The Problem With Search Engines . . .

[datajam]

The Problem With Search Engines . . .
By: Rich Brunelle

The problem with Search Engines is Search Engines. Really! What if Search Engines didn’t list sites the way they do? What if Search Engines algorithms did not require a new SEO approach almost daily? What if Search Engines real goal was the recording and listing data available on the Internet, instead of taking over the world?

I know, it sounds as though I am being ridiculous, but I’m not really trying to be. When the Telephone Book comes out, it provides everyone with one equal listing. Small print, alphabetically, showing Name, Address, and Phone Number. After that, if you want additional listings such as inclusion into other categories or an enhanced listing, you pay for it. There is no question regarding first page listing in any category, start your name with multiple A’s. If you really want to get attention, pay for up to a full page ad. Before you say the Phone Book is a Directory not a Search Engine, think again. The Phone Book provides a searchable listing based on Name, Category, and Topic and is published as such. My point being, I can pay an equal amount to any other advertiser and get equal listing, without keywords or any optimization.

In a Library, the Dewey Decimal Classification System provides a different way to catalogue books. The DDC is used worldwide and has been the standard for cataloging written resources for years. The DDC is not new, having been conceived in 1873 and first published in 1876. The DDC provides a methodology for retrieval of resources by means of a hierarchical classification system that provides for resources to be listed in multiple classifications relative to content. My point is, nobody has to rewrite a book every three months to be accurately cataloged in the DDC.

So if the Phone Book and the DDC can provide accurate listing of resources, why is it so difficult to get the same with a Search Engine? If the Internet is made up of Documents published to web sites, wouldn’t that make the web site a Book? Is it really necessary to make every word in a book searchable? It makes no sense to me for a guy with a PHD in a topic to publish a book and another guy with no practical knowledge of the topic at all to do the same, and the No Knowledge guy to be listed higher because he used the same word repeatedly and Mr. PHD didn’t have to. Does this mean that someone knowledgeable of a topic has to write poorly to satisfy the Search Engines? There’s something seriously wrong in such an approach to any topic.

Our Search Engine Companies are not stupid. Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, and all the rest know that knowledge is power. And, “He who holds access to such information . . .” But do not think for even a second that this comes at no cost to you. I personally do not care if Google has intent on world domination. (They do, by the way.) All I care about is getting an accurate listing of my web site, without it costing me a fortune in SEO crap every three months. Search Engines are making BIG BUCKS at the expense of a lot of people, while not accurately listing resources on the Internet. And, you will never find Mr. PHD’s book listed at the top of any Search Engine listing as long as Adsence Campaigns and similar providing no true resource of topic are allowed to flourish at the top of Search Engine listings.

Search Engines are an evil siphon of time and money. Search Engines have an adverse impact on most real business as most small business cannot afford the constant changes in SEO practices. And why? It’s simple! The problem with Search Engines is Search Engines. Is it possible that the next real money to be made on the Internet will be made by the person that can develop a method of accurately cataloging the Internet?

Oh for all you poll takers, try this for a poll topic. . . Is SEO practical for Small Business: To Time Consuming, To Costly, or Waste of Time and Money? Never mind, did it myself with different question.

<self promo link drops>

[dburdon]

Rich,

I guess when one's getting the right rankings you love search engines. When we get the the wrong rankings we hate them.

SEO remains more an art than a science and you have to accept the ups and downs. When things go wrong take a step back and be objective.

SEO doesn't have to be a constant process. I have a client with a one word, highly valuable B2B search term. I last did any active optimisation back in April 2005. Today, two years later, the client remains No.1 on Google.co.uk, No.5 on Google.co.uk and ranks 4 to 6 on Google sites from Australia, to South Africa. From the client's original $3,000 investment he's had literally thousands of business leads. Great optimisation? No. Just good on page (including meta tags dare I say), aligned content and a few relevant, selected links.

Ranking is important to all forms of directory. The higher you go the more enquiries, leads, sales etc. So people try to game the system to generate higher rankings. Take yellow pages. People realised that ABC corp got more business than XYZ corp. So they renamed themselves Aardvark corp. Then someone spotted that A1 corp beats Aardvark. Then that 1A beat A1 etc. I used to see firms in competitive categories with names like 1111111111111111 ad infinitum until Yellow pages banned that approach.

The good news about Google is that it is constantly trying to counter-game the gamers by altering its algorithm.

[datajam]

You folks gotta be kidding me!

Seriously, you cannot be satisfied with the performance of Search Engines. One day you're up, the next you're down. In the Sandbox, out of the Sandbox. Meta this and that, or no Meta at all. Keyword Density or Dense Keywording. Need I go on?

