Forum Affiliates Network Visit our post exchange directory
July 30, 2010, 10:13:11 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
Welcome on the FAN forum!
Sign up and ask questions and get help about running forums and anything related to it!

 
Menu
  Global menu
     Home
     Forum
     PE directory
     Downloads
     Newsletters
  
  Article Categories
     Starting a forum
     Managing a forum
     Advertising
  
  About FAN
     Mission statement
     Link to us
     Contact
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2010, 10:13:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Tags:
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: yahoo vs msn vs google  (Read 285 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
suleka
Jr. Member
**



Reputation: 0
Offline Offline

Admin experience:
Beginner

Posts: 3


« on: March 10, 2010, 06:21:04 AM »

Yahoo!

* been in the search game for many years.
* is better than MSN but nowhere near as good as Google at determining if a link is a natural citation or not.
* has a ton of internal content and a paid inclusion program. both of which give them incentive to bias search results toward commercial results
* things like cheesy off topic reciprocal links still work great in Yahoo!

MSN Search

* new to the search game
* is bad at determining if a link is natural or artificial in nature
* due to sucking at link analysis they place too much weight on the page content
* their poor relevancy algorithms cause a heavy bias toward commercial results
* likes bursty recent links
* new sites that are generally untrusted in other systems can rank quickly in MSN Search
* things like cheesy off topic reciprocal links still work great in MSN Search

Google

* has been in the search game a long time, and saw the web graph when it is much cleaner than the current web graph
* is much better than the other engines at determining if a link is a true editorial citation or an artificial link
* looks for natural link growth over time
* heavily biases search results toward informational resources
* trusts old sites way too much
* a page on a site or subdomain of a site with significant age or link related trust can rank much better than it should, even with no external citations
* they have aggressive duplicate content filters that filter out many pages with similar content
* if a page is obviously focused on a term they may filter the document out for that term. on page variation and link anchor text variation are important. a page with a single reference or a few references of a modifier will frequently outrank pages that are heavily focused on a search phrase containing that modifier
* crawl depth determined not only by link quantity, but also link quality. Excessive low quality links may make your site less likely to be crawled deep or even included in the index.
* things like cheesy off topic reciprocal links are generally ineffective in Google when you consider the associated opportunity cost
Logged

Sponsored links

Stop seeing these ads by signing up for a free account!
onisha
Jr. Member
**



Reputation: 0
Offline Offline

Admin experience:
Beginner

Posts: 1


« Reply #1 on: March 25, 2010, 08:07:11 AM »

Good job on pointing out descriptions of this major search engines. They are all both actually good but Google leads because of the important services and applications they've done all are very trendy, user-friendly please fast and easy to use.
Logged

shenon
Newcomer
**

Reputation: 0
Offline Offline

Admin experience:
Beginner

Posts: 42


« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2010, 03:38:52 PM »

Hi,

It's quite informative post. However, MSN search would be count as a Bing.
Logged

Tags:
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

SEO and Advertising Techniques

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Seo4Smf v0.2 © Webmaster's Talks

TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.135 seconds with 29 queries.