1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

66.102.7.104 Vs 66.102.9.104

Discussion in 'Google' started by Red, Nov 5, 2005.

  1. heapseo

    heapseo Peon

    Messages:
    636
    Likes Received:
    31
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #21
    I would love it to be .7, from a completely bias point of view of course :D
    SEMrush
     
    heapseo, Nov 6, 2005 IP
    SEMrush
  2. explorer

    explorer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    40
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    #22
    On the keywords I monitor the results are much more relevant from the 7 datacenter than the 9.

    From what I can see, 9 values older websites more than it values relevance.
     
    explorer, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  3. Eazygoin

    Eazygoin Peon

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #23
    GoogleGuy has updated since then, on WebMasterWorld, saying 7.104 will be taking data from 9.104 aswell as its own, and is phase 2 of Jagger 3.
     
    Eazygoin, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  4. tzimisce

    tzimisce Guest

    Messages:
    437
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #24
    I love how on the three part update, each part has seperate phases. I cant wait to see each phases sub-phase.
     
    tzimisce, Nov 6, 2005 IP
    Gede likes this.
  5. Eazygoin

    Eazygoin Peon

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #25
    Google has to bring together all the information that it has acquired in J1 and J2, and add it into J3 in stages, to ensure that everything runs smoothly. J3 has to put into effect the previous stages, such as alogarithm, supplementals, omitting spam sites wherever possible. This is a major update, and needs major effort on the part of the Google technicians.
    Some of you who aren't SEO experts, may wish to look at : http://www.google.com/webmasters/seo.html to get an idea of what they expect.
     
    Eazygoin, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  6. TMAC

    TMAC Active Member

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #26
    google deson't like SEO's plain and simple.. everything on that page makes it quite obvious IMO.
     
    TMAC, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  7. Eazygoin

    Eazygoin Peon

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #27
    But they do like certain optimisation attributes, which many webmasters can do themselves.
     
    Eazygoin, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  8. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #28
    they pretty much say don't optimize

    so that way if you do and your site drops then you can't be mad a them

    those guidelines change too
     
    ferret77, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  9. TMAC

    TMAC Active Member

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #29
    SEO is basically marketing. guess you should just build the site, then wait patiently for google to find you.. :D
     
    TMAC, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  10. Matts

    Matts Berserker

    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #30
    Not really, in this Interview with Matt Cutts:

    Matt Cutts says whitehat SEO such as finding what people are searching for and putting those words in the content is ok, but hidden text and keyword stuffing aren't.
     
    Matts, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  11. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #31
    yeah ok you will definitely get top rankings if you just do that

    why don't we all just do that and everything will be great

    let me rephrase that google says don't do any type optimization that actually effects your rankings
     
    ferret77, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  12. TMAC

    TMAC Active Member

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #32
    problem is most SEO's including myself follow proper SEO guidelines... then you get things like this Jagger fiasco, where you have an abundance of sites in the top 10 which are nothing but spam. IMO google needs to cleanup their own house... :)
     
    TMAC, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  13. Matts

    Matts Berserker

    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #33
    I did until this dang jagger update.
     
    Matts, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  14. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #34
    you got top rankings with no links just by writing stuff on web page?

    Unless you are writing a lot of content, like hundreds of pages I can't really see that being effective.

    if you wrote hundreds of pages of unique content, that might work, of course you would still need link populaity to get it indexed

    I like this quote from that interview

     
    ferret77, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  15. Matts

    Matts Berserker

    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    10
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #35
    Yes, I run a store with about 500 products. Lots of cross linking happens nautrally from item to item, category to item, etc. I have about 1,700 pages in all [with quality content], all xlinked to each other. It looks like jagger valued the image links over the text links because the bots followed the way to the shopping cart, and I have lots of pages in google with no text, only the link to an item that redirects to the cart. I've coded robots.txt for those links now so I have my fingers crossed that they'll vanish from google and the bots will follow my directions in the sitemap.xml.gz
     
    Matts, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  16. seo-ireland

    seo-ireland Peon

    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    12
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #36
    .9.104 is looking very good for my main site and it was only established in Sept 2004. I hope it sticks but at this stage I'm prepared for anything.
     
    seo-ireland, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  17. Roze

    Roze Guest

    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    29
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #37
    c'mon .9! The API is showing .9 results I believe, Keyword tracker agrees
     
    Roze, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  18. ferret77

    ferret77 Heretic

    Messages:
    5,276
    Likes Received:
    230
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #38
    .7 is by far the most releavant
     
    ferret77, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  19. LaCabra

    LaCabra Goats R Us

    Messages:
    1,954
    Likes Received:
    241
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #39
    definitely 66.102.7.104 shows the most promise. Look outside of your own keywords and you'll see results seem to be more relevant
     
    LaCabra, Nov 6, 2005 IP
  20. Gede

    Gede Peon

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #40
    Things are getting better...

    But even in these "new" results I still have Infoseek SERPS from search. com :confused: listed above or around me where my site appears...

    I ask you, SERPS from search. com in the google results :eek:
     
    Gede, Nov 6, 2005 IP