Haven't any of you calculated the time and/or cash you've spent on trying to acheive top placement on any Search Engine? Damn, it must be nice being so wealthy that such drain on your resources doesn't bother you. Have you forgotten that the Internet was supposed to level the playing field, making it possible for Small Business to compete with Big Business. And, it may have for a short time. There is little chance a Small Business can maintain the budget required to keep up with SEO demands, except for the Small Business created by the Search Engines such as SEO companies or Adsense Campaigns.

If you are an Egg Head, sitting at your desk doing nothing . . . you should be thinking about how to take the silver spoon away from the Major Search Engines. They have not yet satisfied the need. They haven't even come up with a good idea. Think I'm joking? Just wait . . . there's a fourteen year old kid somewhere out there that will snatch the whole market away one day!

[incrediblehelp]

You folks gotta be kidding me!

Seriously, you cannot be satisfied with the performance of Search Engines. One day you're up, the next you're down. In the Sandbox, out of the Sandbox. Meta this and that, or no Meta at all. Keyword Density or Dense Keywording. Need I go on?

When have the SE's become responsible for this and your websites listing? I would have to say never.

[Markll]

Comparing internet search to a difinitve entity like a phone book or the Dewey Decimal System in a little narrow.

The search engines have many more variables to contend with. Have you ever tried to spam the phone book.

Although I do get a little tired of spammers putting "get rich quick" books in the gardening section of the library.(sarcasm)

[mjtaylor]

Haven't any of you calculated the time and/or cash you've spent on trying to acheive top placement on any Search Engine?

Well, I have calculated what my clients pay me to achieve top placement. ;D

Seriously, I can see how it is maddening to some, but to me it's a delicious game. If I didn't win most of the time, I would feel differently, of course. But I have always been able to get my clients into our targeted positions, and no, I don't choose obscure, rarely searched phrases.

FWIW, MJ

[Dinghus]

Actually your ideas has merit up to a point. A strict phonebook just has everybody listed who has a telephone number regardless of who you are or what you do. The most you can do is get your listing highlighted. So this would be good for just cataloging the internet. So would DDS. Same thing.

For a searchengine tho, it might work more like yellow pages where you can buy ads and there is more info about what your business is etc. So say you do a search, it would show up with all the categories your search returned. You pick one (just like yellow pages) and see all the websites under that category and with sub-cats too. Much like an index.

[jawn_tech]

One thing I've said for years is I wish SE's, mainly Google, would just list sites alphabetically -- just for a while, until all their critics started screaming for them to put it back the way it was. That would make things interesting.

[SemAdvance]

The day I rely on a search engine to build my business is the day I die and even then I won't.

Seriously your sites are listed in the search engine just as they are in the Yellow pages.

I will give you an example

Turn to Page 1 of the Yellow Pages directory.

See all of the listing on page 1??

Are there other pages in your Yellow Pages?

Of course there are, and just like in the search engine, not everyone can be on the 1st page of the Yellow Pages....seems perfectly normal to me.

In addition you missed the aspect that the Yellow Pages is not the single source of advertisement many companies use, and some will never use it as they are lost in a sea of listings as well..

Look up any lawyer in a major city and you will know they suffer the same helplessness as the mentioned search engine oriented webmaster.

You need a pro active approach in building business and less reactive waiting for a search engine to build your business.

Good luck with whatever 3rd party search engine you use.....

Most will need it!!!

(ohh and how much did you pay the search engine for the FREE listing?? ;-> )

[Peter (IMC)]

keep tweaking every little detail and indeed you lose a lot of time with no real differences in results.

Search engines don't change the algoritms to make the life of an SEO more difficult. They change algorithms to make the SERP's better.

A proper SEO job is not affected by the search engines changing their algorithms every now and then. Sure there can be minor changes but nothing that should have a huge impact.

If there are huge impacts, then you either did something or worse you didn't do something.

[lpoulsen]

The Problem With Search Engines . . .
By: Rich Brunelle

So if the Phone Book and the DDC can provide accurate listing of resources, why is it so difficult to get the same with a Search Engine?

First, the search engines serve the USER (who performs the search) not the information provider (whose pages are indexed). While it is understandable that you as an information provider would want to be ranked high, that is YOUR concern, not the user's concern.

Second, the Dewey system and the phone book do not work nearly as well as you claim. Many of the books I am interested in do not fit neatly in the hierarchical classification system. Would a book about how to program shopping carts in javascript be under the DDC code for
- applied mathematics (because that is where many libraries have placed computer programming since computers appeared in the 1950es)?
- under electrical engineering (because many libraries have everything related to computers under that) ?
- under commerce and business (because this is really about how to run a store)?

Would Richard Stallman's essays about the purpose and implementation of the GNU Public License be under computer programming, or under legal textbooks - or under personal history, because there is an autobiographical element to it?

