• http://www.seo-theory.com/wordpress/ Michael Martinez

    Although Google is really only playing catchup to AOL and at least one other competitor, this is a major step forward.

    However, it’s not really Google 2.0, but rather Google 3.0. Bigdaddy counts as a 2.0 because they radically altered the infrastructure and crawling methodologies. Also, Bigdaddy introduced Supplemental Hell.

  • http://www.luckylester.com Lucky Lester

    The top 3 positions just got that much more difficult to obtain and just forced people to use pay per click more than ever. Talk about cash grabs!

    I think now smart SEM people like myself will optimize video, images, books and such so that we can dominate page 1 for the same products and or relevant information for the same sites.

    In the past I have been happy with 40% of page 1 for my search terms… now I am going to try for 100% – thanks Universal Search.

  • http://seoish.com feedthebot

    Wow, Impressive coverage Danny. There is such a thing as sleep you know. I was going to write about something else today, but now I am stuck writing about Google on SEOish :)

  • http://www.empuriabravaonline.com Mike Empuria

    I think that this is excellent news. Anything that makes search more relevant for the “real users” (e.g. my mum and dad) has to be applauded and that should make our job as SEMs more relevant. Let’s get rid of the rubbish in SERPS and start concentrating on proper results!

    I’m going back to my vino now.

  • gary price

    Hey Danny,
    Great coverage.

    Over on ResourceShelf I’ve posted some history (very brief) of federated/metasearch and a look at how several of the web search companies have used it (or its concepts) for many years. We also look at how it’s used in the library world.
    http://www.resourceshelf.com/2007/05/16/lets-talk-federated-or-metasearch/

  • Illah

    I just noticed these changes today while surfing around, great writeup. Didn’t realize they were so extensive!

    P.S. There’s no love for search news on Digg :-)

  • http://www.repeaterstore.com/news/ sinak

    Great coverage. I had noticed some of the new design, but not the new links bar until I read the article. I think it looks great, and the “Invisible Tabs” notion is definitely one that customers will find useful (as long as it works correctly).

  • http://www.metapilot.com METAPILOT

    Whats with all this extra content getting between my client’s results and the #2 position? (The Wiki owns #1) It seems that search engine optimization may come to mean positioning a site such that it can be reached in as few clicks as possible from the interface where you initiated your search–instead of the good ol’ “I’m gunning for page one” goal we’re all so used to.

  • http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-blog/index.html Jennifer Apple

    Thanks for the great article. I’m one who is routinely “overwhelmed by increasing amounts of information” so your explanations are just what I’m looking for.

  • http://www.michael-martinez.com/ Michael Martinez

    Calling it “Google 2.0″ is definitely going to cause confusion as Google themselves called the SearchMash site “Google 2.0″.

    http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2006/11/google-20-gets-update.html

    I strongly recommend you rename your post even though many people have already linked to it.

    Other than that, I agree it’s a very thorough writeup and I think you’ve covered the details nicely.

  • Miriam321

    I dunno about everyone else, but without an option to limit search results to ‘web page only’ (if I so desire), I will feel like I am losing control of my search, rather than gaining control. Thanks, Danny for pointing out this issue. Interested to hear what others have to say about this.

  • http://twylitehope.wordpress.com TwyliteHope

    Thanks for the article. Your breakdown of this helps a newbie like me better understand exactly what changes are taking place. I am a very visual person, and the images you used clearly illuminate what I should be seeing soon and why.

    Again, thanks!

  • http://wwww.seopractices.com seo beginners

    I have seen Google displaying those tabs on the top left corner of my screen during the past 2 weeks, they are probably doing test to see which one’s get more clicked on. I personally liked them as I got to used them more.

  • http://www.sparkmediasolutions.com/ David Spark

    You might be interested in this very quick analysis I did across multiple image and video search engines.

    http://www.sparkminute.com/?p=133
    Compared five image search engines and six video search engines. An interesting initial look at the competitive landscape.

