Uh... hello? Google is the premier SEARCH engine on the planet (at least so far). How difficult do you think it would be to submit a search query to DMOZ and deliver the results on a Google stylized page?
I do not know how the dumps work, but if I'm not mistaken DMOZ updates it's search and it's directory at different times. This means that you can be listed in the directory but not found in the search. I think it would be funny if Google was keeping up to date on the search aspect of the dumps but neglecting the actual directory all this time... I'm not saying this is what's happening, just saying I'd think it was funny if it was the case. Q
duh? The link is to the Google Directory category, not the DMOZ category. You still have not explained where they are getting the Google Directory category from for sites recently listed in DMOZ other than the downloaded rdf dump. I guess it does not suit your agenda to acknowledge that as a possibility.
The fact is that to update the search and not the actual directory makes no sense whatsoever. Given that, my conclusion is it's not happening. They are updating neither.
Well, we are either correct, or the big G is doing a search on site:dmoz.org/cat/etc and delivering the answers. Either way, I think it looks bad on Google's part for doing a half-assed job of things. I removed things & added things from the category I was accepted for. These changes are reflected in the Google Directory's search, but not the directory itself. You are correct in that it makes little sense, but it is happening. Q
I'm not disputing the results. I'm disputing the mechanism. And the conclusion that Google is updating the search via the DMOZ dump biut NOT the directory. See above. If it makes no sense whatsoever, it's not happening.
I generally don't make a lot of sense but I'm really here... Find something in DMOZ not listed in google, and then do a search in google. it you want to see "no sense whatsoever" that's how to do it. Now find something that's been removed from DMOZ but still in the google directory... If they are using the SITE parameter in their search to pull from DMOZ that's a swell and nifty way to keep things up to date, but it certainly looks screwed up when you are sitting there looking at something in the google directory and then you can't find it in google's directory search. So whatever the mechanism is they are using, its not consistent with what they have listed...and there is no denying that.
I get the feeling they are neglecting the directory 'clone' (actually it's now more like a twin) on purpose, maybe planning to remove it completely later on. For a big company with enough personell it makes no sense indeed not to upgrade such a simple script/database on a regular basis. I first thought it was because of the server crash at DMOZ so they wanted to be sure the recovered database is cleaned etc. But this is taking way longer than it should if they wanted to keep it up to date. I hope I'm wrong, because this odp directory clone helps a lot of people to publish and/or find good quality sites.
They have not updated the Directory categories in over a year, so that has nothing to do with the DMOZ "server crash"
It was always going to be a long time between updates but I mean they could have delayed it because of the crash and data loss... but I believe most of the public data was recovered so atm it shouldn't be a reason to wait.
Google have not updated the categories from DMOZ rdf dump in well over a year or so now. That predates the DMOZ server crash by just under a year, so how could the server crash at DMOZ be a factor?
I am editor at dmoz and it may surprise you but we are still seeing recovering on the database, the recorvery process was very long after the crash (about 6 months and counting) because developers had to build the entire editor panel from scratch. We are now still in the process of accepting sites and removing dead links etc. Knowing that google will wait atleast 3 to 6 months between updates they may have been counting since the editor panel was back up and editors were cleaning up so if that is the case I expect it to be updated very soon or in the next two months, but like I said it's a long time to wait between updates but it could be just to be sure they can get a good rdf dump or it could be that DMOZ told them to wait untill the recovery is 100%. Of course I don't know for sure.
Minimal and largely historical... I believe Google owns a small piece of AOL. AOL owns DMOZ, because it was previously owned by Netscape and AOL bought Netscape. I'm not convinced that even AOL cares about DMOZ, let alone Google.
As near as I can tell, the last time Google updated the listings in their version of the directory was late January/early February 2006. Listings added in January and removed mid Feb. are still present there. As it's been 14 months and counting since the last time Google updated the actual directory content, I seriously doubt we'll see one again.
I agree. It's Google's orphaned project. I don't think they have any interest in it any more. They have too many other projects on the go that will provide them with far greater benefit.
Good point. Just assumed that Time Warner would own G. It is the sort of thing they do. Who is the major stockholder anyway? Is it Heiniken Family?