It is much faster to find books by searching on Amazon than by scanning the card catalog at a library.

On a smaller scale, I am lost when I go to Blockbusters Video. I can never figure out of the film I am looking for is considered Comedy or Drama or it would be filed under Foreign Films or New Releases. ("After the Wedding", for example.)

[TrafficProducer]

Telephone Book comes out; it provides everyone with one equal listing. Small print, alphabetically, showing Name, Address, and Phone Number. After that, if you want additional listings such as inclusion into other categories or an enhanced listing, you pay for it.

Great;

But I want to look up a type of company in an area; I have to use classified sections, in the UK)

But I want to look up a phone number to see what is listed for that phone number.

Now I want to look up potbelly pig farms and 100 Acre farms, which do NOT have cows.

You get the idea; a phone book can’t cope.

An then if I did find that type of farm in a phone book, next week the farm starts milking cows so this find is not helpful.

OK search engines are not that good at finding such stuff, but surely they are better?

Search engines may have to search through 100’s of thousands of details. I do not know any printed method which could even even try to manage this and find information in about 1 second.

[uniquorn]

Search engines will always be changing algorithms so that the only steady exposure for 90% will be paying for a click. Search engines promote a level of fuzziness in results so that click ratios on ads do not drop.
Paris Roussos

[RHunt]

Seriously, I can see how it is maddening to some, but to me it's a delicious game. If I didn't win most of the time, I would feel differently, of course. But I have always been able to get my clients into our targeted positions, and no, I don't choose obscure, rarely searched phrases.

FWIW, MJ

mj...you're absolutely right...it's a GAME. And it's a game that I love to win and can usually hold my own in. In one sense datajam is right, though. I got addicted to SEO and haven't looked back. Speaking of...remember there used to be a help organization for the internet addicted. This must hold true for SEO folks too. Know of any local chapters of SEO Anonymous?

[EditFast]

I agree with you in principal, datajam, but I am not too sure the Dewey Decimal System is the way to go. I understand where you are coming from but a system created over a century ago may not have the power of classification we need today. I think though that a new classification system and the implementation of such a system on the net which would require every new site (or perhaps every new page since many sites have a variety of purposes and could fall into many categories) to choose their category listing (along with country, state, town etc.) and then automatically added to a global directory (which could be broken down into country wide or state wide or city)...wait ... this is starting to sound like Yahoo!


I guess when one's getting the right rankings you love search engines. When we get the the wrong rankings we hate them.
I have good ranking (but could always use better), but it bothers me that my livelihood depends solely on how I stand with Google (and the others of course). What if one day I wake up and my site has been banned through some minor clerical error? What if there is a flood and Google servers are wiped out? What if the sky should fall? Of course I am being a little facetious here, but really, we as Web site owners and developers should make it part of our business protection plan to find other methods of promotion and advertising so that we are not limited by the whims of the Google algorithm manglers. I think datajam is on the right track with an independent, unbiased, global directory of sites based on a clear, easy to understand system of classification. What that system might be will probably be the most contentious issue in the process.

[davidmg]

jawn_tech Wrote:

One thing I've said for years is I wish SE's, mainly Google, would just list sites alphabetically -- just for a while, until all their critics started screaming for them to put it back the way it was. That would make things interesting.

It would read like the phone book also. Just keep putting "A's" in front.

AAAA Acme
AAA Acme
AA Acme
A Acme
Acme


How many A's can you add? The one with the most A's gets top listing.

[incrediblehelp]

The one with the most A's gets top listing.

Ahhh, the days of directory traffic!

[Milo]

I think its a little naive to propose that search engines should list information like datajam mentioned (I do realise that this is just an example though). Alphebetising listing would obviously have its downfalls. I also disagree entirely that small business has very little chance on SE's. We have taken our very small business into a profitable entity that ships 500 plus orders a month. Our bottom line has been increased 20 fold and we would never have got here without SE's. All this was done by accessing the information about SEO and SEM available on the SE's and putting it into practice. Did I mention that good products and some patience were also required.
My point here is that "Is SEO practical for Small Business: To Time Consuming, To Costly, or Waste of Time and Money?"
SEO is extremely practical and is no waste of time or money. The only part I agree with is that I too have a strong dislike to them when my rankings fall.