  • http://www.eurorunner.com/ alessandroventuri

    Will this lead to banner/video adwords in SERPs ?

  • katy

    I noticed that the comment was made that the results only take one spot up in the organic search. Actually, The SEMZone reported earlier this week that local search results with the map and 3 local businesses take up 3 SPACES in local search vs. 1, leaving 7 organic postions for the average user.
    http://www.thesemzone.com/2007_05_16_thesemzone_archive.html
    Check it out:
    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-47,GGLJ:en&q=raleigh+maids

  • katy

    I noticed that you said that the new Local results will only take up one spot up in the organic search. Actually, The SEMZone reported earlier this week that within local search results, the map and 3 local businesses take up 3 SPACES in local search vs. 1, leaving 7 organic postions for the average user.
    http://www.thesemzone.com/2007_05_16_thesemzone_archive.html
    Check it out:
    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-47,GGLJ:en&q=raleigh+maids

  • http://searchengineland.com Danny Sullivan

    Thanks, Katy — I clarified now that in some cases, local results take up three spots. In other cases, they take up one. There’s more info on this from Google now in the story.

  • katy

    Thanks, sorry about the double post. Feel free to delete one if you like.
    K

  • http://www.ineedhits.com/local-search/local-search-listing.aspx Search Engine Marketing

    Great coverage of Google’s Universal Search Danny. Universal search is great for many of our small business clients – especially with the integration of local.

    I appreciate many readers have concerns with the space local listings take up on the web results page, but it’s important to remember this only happens on “locally targeted” searches.

    Another great feature is the addition of local options on the organic listings (drop down map and enhanced info). As the web results in Google seem to be getting less relevant on many searches, it’s good to see Google addressing the relevance of local searches.

  • http://www.vezoom.com joshmatthews

    Great coverage Danny and extremely thought provoking. I have been playing with a new competitor on the video search side covered by another blog post http://pravdam.wordpress.com/ on a purely global video search engine called VeZoom. It follows your though process in making things more personal from a global perspective.

    Here is what Kfir Pravda said on his blog:
    http://pravdam.wordpress.com/2007/06/04/vezoom-meta-aggregator-with-a-twist/

    I tried this tool and was extremely impressed. It will be interesting to see how it evolves. Has anyone else tried it? Email me with your thoughts.

  • thuhouse

    Danny,
    On your suggestion for new york hotels query google should just switch to google local view, don’t you think for that query at least some users are better off reaching to say hotels.com through google rather than direct listing of hotel addresses and phone..i am just taking example hotels.com ..i don’t think it is perfect but hope i convey the point.. when did someone started calling hotels one by one and booking them ..There are many folks working on very innovative solutions in local domain above and beyond the yellow page like listing of google local and that’s true for almost all the areas google universal wants to combine.. ..so i think it is good idea for google to not go too far
    and be still a gateway to websites as a primary offering and treat their own allied offerings as just another web site..If Google is really any different company (and want to stay on top for long term) then they should not leave what made them great.. why don’t they have standards so that the general websites can expose data helpful to users in qualifying results up front.. google local or blog search or news search should all compete with other websites providing similar offerings and not get any special treatment..btw, i am sure it won’t happen..google hijacking traffic to squeeze dollars in short term is inevitable

  • http://www.draganvaragic.com/blog/ Dragan Varagic

    It is interesting to see the future SEO activities regarding the optimization on mentioned vertical searches. These activities are mixed with appropriate online PR activities (like a news placements, choosing different media format and places strategies, etc.).

    I think that there will be the problems to manage the increased list of daily tasks for SEO people, due to new SEO activities.

  • http://www.lukehumble.com Luke Humble

    Surely, if Google are now listing all the different search types on one page then there is the possibility that a company could take up the entire first page with the images/videos/blog/map/news results etc?!

  • Dheeraj Singh

    I have developed a site by the name of infonary that searches the latest news and videos from thes sites like google, yahoo, bing, ask, youtube twitter etc on the same page. Just wanted a feedback on the concept