Google
Add Your Site

Yahoo
Add Your Site

Bing
Add Your Site

Astalavista
Add Your Site

Cuil
Add Your Site

All The Web
Add Your Site

Search Engine
Add Your Site

Websquash
Add Your Site

WhatUseek
Add Your Site

Scrubtheweb
Add Your Site

Jayde
Add Your Site

Infotiger
Add Your Site

Surfsafely
Add Your Site

Hotbot
Add Your Site

Swoogle
Add Your Site

Vmgo
Add Your Site

Omgili
Add Your Site

Guruji
Add Your Site

Big Clique
addurl

Acoon
addurl

Alexa
addurl

Aesop
addurl

Abacho
addurl

Cipinet
addurl

Amfibi
addurl

Avui us presentem un nou cercador biomèdic, Quertle, bàsicament centrat en el contingut de la base de dades PubMed, però que aporta unes característiques que creiem que el fan molt interessant.  bé, ja fa uns mesos que es va llençar però nosaltres l’hem descobert avui. Com diuen els creadors del producte: “Find meaningful results in context, not just long lists of documents”.

D’entrada, està patrocinat per empreses del sector que sens dubte han permès un desenvolupament del motor de cerca però, és clar, a canvi d’incloure publicitat en els resultats. El què caldria saber és si en el llistat de resultats hi tenen alguna influència, que creiem que no….

El que a nosaltres ens interessa destacar-vos és: 1) Que la interfície de cerca és senzilla: cerca per paraules clau amb la possibilitat d’afinar usant el que anomenen Power Terms, llistat de termes que es pot ampliar amb els suggeriments dels usuaris; cerca per un o més autors, amb desplegament de l’índex d’autors a mesura que escrivim, i cerca per revistes que ens fa de ‘butlletí de sumaris’ amb abstracts. Els tres camps de cerca es poden simultanejar. I la resposta és molt ràpida. I la cerca es pot refinar aplicant filtres i ampliar cercant els conceptes suggerits (Key Concepts). 2) Que la cerca es pot fer en llenguatge natural i que el cercador dona els resultats ordenats per la rellevància, i agrupats en funció de a) les relacions conceptuals existents entre els termes de la nostra cerca (Relationships), i b) la mera presència als documents d’aquests termes (Keyword results). 3) Que també cerca al text complet, de moment, dels documents inclosos a BioMed Central (Material i Mètodes, però no Bibliografia).

Bé, caldrà posar-lo a prova i veure els resultats que ens dona.

The fact that Google ponders about “updating” its layout is not overly surprising. During the last couple of years the Google’s designers have constantly tried to include new functions such as the wonder-wheel, etc. into the existing layout without altering the existing and well know design fundamentally.

Or as Danny Sullivan on search engine land has put it:

“…Indeed, it has felt a bit confusing with Google lately. When I wrote my Up Close With Google Search Options story in October, after new search option features were introduced, I detailed a number of inconsistencies in how they operate.

I haven’t yet finished another piece about a growing gripe I have, inconsistency in how Google enhances search listings with sitelinks. I never know where to expect them now. They can appear in in any position, within snippets, on a single line and in even more ways. It’s been making my head hurt.”

However the issue that interests me is the display/labelling of the ads and they seem to have stayed pretty much the same. The only difference I could spot was that the yellow bar behind the Top-Ads seems to be a tiny bit brighter than before.

To try out the new layout yourself please follow the instructions >>here<<.

Images are an important component of your blog post because they add interest, often reinforcing your written message.  They’re also a way to attract the search engines to your site.

When you upload a photo to your blog, most blog systems will give you the option of adding an alternative title. Often the existing title, if you’re importing a photo you’ve found on Flickr for example, is just a string of numbers.

I’ve tended to skip over this step, but won’t anymore, after hearing Ross Dunn’s SEO presentation to our Social Media Club last night.

The problem according to Ross is that a string of numbers is not search engine friendly.

You’re better off to use a more descriptive title such as:

• image of man reading newspaper, or
• picture of person at computer.