[davidmg]

Until artificial intelligence is created search engines wil always have hang ups. Search engines are supposed to look for content when searching for a word. The more times it sees a word in the article the more relevant it must be toward the search without overloading the key word. Even if the text is words that don't make sense it will pick up on the keyword it is searching for, but if it sees the keyword to many times it will back off. The more creative we get trying to trick the search engines the better they get but it will never be perfect. Remember the old trick of using a font color the same as the page color. After a while Google caugt on and wrote code to disallow font color same as page color then everyone doing it dropped in ratings. Spamming the first two lines with keywords worked for a while then the code was written to disallow keyword 5 times etc. The old saying still holds true to computers “Garbage In Garbage Out” If we keep loading up the internet with garbage sites we will eventually run into trouble down the road. There are so many garbage sites that make it to the top ten only because in “Today’s terms” they have the right SEO. Tomorrow those search terms will be disallowed. You will always have somebody trying to beat the system but in the mean time we are junking everything up. If the internet truly is still in it’s infancy are we teaching our child a bunch of garbage. Are we making it easier for that child to get a hand gun? What can we expect down the road????? There is talk about pulling the plug on the internet and starting over. In a way it would clear up all the junk but I’m sure it wouldn’t take long till we came up with more ways to beat the system.

[doj464]

I try to imagine the horror that would be if search engines would be stuck in 1995, where all we really had were directories. I think that being able to find all of the information in such a simple way is great. The gaming allows someone with a small budget and a decent amount of know-how to beat the "big guys" who are paying upwards of $5k a month.

I find that a very liberating feeling! I hate being stuck in a lower position, just because I don't already have the resources. I like to use my creativity to make money, and SEO is definitely one way to get there.

And yes, it's definitely true that search engines are there for our customers - who would not come to us if not for the convenience of the search engines...

David J

[netroact]

About 2 years ago you would frequently read somewhat boastful-in your face comments about how easy it was to achieve top search engine rankings. Newbies would be discouraged and self-proclaimed SEO experts would make it sound like all you had to do was make a relevant website, and you would achieve high rankings in Google, and many other search engines.

Now, you don't see that nearly as much. Google stirred the waters, and you see a lot of bitter SEO's, blaming Google for their bad listings. I wonder how many of these bitter folks were the one's boasting.

Don't let anyone fool you. If you want to be ranked high in the SERPS, you will need to work very hard.
And, you will need to manipulate the SE's. There are some who are just lucky, or fortunate, and they won't understand this, because they have never had to deal with it. They are living in some fairy tale land somewhere (very naive). You don't need to spam to control the SE's, but know this for sure: Google wants to control you and your website. Recent announcements have made this crystal clear.

There will always be those exceptions, like websites that by their very nature weave a web, or string a net that the SE's can't miss. A forum, for instance, that has been building popularity for a few years. It will deal with all kinds of unique content, and links will spin a web that will make even the Googlebot salivate.

Please don't be discouraged. Just keep working, and educating yourself. There are all kinds of things you can do to achieve your goals and dreams. It might not be worth your time and effort to get an acceptable Google listing. People have made lots of money from listings in the Yahoo, Ask, and MSN search engines.

[cryptblade]

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Seriously. If you want a phonebook, go to it. They still exist. If you want a library - go to it. If you want a search engine, there they are.

You wanna benefit from them - you play their game. You learn their rules. And if they change the rules, you learn to change with them.

It's kinda like pro football... and the rules that keep changing to protect the offensive players...but I digress...

[davidmg]

cryptblade Wrote

Don't hate the player, hate the game. You wanna benefit from them - you play their game. You learn their rules. And if they change the rules, you learn to change with them.

I am not proclaiming to be a Google fan but I beleive that they are in 1t for the long run. I beleive that they are working trying to clean up the internet. All the buzz the past weeks about "Paid Links" and Google looking for them. Maybe they are trying to clear things up and level the playing field for everyone. Lord knows we have enough directories out there and I'm begining to think there are more directories than pages with content. One of the things a search engine looks for on a site is the directory so it can follow all the links to it's pages. Well to beat that game and sell ads call all your pages directories and it scans all your pages and the out links. I really think they just want to start clearing up more of the junk, not necessarily penalize anyone who paid for a link. I think we have to hate the players who are junking things up. The game is just trying to stay on the same field. Google can't tell it's bots to disallow directories because every sit has a directory. They are just trying to cut through the BS.

[davidmg]

Remember a few years back when the big thing was being in a shopping mall? Sites were constructed with diagrams laying out a shopping mall. Little boxes for each store. All you were doing was buying a link to your site. The bigger the box in the diagram the more you paid. What ever happened to all these sites. They were early directories and that was it. I truely beleive they are trying to clear things up.

[mjtaylor]

Until artificial intelligence is created search engines wil always have hang ups.


So if the Phone Book and the DDC can provide accurate listing of resources, why is it so difficult to get the same with a Search Engine?


The phone book analogy falls apart the moment you leave your community - and you have to get out of the house and over to a library to use the DDC - and, have you noticed how much easier it is to get a book in the library with the Intranet between libraries?

