recall where was that option... do a quick search thru the google's site...

Normally google will find your site without submitting if you have backlinks. Get indexed isn't hard (he might actually be indexed already, he should try searching for his url rather then keywords)...ranking is the hard part.

[Elrohir]

hmmm... that might be also...

[Zensunni]

There is a place that you can submit your site into for every search engine. Yahoo has the link right on the home page, but google and altavista are a little harder. The best thing is to create a site index and submit it (near-blank html doc with all your links).

As for the popularity, I can't blame google for giving the more popular sites a higher rank (if that is the case). But, unlike most people, I prefer precision over popularity, especially considering that the majority of people use the internet for adult entertainment, walmart-esque shopping, and to look up bad pop stars. Even noting that the search isn't that fixed, I still don't like the idea of being funneled. But that's just me...

BTW, is there any good documentation on page rank? I've looked around on google, and either I'm slow or it's not there.

[joflow]

There is a place that you can submit your site into for every search engine. Yahoo has the link right on the home page, but google and altavista are a little harder. The best thing is to create a site index and submit it (near-blank html doc with all your links).

As for the popularity, I can't blame google for giving the more popular sites a higher rank (if that is the case). But, unlike most people, I prefer precision over popularity, especially considering that the majority of people use the internet for adult entertainment, walmart-esque shopping, and to look up bad pop stars. Even noting that the search isn't that fixed, I still don't like the idea of being funneled. But that's just me...

BTW, is there any good documentation on page rank? I've looked around on google, and either I'm slow or it's not there.

Yes..there are alot of resources on the net about page rank.

Basically, Page Rank ranges from 0 - 10. 10 being the highest and best possible score.

You gain page rank by getting inbound links (other sites linking to you). The higher PR (Page Rank) the linking site has, the more PR is transfered to you. So a PR 5 page linking to you is better then a PR 2 page. You need lots and lots of inbound links to get PR5+. The theory is that good sites with good content get linked to alot. Having a high PR is like having a reputation of being a quality site hence the reason why links from high PR sites are worth more then links from low PR sites (they assume high PR sites, and there high quality sites will also link to other high quality sites).

This system can be manipulated easily. A whole industry of buying and sellilng text links has arisen because of google's high reliance on link popularity. Go to google and search for the term "failure" and you'll see a good example of how search results can be manipulated. A bunch of bloggers used a technique called "Googlebombing" to get that result.

Link Popularity is not the only factor in ranking a site in the search results with google. There are other "on page" factors as well but link popularity is one of the most important, if not most important, factor for google. Other engines like yahoo and msn also take link popularity into consideration but they do not place the same importance on it as google.

[UbuWu]

BTW, is there any good documentation on page rank? I've looked around on google, and either I'm slow or it's not there.

Wikipedia to the rescue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagerank

[Zensunni]

Wow, thanks a lot guys! I'm off to wikpedia....

[BWF89]

I switched from Google to A9 because it's sometimes useful to have your search results and images on the same page and I like the interface better.

http://a9.com/?q=&ypLoc=&a=sweb&a=simage&a=0

[egon spengler]

As for the popularity, I can't blame google for giving the more popular sites a higher rank (if that is the case). But, unlike most people, I prefer precision over popularity, especially considering that the majority of people use the internet for adult entertainment, walmart-esque shopping, and to look up bad pop stars. Even noting that the search isn't that fixed, I still don't like the idea of being funneled. But that's just me...

Well you can be Mr Anti Mainstream all you like but surely if most people entering the single keyword "sex" are looking for pornography rather than a treatise on gender issues then the best result has to be porn.

If you find youself disapointed that a search for bread returns results about the foodstuff and not the 80's BBC sitcom then instead of lambasting google for being populists you should just investigate the possibility of using better search terms.