On onlinekosten.de someone made a comment about the new Google Toolbar and the Google Page Rank. In this comment the author says that Page Rank is generated by the amount of visits from Google Toolbar users. That would mean that the PR is nothing else than the Alexa TR, i.e. very vague as to realistic importance analysis. Have you ever heard anything similar?
I do not believe this is the case. If you read the page rank paper done by Google founders, you will see concept of pagerank was based on links. Concept of TR is based on clicks on Alexa toolbar. Shannon
Google Page Rank is not based upon the ammont of hits it gets from people with google tool bars. Google PR is based on a sliding scale of 1-9 and where google thinks that you belong. Alexa, on the other hand, is based soley on the amount of visits that the particular site receives from user with the Alexa toolbar. IMO, the Alexa rankings are completely worthless and can be manipulated quite easily.
Actually, it's from 0-10. And so far there has been no evidence that the toolbar has any effect on PR. I doubt it ever will. Even Alexa doesn't change the way results are ranked based on their toolbar (afaik). The stats from Alexa are kind of fun, perhaps slightly useful, but yes, they are also easily manipulated (particularly in the lower rankings).
I know that it was 0-10, but I have not seen too many 10s. The only 10s that I have ever seen are yahoo! and google. msn.com, microsoft.com, and aol.com are all 9s. Even www.nakedbritney.com isn't a 10 and that site gets more hits than yahoo! and google combined.
lmfao you really think that websites receives more hits than yahoo! and google combined? I really doubt that
Visiting a site with the toolbar does cause it to be indexed (usually). I've tested this. I doubt it has influence on PageRank.
Ok sure, but I still don't really understand why you would say it's 1-9 unless you're just trying to confuse someone. There's TONS of PR 0s out there that don't even fall into that range. And there are the occassional 10s as well - they're still part of the scale. Yeah, and I really doubt that that site gets even 1/100th of Google's visits. What do you base that on?? Alexa is the only semi-reliable source of such information and it doesn't even have a rank there .. hahaha .. Sure Alexa is easily fooled, but if a site is reasonably popular, it will at least have a rank. Ok, maybe if you were counting 'hits' as you say and they had 10,000 images on a page, they would stand half a chance (considering Google's hit count per page would be quite low due to its sparse design). But I'm assuming you meant to say page views. But as already stated, visits have nothing to do with Pagerank anyway. It's all about links, links, links and a backlink search for that site showed 0 backlinks.
Do you own this site ? . Number of pageviews larger the yahoo and google combined is somewhat hard to digest.
no, I don't own that site. I have no idea if there is even a site there. I thought it would be funny to mention that a naked Britney Spears pulls more page views that yahoo! and google combined.
no, I don't own that site. I have no idea if there is even a site there. I thought it would be funny to mention that a naked Britney Spears pulls more page views that yahoo! and google combined. We buy and sell used Cisco, used Cisco router, and used Cisco switch.