As I see it, SEs do a much better job than phone books or DDC. I don't have to go to a library and I don't have to pick up a phone book. And if I misspell the name Google suggests the correct one ...

That is AI in reality now.

I almost always find what I want on the first page - yes, I am a more sophisticated searcher than most 'civilians', as I have been in the search business since 1995. But few of my non-SEO friends find the search engines as lacking as so many of my colleagues do. Sure there are irrelevant results - (there are lots of those in the phone book, too) - not because AI is lacking, but because I am different than the next person who types the same thing and is really looking for something different than I want.

AI will never make up for personal preferences. If I can't do it, I can't program a machine to.

Much of the griping about SEs seems a bit like sour grapes. I am annoyed with Google for making directories come up above individual sites, but you can bet if I optimized a directory I would have a different point of view.

My 2 pennies +, MJ

IMO, MJ

[davidmg]

datajam wrote:

So if the Phone Book and the DDC can provide accurate listing of resources, why is it so difficult to get the same with a Search Engine?
Phone books are written by humans for humans. Websites are written humans for bots then for humans.
In the Phone book a listing can't be altered. I really don't think were comparing apples here.

Lets say your listing in the phone book is "Acme Computer" Well every phone book lists you as Acme Computer. On the internet you can pull in your competitors customers as well. If I list on my site "The blue apple was on the computer. The orange apple ate his computer, and the pink apple gave birth to a computer."

All of this makes no sense. In Word this is proper grammer. To a search engine it will point anyone looking for "Apple Computer" to your site even though you sell Acme Computers. Most people don't read they just go to the next link for coumputers in their search. Search engines only search for keywords you are looking for, they see it is in copy but are unable to comprehend what it says.

[Christiaan]

Maybe we all should start using DMOZ again?

[bjbtexas]

Remember when the internet was young and everyone was trying to get listed in the Yahoo directory? Then Yahoo started charging for a listing? Am I dating myself here? What 1998?

It sucked!!!

Yahoo's early days was a much like the DMOZ today, but it was the only game it town.

Yellow Pages are cool, but the biggest, baddest dude with the bucks and the best AAAAAAAAAAAname gets listed first.

There is a reason people are debating today whether or not to pay Yahoo to get listed -- the system doesn't work.

Long live SEO!!!

[datajam]

So we all agree, there is no better way than this ongoing SEO and there is no better way for Search Engines to do their thing?

I come back to Mr. PHD who writes a site/book on a topic, but when indexed by the Search Engines his work places significantly lower than a site with an adsense campaign and the results of a Search Engine script for the page. It is not acceptable for such to happen, but it does. And as long as it does, Search Engine technology is failing the Internet.

I'm not trying to bad-mouth any Search Engine or SEO practices. I'm just suggesting that Search Engine Technology as is, is flawed. I think a different approach needs developement. One that gives credibiity to the document versus keywords, scripts, spamming, or campaigns would be refreshing. It's just an idea. . .

[beakerbum]

If phone books were the be all end all and the way that people really want to find things, why is local search growing and phone book usage going down?

It's not about Google trying to control the internet. It's about providing the kind of results people are looking for. That's not out of any altruism (or not being evil) on Google's part, it's because the moment someone else provides better results, that's where people will go.

As long as people want better results and as long as people are trying to figure out how to manipulate the search engine requests, the algo's are going to change.

[James Bull]

As other folks have pointed out, search engines do things that phone books don't do. If there was a market for an alphabetical listing of all the websites in the world then someone would have done it by now.

It's up to the business that owns the website how to spend their marketing budget. If they think search engine marketing or search engine optimisation is cost-effective, that's their decision.

Jakob Nielsen made a good point when he said that "liberation from search engines will be one of the biggest strategic issues for websites in the coming years." See Search Engines as Leeches on the Web (http://www.useit.com/alertbox/search_engines.html)

[JohneeMac]

Up / Down / Up / down.

I take it you have a relatively new website!?! I dont see much turbulence in my rankings at all. I certainly dont see daily alogithyms update either.

Been preached many times and is no secret but build a site for your visitors and then traffic / links / rankings and hopefully sales will come.

The on page seo is the easy bit, getting creative is with link building is the hard bit.

[jammybiskit]

I'm just suggesting that Search Engine Technology as is, is flawed.

Datajam is quite right. Search Engine technology is flawed. Pagerank is based on the citation model used by scientists: highest authority is given to scientific papers that are cited most often in other papers. For papers read web pages, for citations read links.

What works in the (usually) honest scientific domain is not necessarily true for the commercial domain and we see the consequences all the time.

Search Engine technology is in the process of evolving - natural selection in information technology. Keyword search has been tried and found wanting; Pagerank has been tried and found wanting ... and so it will go on. Each new idea brings a temporary balance between the interests of the competitors.

