All Posts Tagged Tag: ‘Relevance’
Yesterday, I argued that Microsoft’s search engine update, which included highly touted relevance improvements, did not and will not ultimately improve their fortunes.
To state things a bit more strongly: I think that relevance cannot be a selling point for a search engine, and not just because Live’s update was just catching them up to the level of many other popular search engines. In fact, I think that it’s hard for any of us to truly evaluate “relevance” in results.
Strewn around my house are pens, coffee cups, calculators, USB memory sticks, and assorted swag from various companies I’ve met over the years. What is the purpose of all this stuff? Does having a leather portfolio with a vendor’s logo on it make me more likely to buy their products?
Yahoo has admitted to something thousands of search engine users already know: it’s not going to beat Google at search dominance. Game. Set. Match. Google. The best way to read the Bloomberg report on Yahoo’s fall from the search game would be with a glass of champagne and a dish of strawberries and cream, Wimbledon style.
Search engines actively and regularly seek new content. As more and more search engine algorithms evolve into complex, human-centric logics, they seek content that is relevant to the search conducted by the surfer. They also want to present freshly updated content to their users. Google sends out its ‘freshbot’ spider to gather and index new material from all the sites which offer it.
What good is a search engine if the results it provides aren’t relevant to the query being performed? The answer? Not much. The largest search index in the world doesn’t amount to much if you don’t have an algorithm that can successfully provide results related to the question being posed.
No one said being on top was easy. In case you need further proof, just ask Google. The search engine king was recently hit with 3 cease and desist notices, asking them to remove certain content from their index.