The real jagger 3 thread!

Matt has just said on his blog " there will still be some settling on canonical name fixes. My hunch is that sometime next week I’ll put out a call for people who believe that they have canonical name issues after that. I wouldn’t mind spending some time in the future collecting indexing reports, looking for bugs, etc. and trying to making sure that we get them into good shape"

 

What are "canonical name issues"?

 

It appears its all this stuff about using www in front of the URL, or not

 

re: 66.102.9.104

I am confused. Cutts says that this is where you can see Jagger3 but it seems that its no different than what I got after Jagger1. But now I see great results at a different datacenter, 66.102.7.104 which only started appearing a couple of days ago and Cutts says this is jagger1 only.

Now, I don't know what to expect. If 9.104 is Jagger3, I am screwed. Anyone else have better results at 7.104?

 

I am also seeing good results on 66.102.7.104, not so good on 66.102.9.104

I really hope my results from .7.104 are the real ones...

-Erik

 

Remember, he also said that Jagger 1, 2, and 3 were independent but interactive updates. Jagger 2 and 3 may or may not affect changes you see for a particular site after Jagger 1.

My sites really weren't affected by Jagger 1, or not noticeably. I did see some effect of Jagger 2. Haven't looked yet to see what's happening the past few days (once a week is better for my health).

 

When I read what Cutts said,

"there are some Jagger1-related changes going on at 66.102.7.104. ", maybe it means that this is a Jagger1 type of change that will eventually be propogated to all servers as well.

I really hope everything irons itself out.

 

I think those are for people who use 301 redirects to consolidate domain.com and www.domain.com

For me, it consolidates all my yahoo store domains:
store.yahoo.com/site
shop.store.yahoo.com/site

into my real domain www.site.com

Last year, yahoo stores got NAILED (not all of them, but lots of em) by having duplicate content with 3 domains listed in google. Yahoo fixed it after there was an uproar.

 

Amen to that. I just watch my revenues from week to week and month to month. Daily fluxes are enough to drive anyone crazy...

 

The 7.104 DC seems to have more consistent SERPs for related terms. By that I mean that 66.102.9.104 gives very different results for only small variations in search terms while the results on 66.102.7.104 are only slightly different for small variations in search terms. It's almost as though 66.102.9.104 has its LSA rules weakened.

It also seems like 66.102.7.104 gives less importance to directories. For my searches Google, Yahoo, business.com and other major dirs are 2 to 5 positions lower on the page.

/*tom*/

 

66.102.9.104 was the first DC to show Jagger 3 results. 66.102.7.104 is the second phase, and the two DC's are being blended together, with canonical and supplementary result changes at the same time.

 

66.102.7.104 looks better than 66.102.9.104 for me.

 

Ditto. I'm seeing huge differences between the 2.

 

Me too !! We're having a vote on it, in another forum, WMW, and its pretty even right now, but I think .7. will prevail

 

66.102.7.104 is showing more results/search than 66.102.9.104 Can this be any indication of direction?

 

here is a quote from another forum

then, I guess you can say so, flyguy

P.S. found the actual GG's post http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/31888-14-10.htm

 

translated says 7.104 are better than 9.104?

 

I am noticing a lot less link dependant results for minor keywords with the update ie: internal pages that we have not built links directly for are ranking, anyone else seeing this?

 

Which results are you looking at? 7.104 and 9.104 show very disparate results in that sense.

If anything, to me, it seems like external links have more impact than internal links for my sites.

 

the highly ranking internal pages that I have are those that have most links to them. I don't see what you see Morgan - at least not with my sites.