SEOs, spammers, big business, governments and - I almost forgot - the insignificant rest of us must go on gaming the SEs for the foreseeable future.

Well, it beats working :)

[pagetta]

back to the original question of 'is seo too time consuming/money waste for smaller businesses?' perhaps - but surely it is nothing new that smaller businesses have to find cheaper/free ways to compete with the big boys.

in the age of search, bigger waelthier companies can afford agressive seo & paid online advertising campigns so where does that leave a company like us compared to microsoft? we have a very limited budget, and only one person working on the seo as about a third of their role. well it means we target specific keywords we build a content rich website and organically links appear and now we are at the top of the SEs for a lot of popular although specific keywords. it requires time and dedication and a bit of a slog as do most aspects of marketing smaller businesses - hard work and time replace the ease of having mega bucks to throw around on fancy advertsiing strategies.

a directory is easy - we put in there that we're a computer software provider in our region with our number and address. we can't afford a full page outlining exactly what we do and sell. likewise we can't afford to be top of adwords for our major keywords, which is where SEs come into play and long term it is free marketing for us.

before search there was the same problem of expensive advertising being for the big boys and offline we still have this too. we rely on free PR whilst someone like mocrosoft get 6 full pages in the daily national paper. and whilst we're not at the mercy of spiders and bots, we're at the mercy of one person's opinion on our story and whether its important enough to be published.

you said yourself the ddc has been around for over a century - search is a new industry it has a long way to develop and we are at the mercy of every new development unfortunately. i'm not a mad google fan or anything but i think search engines and not directories will be the future of categorising online infornation, there's just a way to go yet.

[jtracking]

I just have difficulty accepting systems that falsely report data, allowing garbage content to rank higher than true content.

...Nope, Search Engine technology is flawed. Somebody has to step back and look from a different angle, and make his fortune by finding a better way to do it.

Are You Bored?
Visit http://thanksome1.com and help this gal get her site up and active

I don't believe Google is reporting false data at all. They're not even really reporting data, their listing websites. If they listed them according to the DDC or like a phonebook everything would be alphabetical and we know how difficult it would be ti sift through 1 millions pages that start with the letter A, not only that but the letter A in a title could be for Auto or A cat's life.

Search engine technology is not flawed it just doesn't work for you - either cause you can't afford someone to list you properly and give you or use the tools to get you ranked higher and in more places or you can't do it yourself.

Lastly, do you actually want someone to help that gal and get her listed on the engines you think are flawed? just curious...

[jtracking]

back to the original question of 'is seo too time consuming/money waste for smaller businesses?' perhaps - but surely it is nothing new that smaller businesses have to find cheaper/free ways to compete with the big boys.

a lot of the times the smaller business have less to complete with cause they can use regional parameters in their keywords which makes it slightly easier...

mississauga maid services is much easier to compete with when it comes to maid services - molly maid most likely would like to rank #1 for maid services and mississauga maid services but won't because of the small business owner who doesn't want to rank high for only maid services...

[boggart]

As someone whose activities involve securing data rather than attracting traffic I can come at this from a users perspective.
The problem I have always had with search engines is the question of relevance. I do not want the million listings Google gives me with the one most linked to placed top If I search "quantum physics" (OK, in real life I am smart enough to refine my search somewhat) I don't want a sci - fi fan site, I am looking for stuff by leading academics in the field.
Links and keyword frequency are lousy ways of indexing information but who is going to build an algorithm that can truly index by relevance.
The shortcomings of search engines show that it is ludicrous to talk of artificial intelligence.
Back in the 1970s when I first worked in computers we were told that a computer had the intelligence of an earthworm. Since then of course they have dumbed down.

machiavelli.blog.co.uk/main (http://machiavelli.blog.co.uk/main)

[emptymirror]

Seriously, you cannot be satisfied with the performance of Search Engines. One day you're up, the next you're down. In the Sandbox, out of the Sandbox. Meta this and that, or no Meta at all. Keyword Density or Dense Keywording. Need I go on?

You know, not every site is like that. I guess it just depends upon your site & the SERPs & keywords you're after.

I admit, I don't obsess about my placement & rarely check the SERPs. And I don't make changes every time Google tweaks their algorithm.

For example, my main site has been online & is constantly growing; we add new articles, interviews, and resources relating to our topic every month.

The site uses valid HTML, is well-designed, and uses good solid SEO practices such as relevant, specific titles & headings, well-written meta descriptions that make folks want to click on the link, using the important keywords in the text (and judiciously in some of the file names).

I've never worried about keyword density & don't worry about getting every possible keyphrase variation into the text. If the article is on a certain subject, those words will naturally be in the text.

