Google has a vested interest in providing their customers with the fastest search and browsing experience possible. That’s why, for years, they’ve been making recommendations for how Webmasters can make their sites as small as possible, in terms of bandwidth requirements.
But, now there’s a better way – and by better, I mean lazier. Google’s Page Speed Service allows your users faster access to your site. You point your site’s DNS entry to Google, and they will actually rewrite your pages for user access on their own servers. Google claims that by rewriting your pages based on speed performance best practices will improve user access speeds by 25 to 60 percent.
But, I’m not sure how many people will trust Google with this process.
If you have a Google account, you may have experienced some design tweaks lately while utilizing the Google search engine.
Now, Google isn’t coming outright and saying it, but you have to assume that the timing of this redesign means that it’s meant for Google Plus integration. Especially since the first button on the new black header is the Google + link, for those who have the account.
In fact, at the same time, YouTube is playing around with a redesign they’ve called Cosmic Panda. It’s a re-design too, but perhaps it’s meant to better integrate with Google Plus, which is definitely designed specifically for sharing YouTube videos?
But, Google claims that the focus of the re-design is really on device-agnosticism. That your Google experience will be seamless no matter if you’re using it on your desktop, laptop, tablet or phone.
It’s another case of personalization vs. privacy. So, which side do you support? And by that, of course I mean, do you want Google search and Facebook feeds to use the information they have on you to provide you with “filtered” content?
In their opinion, they’re making your user experience better. Google knows the kind of sites you use for research. They know you prefer Wikipedia results to content farm sites. Facebook knows you interact with certain friend’s posts more than others. So, what if they just went ahead and automatically adjusted your results based on your usage?
Personally, I love that they do this. Others feel differently. They feel like this “filtering” isn’t their choice. And their solution is to provide users with control options to determine what kind of “filtering” they prefer.
But, long-tail keywords, by definition, have long-tails. They’re long, and the question is, will mobile users have/take the time to refine their search queries with longer entries?
Well, voice search may take care of the mobile search problem for us. Since most smart phones have voice command integration, the ease of speaking your search query may continue to incentivize long-tail strategies. So, we can still search for those hidden gems to rank high for.
Google is “mildly” transparent about letting the world understand the ranking signals they use to prioritize content in their search engine results. But besides rough guidelines, it has always been a bit of an evolving guessing game to understand exactly what factors you should be prioritizing your time on. But Rand Fishkin and SEOmoz polled SEO experts and used data from more than 10,000 Google search results in order to try and figure out how Google ranks their ranking signals.
While their findings are exhaustive, here are the highlights and trends I found most fascinating.
Page-level linking is still more important than domain-level linking. For instance, if you’re looking to increase your search engine ranking for a specific page on your site, getting backlinks solely to your page isn’t your best move. But in general, the findings show that the power of links overall has declined.
In general, more content (longer documents) tend to rank better. But, short titles and URLs are still the best for URL, along with prioritizing keywords early within them.
Search engine optimizers everywhere are feverishly working to understand exactly how Google +1 can benefit their site listings in search results. So, let’s give a run down.
Google +1 is a Facebook “like” equivalent. Similarly to how Bing search results incorporate Facebook “likes”, Google search results incorporate +1′s. If your friends, family or the aggregate Internet community has +1′d a page, you will see it in your search results, when signed in to Google. The idea is to screen Google’s search results before diving in. If a friend or the aggregate community have socially approved a site, there’s a tacit approval of the content that follows.
Google PPC ads will also incorporate +1 social approval when possible. Now, while Google Buzz, Google’s last attempt at social relevancy, was deemed a failure – due to non-use, there’s a legitimate fear that Google +1 may have the same fate. But, bottom line, this is a new ranking signal. Odds are that Google will prioritize it in order to promote it. Google is still 80% of the search market. Yeah, I’m going to start incorporating it. And it’s important to note that the Google +1 button is customizable for the technical Web programmers among us.
Does anyone else see the irony that Google has destroyed the concept of “the middle man” while simultaneously becoming the world’s biggest?
I now go to Google every time I want to avoid the middle man…and they’re continuing that evolution of helpfulness with Google Advisor.
For example, you no longer have to fend for yourself searching online for mortgage quotes. You don’t even have to use Google’s search engine itself. Now, you can use Google Advisor to help you make financial decisions, regarding mortgages, credit cards, CDs, checking and savings accounts, and more. Google is making it even easier to find the real information you’re looking for.
What happened to Yahoo? Do you remember when it used to be THE search engine. THE Internet company to be afraid of, to be in awe of? Years later, that same company ended up in a search deal with Microsoft, which has definitely helped Bing, but it doesn’t look like it’s helped Yahoo.
So that begs the question, what delusions of grandeur does Yahoo have within them? And also, what’s their realistic play to maintain their role as a player in the industry? Because, Yahoo’s talent pool is running dry. Their reach is much much smaller than its ever been. The perfect size to focus on their core strengths, if they can decide what those might be.
Perhaps they need a new and visionary leader that can breathe life into their business model? Although, I think Steve Jobs is busy.
It’s not just the people selling jelly beans with Kate Middleton’s supposed image in them that are profiting from this Royal Wedding. Smart web sites around the world understand the keyword popularity of the Royal Wedding. In fact, “royal wedding” has become the fifth most popular wedding keyword in the U.S. And over the past two months, as the royal nuptials draw nearer, clicks from variations of “Prince Williams”, “Kate Middleton” and “Royal Wedding have been growing week-to-week.
So, it stands to reason that if you optimize a page on your site for this royal occasion, you’ll definitely get some organic traffic sent your well. But perhaps the only way for you to truly capitalize on this traffic financially would be for you to sell custom-made Royal wind chimes or some other form of crazy. Good luck with that.
Google, the untouchable, is starting to look slightly fallible. The Bing-Yahoo allegiance has taken six straight shots at Google, and there has been some bleeding. For six straight months, Google’s search market share has been dropping – from 72.15% in September down to 64.42% as of today.
That’s not insignificant. That’s a turn from market dominator into mere market leader.
At the same time, Bing-Yahoo now exceeds 30%. More than that, 80% of these web searches ended up being directed to a Website, as opposed to merely 66% of Google searches. If Bing-Yahoo are growing, not just because of the advertising blitzes, but because they’re getting better, Google needs to be paying attention, and possibly worrying.
