-
Website
http://andybeard.eu/ -
Original page
http://andybeard.eu/1210/blog-search-revisited-google-vs-technorati-vs-techmeme.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
-Ian
Lots of things are still not perfect, I could reel off lots of things that still need to be fixed, or made more consistent, but I am very glad to see that the search results have been cleared up and your indexing speed is good.
-Ian
Lots of things are still not perfect, I could reel off lots of things that still need to be fixed, or made more consistent, but I am very glad to see that the search results have been cleared up and your indexing speed is good.
Do you use any other blog search sites? Would love to see your thoughts on Ask and other blog search engines.
There is also Ask / Bloglines though that has also been a little noisy, and you can always take a look at Lijit.
Do you use any other blog search sites? Would love to see your thoughts on Ask and other blog search engines.
There is also Ask / Bloglines though that has also been a little noisy, and you can always take a look at Lijit.
Using this site, you can search all of your favorite sites in one go. There is a section for searching social media sites (Digg, Technorati, Reddit etc.) which may be helpful for locating blogs too.
Using this site, you can search all of your favorite sites in one go. There is a section for searching social media sites (Digg, Technorati, Reddit etc.) which may be helpful for locating blogs too.
Technorati... I used to use it, but haven't been using it for years. Maybe I should go back.
Google... I rarely use Google these days. Just kidding. I might have to limit my use now.
Technorati... I used to use it, but haven't been using it for years. Maybe I should go back.
Google... I rarely use Google these days. Just kidding. I might have to limit my use now.
"Keep pedalling guys, keep pedalling!"
"Keep pedalling guys, keep pedalling!"
In Google blog search, time and freshness seems to one qualifying factor..and the results are updated hourly right? Do you see a pattern while re arranging results?
In Screenshot 4, for "Microsoft Yahoo" search, the 2nd(Andybeard.eu) and third (scripting.com) result is pushed down, while a new entry is made at the top(NYTimes).
What's interesting is there's a site "Mavericksatwork" which was in the third position on screenshot 3,being pushed down, while there's a "new" entry from NY times (result 4 of screenshot 4).
What's even more interesting is the first result (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com) was indexed 3 hours earlier, while the fourth "duplicate entry" from NYtimes (titled - after rejection Microsoft Yahoo hits a fight) is actually indexed just one hour ago.
So there are two entries from NY times, the one o the top is indexed 4 hours ago, and theres a new entry after 19 hours (as u suggested) which was indexed one hour ago.
I find it confusing. When you say that - when you are selected as relevant, you stay relevant - it doesnt hold true for the new entry (4th position screenshot 4) right? Had he been better in the onsite factors (KW proximity, KW density etc) he could've broken into the first position even.
What is your finding on this? (Hope it all makes sense)
In Google blog search, time and freshness seems to one qualifying factor..and the results are updated hourly right? Do you see a pattern while re arranging results?
In Screenshot 4, for "Microsoft Yahoo" search, the 2nd(Andybeard.eu) and third (scripting.com) result is pushed down, while a new entry is made at the top(NYTimes).
What's interesting is there's a site "Mavericksatwork" which was in the third position on screenshot 3,being pushed down, while there's a "new" entry from NY times (result 4 of screenshot 4).
What's even more interesting is the first result (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com) was indexed 3 hours earlier, while the fourth "duplicate entry" from NYtimes (titled - after rejection Microsoft Yahoo hits a fight) is actually indexed just one hour ago.
So there are two entries from NY times, the one o the top is indexed 4 hours ago, and theres a new entry after 19 hours (as u suggested) which was indexed one hour ago.
I find it confusing. When you say that - when you are selected as relevant, you stay relevant - it doesnt hold true for the new entry (4th position screenshot 4) right? Had he been better in the onsite factors (KW proximity, KW density etc) he could've broken into the first position even.
What is your finding on this? (Hope it all makes sense)
I think the results about a site comes easily in yahoo these days..
I think the results about a site comes easily in yahoo these days..
I had no idea that technorati was so much "fresher". Ten in 10 minutes? That's surprising.
I knew that keywords in the titles was supreme. It's nice to hear confirmation of that.
I'm surprised that rss subscribers doesn't really make a difference.
Thanks for the VERY useful info.
I had no idea that technorati was so much "fresher". Ten in 10 minutes? That's surprising.
I knew that keywords in the titles was supreme. It's nice to hear confirmation of that.
I'm surprised that rss subscribers doesn't really make a difference.
Thanks for the VERY useful info.