We've taken care with our site / linking structure as well, trying to make things as easy as possible for people as well as bots to find their way around.

We make changes to the navigation as it grows.

We do spend a little time getting new (mostly non-reciprocal & always unpaid) links, as I think Google does like to see the number of quality links to a site increasing over time. But many of our links come without us having to ask. And, we do link to our site from other (related) sites we own.

The result?
We're on the first page of results - if not #1 - for nearly every one of the keyphrases for which it's important for us to be found.

There is one big one for which we're usually somewhere on the second or third page, sometimes lower. I don't quite understand why we don't rank higher for it. But that's OK, it's a less specific term than the ones that we are usually #1 for & tends to bring in folks searching for more general information than we generally offer. I'm not going to spend much time trying to boost it.

Our rankings have been pretty stable for the past several years.

I know some keywords/keyphrases are much more difficult than others, and some SERPs are more volatile than other.

But no, I don't share your vitriol toward the search engines, and I don't jump every time they make a little change or we go up or down a few places in the SERPs. SEs don't give perfect results but I don't think it's all just junk either.

And I don't think SEO is a waste of time, but it does seem a waste of time to alter your site every time Google makes an adjustment.

I don't understand your phone book analogy - in a phone book you can only be found for one category (maybe more if you pay for it). If you're a used bookstore and all someone wants is a used bookstore, that's great. But if someone wants to find "small press poetry books" - for which there is no phone book category - one would have to call every bookstore, to find out if they carry small press poetry books. An alphabetical listing of bookstores sure isn't gonna help you with that. You're gonna have to slog through the listings & it's going to take a lot of time.

Denise

[webmaker]

Maybe you all would be more interested in helping me now with my project that aims to solve the issues at hand in this post. I have been a member here for a while now and have asked for help many of times. It is very hard to get help with out sounding like Plugging. I have some great ideas. Help me build a great search & promotion facility?
Basic idea.
Front end search interface that allows for typical search results that can then be sorted or filtered or categorized by relevance, popularity, hits, date, etc.
Backend or as I call it the Base. Which is database driven information that covers all forms of media. Kinda a community directory on steroids.
Again, I ask for help in the development and building of my project. People who are tired of the seo game and want something different and fresh. I am not looking for CUSTOMERS. Atleast not yet.

[mjtaylor]

Again, I ask for help in the development and building of my project.

It's not clear what sort of help you are seeking.

MJ

[datajam]

Well, a few of you have misunderstood or I just need to write clearer. I am not trying to use the phone book or the DDC for the Internet. I just use them as an example of other methodology. I think it ridiculous that people spend hours and hours doing the SEO thing to their sites, or spend a small fortune for others to do it for them, only to discover that the Search Engines do not produce the results many people believe they do. Search Engines have become very complicated and yes, they are by no means an accurate listing of the Internet.

When the Internet began (after Military) it was described by many as documents. Simply put, a website was a collection of documents. Now, one would suggest that these documents probably written by people, all with their own writing style and such. Someone could write a book, a story, a poem, or simply publish stupidity to a web site. Now, we do not publish documents as they were written or intended to be. We perform SEO Magic to make them appeal to Search Engines.

Well, what of the work of the real Authors out there that are at the lower half of a Search Engines results because their work was not made SE Friendly? And, this is my reason for claiming the Search Engine methodology is flawed. How is it that a junior high school students report on a book comes up higher in the Search Engine result than the actual book? How is it that some idiot can put up a page of false information on a topic, and get higher in the Search Engine results than a report prepared by an expert of the same topic?

So, why not accept that Search Engine Technology and Methodology is flawed and step back and somebody come up with a better idea? In the beginning, before Google, it was expected that Search Engines would index documents, not documents would be written for Search Engines. Maybe, I'm just stoopid (yes, I meant to do that) but it seems to me that some method need be developed that does not require we build web sites, write documents, or present information pursuant to what a Search Engine wants.

So again, somebody needs to step back and create a new technology and/or methodology for indexing the Internet.

(Persistent aren't I?)

[James Bull]

Well, a few of you have misunderstood or I just need to write clearer....

...somebody needs to step back and create a new technology and/or methodology for indexing the Internet.

Hi Datajam, no problem with any of that. However, could I suggest that the solution lies not in technology (like a new way of indexing the internet) but in behaviour (like not building content with search engines in mind in the first place).

When you think about it, one of the big reasons why it is so hard to find content is that people (including me) create content of various kinds in order to create or attract links to our websites. Then there are all those sites that exist not to communicate any real information, but purely to attract traffic and generate advertising revenue.

So, search engines are one of the big drivers for the oversupply of content, which in turn makes finding information (or being found) more difficult. It's a self-perpetuating process.