There’s a much greater chance that this will get picked up by sites such as Google.  And in addition to the SEO benefits of a descriptive title,  visitors to your site who have images turned off will appreciate it, as will those who use assistive technology to surf the net.

Use a title that’s meaningful, and don’t stuff it with keywords.

With your images appropriately titled, people searching for specific images may end up coming to your site. If it’s inviting and your popular posts are easy to find, there’s a good chance these passersby may stay and look around.

Good luck, and I hope this gets your blog some additional traction.

Photo credit: pedrosimoes7

Search Engine Bot Simulator

Search Engine robot adalah aplikasi perangkat lunak yang dirancang untuk mengunjungi website untuk mengindeks konten mereka. Namun, mereka berbeda dari pengunjung manusia dan mungkin bahwa beberapa halaman Anda tidak akan ditemukan.

SEO Tool ini akan menunjukkan link yang bot mesin pencari akan menemukan pada halaman Anda.

Periksa bagaimana halaman Web Anda mencari mesin pencari bot

]]> http://technologizer.com/2009/11/25/try-a-secret-new-google/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:22:32 +0000 Harry McCracken http://technologizer.com/2009/11/25/try-a-secret-new-google/

Google guru Philipp Lenssen has a cool tip on his Google Blogoscoped site: He shows how to turn on an experimental version of Google by pasting a URL into your browser. It’s got a number of minor visual tweaks, including a much cleaner version of the Google logo (it even skips the TM sign).

But for me, the real treat of the new version is the fact that it turns the Google Search Options left-hand filters on as a standard part of the default search-results view. I’ve been hooked on them since they showed up last May, especially for restricting my results to a specific time frame. And as far as I can tell, there hasn’t even been a way to tell Google that you’d like to leave the Search Results panel open permanently–it’s required a click every time I’ve wanted to use it.

Google’s instinctive desire to keep its pages from getting cluttered up is one of the company’s most admirable traits. But I hope it decides that the Search Results are worth the real estate they occupy–and that this new design becomes the default view real soon now.

Bing and online newspapers: Web-wide war | The Economist.

EVEN technology pundits can sometimes be right. Jason Calacanis, an entrepreneur and noted agent provocateur, recently argued that there is a simple solution to the woes of both Microsoft and big media companies.

I give credit to Mark Cuban, from May of 2008: Beating Google ?

But what about the Google Index, all the websites that are indexed by Google ? What is it worth to be in the Google Index ? What would you, as a website owner require in order to remove your site from the Google Index and no longer be available when someone does a google search ?

It should just be a matter of dollars and cents and sense, shouldn’t it ?

How many websites would have to recuse themselves from the Google Index before Google Search was negatively impacted ?

And before that, John Fine of Businessweek from January 2006:

What if 2006 is the year big media players take aim at Google’s (GOOG ) kneecaps? No, not with more lawsuits; the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers — on behalf, in part, of BusinessWeek’s parent company, The McGraw-Hill Companies (MHP ) — and Agence France-Presse have already sued the search behemoth. Rather, picture this: Walt Disney (DIS ), News Corp. (NWS ), NBC Universal, and The New York Times (NYT ), in an odd tableau of unity, join together and say: “We are the founding members of the Content Consortium. Next month we launch our free, searchable Web site, which no outside search engines can access.” (A simple bit of code is all it takes to bar all or some major search engines from accessing a site.) “From now on we’ll make our stuff available and sell ads around it and the searches for it, but only on our terms. Who else wants to join us? Membership’s free.”

I guess just like some startups, these ideas were just too early for their times.

Related posts:

Google vs. Old Media

Mark Cuban Likes My Idea

Looks as if Google does listen to its users! It has finally come up with something really useful. The Google Dashboard. Many of you may have already noticed it but for those who havent, the Google Dashboard is a collection of all the info collected by Google and contains all your user account info in various Google affiliated sites etc. So for all you privacy frreaks (erm that includes me as well) this is really good news! Although I doubt if Google is releasing “every” bit of info collected from us. But hey, something’s better nothing!

To check what info Google has collected about you, log in to Google Dashboard.

