• http://www.rankinstyle.com/ Jacques Bouchard

    I’m slow to adopt and slow to give up. I still use WinAmp, because it serves my needs, it’s efficient, and it makes more sense to me to use something that works than to learn a new software simply for a slightly better user experience. I still use Yahoo for much the same reason; it’d be far too time-consuming to migrate to Gmail, and besides, I have an unlimited mailbox. I migrated from FireFox to Chrome because I had to — FireFox is not the browser it once was, and the transition was worth the effort and necessary.

    Similarly, until I can see a poignant improvement in search quality elsewhere (I’ve looked at Bing and was underwhelmed), then I will continue to use what’s functional to me.

    I feel like the general public is similar — they’re elementally unmotivated to leave their comfort zone, they build an emotional investment in brand (Google’s doodles. Think: Coke vs Pepsi), and especially in the case of the older/uninclined, there’s just no time to keep on the cutting edge.

    So is Google broken? Who cares? Until people stop using it, it’s relevant, people are there, and smart marketers will want to be there too.

  • Jim Hodson

    Eric,

    My problem with Google these days is that for every spam site that shows up in the SERPs, there are one or more quality sites and businesses that are being killed by their “attempts” to combat spam. I think Google needs to step back and look at what they’ve done over the past 2 years.

    It is understandable that there is some very small amount of collateral damage that comes with a major algorithm change because it is true that search is very complex. However, as more and more such updates roll out (Pandas, Penguins, Unnaturaly Linking, EMDs, above the fold, etc.) it just seems that the level of collateral damage that is deemed “acceptable” in Googles eyes has risen dramatically. And it seems to get worse with every major update. And more and more of these are due to algorithmic filters being applied for which webmasters have zero recourse… they cannot even submit a Reconsideration Request to get someone at Google to take a look because its not a “manual action”.

    So what are we left with… Amazon, eBay, Wikipedia, universities, VERY large brands… and spammers. Small businesses around the world that have never even thought about SEO (who don’t even know what it means) are having their businesses destroyed by Google’s aggressive campaigns to rid their SERPs of spammers and the resulting filters/penalties. This is especially true for their link related filters and penalties. Both Aaron Wall and Rae Hoffman have written epic posts about this over the last couple of weeks.

    The SERPs were much better, more diverse, much more relevant and more fair to non-brands when Google simply ignored all of those crappy links instead of filtering or penalizing sites for them.
    I have always been a BIG fan of Google, but spending the last two years watching them destroy web sites and businesses more and more which don’t deserve it has honestly made me start to question why I am a fan. If not for their marketshare, I would be recommending to all of my clients to focus on Bing, Yahoo! and any other engine but Google for not only organic traffic, but also paid search.
    But there in lies the conundrum… They’ve got the marketshare, so they honestly don’t seem to care how bad their SERPs get or who they destroy along they way so long as revenues continue to climb at double digit rates year over year.

  • Jim Hodson

    Eric,

    My problem with Google these days is that for every spam site that shows up in the SERPs, there are one or more quality sites and businesses that are being killed by their “attempts” to combat spam. I think Google needs to step back and look at what they’ve done over the past 2 years.

    It is understandable that there is some very small amount of collateral damage that comes with a major algorithm change because it is true that search is very complex. However, as more and more such updates roll out (Pandas, Penguins, Unnaturaly Linking, EMDs, above the fold, etc.) it just seems that the level of collateral damage that is deemed “acceptable” in Googles eyes has risen dramatically. And it seems to get worse with every major update. And more and more of these are due to algorithmic filters being applied for which webmasters have zero recourse… they cannot even submit a Reconsideration Request to get someone at Google to take a look because its not a “manual action”.

    So what are we left with… Amazon, eBay, Wikipedia, universities, VERY large brands… and spammers. Small businesses around the world that have never even thought about SEO (who don’t even know what it means) are having their businesses destroyed by Google’s aggressive campaigns to rid their SERPs of spammers and the resulting filters/penalties. This is especially true for their link related filters and penalties. Both Aaron Wall and Rae Hoffman have written epic posts about this over the last couple of weeks.

    The SERPs were much better, more diverse, much more relevant and more fair to non-brands when Google simply ignored all of those crappy links instead of filtering or penalizing sites for them.
    I have always been a BIG fan of Google, but spending the last two years watching them destroy web sites and businesses more and more which don’t deserve it has honestly made me start to question why I am a fan. If not for their marketshare, I would be recommending to all of my clients to focus on Bing, Yahoo! and any other engine but Google for not only organic traffic, but also paid search.
    But there in lies the conundrum… They’ve got the marketshare, so they honestly don’t seem to care how bad their SERPs get or who they destroy along they way so long as revenues continue to climb at double digit rates year over year.

  • mike

    James,
    its great that you like to use your 8 track player , but most people are not slow to adapt I do agree with your analysis of a somehting better , but by the sounds of it even when there is something better you will still be using the old thing! Win amp …really???

  • victortuszing

    Excellent, I agree 100% with you!

  • victortuszing

    I agree with you. However, it looks Google apparently did not care about any criticism…When you think will begin its decline?

  • tomshark

    Here’s a poll about whether Google knows what is authoritative to humans or not based on a Webmaster World thread:
    http://www.capturecommerce.com/blog/general/google-know-authoritative-human/

  • Joe

    duckduckgo.com the google bubble scares me..is almost a good definition for stupidity..

  • http://www.rankinstyle.com/ Jacques Bouchard

    Nothing about your response signals to me that you’re prepared to engage in a productive conversation.

  • mike

    Kind of like taking a chainsaw to brain surgery would be my description of what Google has done.

  • MIchael de Valois

    “The SERPs were much better, more diverse, much more relevant and more fair to non-brands when Google simply ignored all of those crappy links instead of filtering or penalizing sites for them.”

    100% TRUE!!

  • Ross Smythe

    While I broadly agree with you…but Winamp?Seriously? On Windows 95? ;-)

  • http://www.jacqueslbouchard.com/ Jacques Bouchard

    Ha ha. ;-) In my defense, the program is still alive, kicking, and making headlines.

    http://www.techtimes.com/articles/2695/20140119/its-official-winamp-finds-new-owner-and-new-lease-of-life.htm