Maybe the answer is some kind of cultural change in the way we use the web, rather than new technology.

Probably impossible, but I thought I'd throw the idea in.

[webmaker]

Well, what of the work of the real Authors out there that are at the lower half of a Search Engines results because their work was not made SE Friendly? And, this is my reason for claiming the Search Engine methodology is flawed. How is it that a junior high school students report on a book comes up higher in the Search Engine result than the actual book? How is it that some idiot can put up a page of false information on a topic, and get higher in the Search Engine results than a report prepared by an expert of the same topic?

So, why not accept that Search Engine Technology and Methodology is flawed and step back and somebody come up with a better idea?

This is what I am trying to do with my project. The main problem is that the way the search engines are set up now. They are quick fixes. How do I take that quick fix mentality and guide it to take an extra step or two to help site owners and searchers to land in the relevance and validity zone upon request?

[datajam]

James Bull, Thank You! If there was a prize to give, it would be yours. You even considered something that I really had not said much about.

I wonder how much SEO practices polute the content of the documents that make up our web sites. I mean, are we actually creating a self-fullfilling prophecy of Search Engine confusion by making modifications to our web pages? Our documents should be able to be indexed in their purest form, as written by the Author. That would be my goal were I the Boss of these Search Engines. Maybe what the Search Engines should be doing is giving the highest ranking to documents without evidence of SEO or other tampering to the original content. Nope, too simple! Or, is it?

Now, if we could come up with a way to rate Author credibility. . .

Webmaker, I am going to visit your site to see if I can figure out what you are up too and if there is a way I can be of assistance to you. But, this may be my best advice: Drop by your local High School, College, or Tech School and see if you can put together a team of fresh youngsters with an abundance of imagination to step outside the box and come in with a new approach. Maybe they will be able to earn school credit for their participation. And, if you get rich off of it, hire them all quickly.

And, pretend I am your favorite tax free relative and pay me off in company stock for the idea . . . (Hey, it was worth the shot. I never get away with anything.)

To everyone else, Thanks! I enjoyed the topic and your participation.

[davidmg]

So, why not accept that Search Engine Technology and Methodology is flawed and step back and somebody come up with a better idea? In the beginning, before Google, it was expected that Search Engines would index documents, not documents would be written for Search Engines.

The problem is there are too many documents containing the same info. What is relevent to you and your search could be totally opposite to what everyone else is looking for. Therefor the search engines bring up everything with the key words you are searching for. It is up to the person searching to determine what is relevent and what isn't.

Even on your own computer you may have several documents containg the same words. Type in a keyword into the search on your computer and it brings up a list of all your documents with the keyword. Then you have to remember which document contained exactly what you are looking for or start openning the results looking for the one you wanted.

Words were around for years before somebody came up with the idea to put them in alphebetical order. Books and libraries existed long before the decimal system organized them. UPC codes has made indexing products much easier. SEO could finally be the answer to indexing the info on the internet or a step toward the answer. This Thread has been great but it doesn't solve any problems or give any solutions, yet it will be indexed and come up in searches on SEO for years to come. When somebody clicks on this thread when searching on SEO will this be the info they are looking for? Or have we added another "junk" page to the internet?

[davidmg]

Just another thought. The decimal system for books works great for organizing the books and tells you where to find the book on a shelf. A library computer will tell you which books are in the library the bigger the library the more books. A search for a book on "How To..." can bring up many books. Some books might be from the 50's and may not have as much info as one with updated info from the 90's. In the end you still have to look through the books to find the exact info you are looking for.

If I am not mistaken doesn't a publisher have to pay to get a ISBN number? A manufacturer pay for a UPC number? Should we have to pay for a "IPN" (Internet Page Number)? I'm sure whomever comes up with the ideal search catalog will find a way to profit from it or would we be banned for using paid links?

[webmaker]

To come up with a solution. One must find an answer to one problem and then find a practical implimentation.
Ok. I will give you a example of one of my ideas.
Take RSS. Using ajax technology. Realtime updates of any site content are possible. Even not using the ajax tech. Realtime updates are possible upon a refresh. Ok so a site does not have rss service. I have found ways that you can make a rss feed. etc
This is just one of the PROBLEMS that people have that I have been working on. The cool thing about just this idea alone. Instead of sending my spider out to search everysite on the net. I will be able to keep the spider inhouse.
My point is now you can work on your site knowing that every change that you make on your site is an automatic update on Yoddle. I have at this time a testing version of this example.
This is a solution. Next, comes the usability and interface solutions for the front end and the sortability, ranking, filtering.(What to do if your site sells items, has reviews, or has a video presentation about how to use it? Not to mention that new product that you just started to sell.)

[Webnauts]

To your poll question I answered: Always!

And my clients sites always too. ;)