Image: Yaron Jeroen van Oostrom / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

It’s going to take a while for this blog to get picked up by search engines, so in meantime, I’m just documenting this for myself.

I haven’t been able to do too much yet. Been busy with a newborn and a full-time job.

Again, I must mention I hate the cluttered layout of the homepage. I’m going to need to take a whole day just to figure out all the features.

I ended up signing up for the Mailbox-Cashbox program. Even though I hate junk mail, I figure each piece is like a little check – so bring it on! I took a 30 question survey to determine my interests. Now I have to wait 30-90 days for the first offer from Peoplestring to verify my address. Then I’ll begin receiving possible 5+ pieces of mail a day with codes to plug in on the website. I made sure I am eligible to receive email offers. Just for taking the survey, I earned $1.50.

I noticed that I’m beginning to earn “People Points.” I’m at around 100 now. After searching the FAQs, I found out these are points you earn for being active on the site. The more you login, the more you earn. That’s way you’ll see people suggest you set it to your homepage.

I’m not sure, but the number of People Points you earn determines the percentage of the ad revenue you receive. I’ll need to do more investigating.

Unfortunately, I found out you can’t post MLM type ads on Craigslist or a number of other free classified sites. While I don’t think this is a typical MLM scheme as there is no selling involved, I can understand why these sites wouldn’t want to be clogged with recruitment ads.
I did find one classifieds site that would like you post under the “Business Opportunities” section. I decided I would start posting in the largest cities first. I started with Georgia.

I noticed there is quite a bit of competition out there. Even some other Peoplestring recruiters on these sites. I had to think about how I would differentiate myself. I thought I would do more the explain how the process works, i.e. by sharing in the profits. This would hopefully show that this wasn’t a scam, whereas some other MLM schemes really don’t tell you anything about how the system works until you send them some money. In the future, when I’ve made more money, I’ll also link to this blog. I added the ubiquitous “WORK FROM HOME” and “EASY MONEY” in the title, which may work for or against me (but hey, it’s true), and a line about advertisers paying you.

Then it was cut and paste, cut and paste. Man this can get tedious… After posting just 3 ads the website stopped my by saying I wasn’t allowed to post the exact same ad more than 3 times in the same city within 7 days. Even though, it wasn’t the same city, I guess they meant, the same vicinity???

Anyway, after that I stopped for the day. I’ll cut and paste more later in the week.

Finally, I still haven’t accepted those 2 friend requests I received. I really can’t see myself using this the way I do Facebook. Right now most of my friends are there. I don’t want to have to duplicate all my status updates anyway.

TOTAL PEOPLESTRING EARNINGS TO DATE: $1.53

Search Engines divided by Countries

http://www.philb.com/countryse.htm

Use Bing, spend extra money.

Remember Joost? It’s been sold.

More on “the Google phone.”

Vudu movie service gets Wikipedia.

It’s war: Amazon vs. Wal-Mart.

More publishers talk Google withdrawal.

Google explains offensive image result.

Google and Tivo strike deal.

HP’s new iPAQ world phone.

________________________

Like 5Words? Subscribe via RSS.

Google Blogs Alert for: “4R x T”

Google Web Alert for: “4R x T”

According to WebVisible, the current break down of search share is:

Google: 60.4 %

Yahoo 26.2%

Bing 10.5%

Ask 2.4%

Continuing from the WebVisible report:

“Small Businesses Increase Spend by 91 Percent Generally, small businesses are buying more keywords and dramatically increasing their paid search budgets when compared to last year, according to WebVisible. First off, the average small business purchased 55 keyword phrases in Q3, which is up 30 percent from Q3 2008’s median number of 43. That statistic represents the high-water mark for the four quarters that WebVisible has been tracking small businesses keyword buys. Meanwhile, businesses dedicated an average of $1,658 to search ads, 91 percent more than Q3 2008. And business-to-consumer professional services appear to be the busiest in terms of collecting local sales leads via SEM. Attorneys and dentists made up the top two advertiser categories, with 7.7 percent and 5 percent of total small advertisers, respectively. Each of the two categories invested far more than average, spending $2,560 and $2,005 respectively in Q3. Air conditioning services and physicians/surgeons were the only other categories that accounted for more than 2 percent of search advertisers. Overall, the research suggests that the small business search advertisers are a varied bunch. The top 20 categories accounted for only 36 percent of total dollars spent. Thirty-two percent of search clicks resulted in a “lead conversion,” meaning the viewer either clicked through to a landing page on the advertiser’s Web site, printed a landing page, watched a video, printed out directions, entered an e-mail address, inquired via e-mail, or completed an online form. Clicks to the Web site were far and away the biggest lead conversion type, coming in almost twice as high as the next three categories: printed landing pages, submitted e-mail inquiries, and printed driving directions. For small businesses utilizing a call tracking number, 4.5 percent of the clicks resulted in a call, a 3.6 percent lift from 2008. No material differences occurred among advertisers in terms of CTR or proportion of lead conversions. However, WebVisible said that cost-per-clicks and keyword counts tended to increase with rising spend levels.”

Quite a shift!  From a merchant’s perpsective this is a double edged sword. When Google had 75-80% of the marketshare, an arguement could be made to neglect MSN and Yahoo and focus on having the best possible Google ppc campaign. Now that is no longer true. That may put a lot of strain on merchant’s paid search team to manage additional campaigns.

But, with the growing market share of Bing and to a lesser extent Yahoo, merchants who can act quickly and more nimbly then larger orginizations may be able to take advantage and grab a disproportionate share of these other engines at reduced costs.

In the cult-classic b-movie “Cool as Ice” (starring, you guessed it, Vanilla Ice), the protagonist admonishes a love interest to “drop that zero and get with the hero!”

While most advertisers can’t muster the same sort of panache that Vanilla Ice had back in the early ’90s, there is no denying the fact that advertisers like to boost the strength of their brand by attacking the credibility of their competitors.

Keyword advertising is an exciting platform where can advertisters turn the internet searches into sales opportunities.  And, from a trademark perspective, it’s kind of like the Wild West, with litigation cropping up left and right and courts wrestling with issues such as “trademark use” that become elusive in this new context.

Eric Goldman has posted recently on Morningware, Inc. v. Hearthware Home Products, Inc., 2009 WL 3878251 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 16, 2009).  In that case, the trademark owner sued the advertiser for purchasing its trademark as a keyword and running an ad with the following copy: “The Real NuWave ® Oven Pro Why Buy an Imitation? 90 Day Gty.”

Interestingly, the ad’s copy did not specifically reference the trademark owner’s mark.  And, as Goldman notes, the trademark owner was able to survive the advertiser’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.

So what’s the takeaway for advertisers interested in purchasing keywords?  Goldman sums it up nicely:

“Meanwhile, advertisers buying competitive keyword advertising should take note of the risks of implicitly calling your competitor an “imitation” without explaining the relative product positioning–which isn’t possible due to the limited character count of a Google AdWords ad. Because the character limits prevent fully clarifying disclosures, advertisers should consider striking the phrase “why buy an imitation?” from their keyword advertising copy toolkit.”

A regular habit I have is to blog My Ten Favorite Tweets for each week. These are my own tweets, and they mostly contain links to interesting things during the past seven days. One thing I’ve always liked is that I can give “link credit” to the sites that I include in these weekly posts. This blog has a pretty respectable Google pagerank, so it can help other sites posting good content.

But alas, I have come to learn something. Twitter inserts the “nofollow” attribute in any links included in tweets. What is a “nofollow”? From Wikipedia:

An HTML attribute value used to instruct some search engines that a hyperlink should not influence the link target’s ranking in the search engine’s index.

When you paste a tweet from Twitter to your blog, the links include the “nofollow” attribute inserted by Twitter.  See below:

On FriendFeed, I asked some SEO-knowledgeable folks about this “nofollow” attribute I’ve been pasting in to my blog posts. AJ Kohn and Jimminy confirmed that because that “nofollow” is in there, the search engines aren’t giving link credit.

So the great content doesn’t get the credit in search engines it deserves. Now I need to go back and remove those pesky “nofollow” attributes.

Keep this mind if you paste tweets into your blog posts.