Trophy Site: Divorcing Google for Technorati
If you find information on Google.com because the web page has high rankings due to Google's page-rank system (as some mysterious calculation of the importance of its external/internal links and incoming vs. outgoing links as well as keywords being consistent with the overall purpose and design of the site, to weed out "link farms"), but that page has not been updated for a long time and still shows up on the first page of the search results, how useful is it to the surfer?
You have to admit, it's a good point. Blogger Iyengar (or Aiyangar) from India posed that question on his blog pointing out the perils of the world's greatest search engine (my words) versus a younger, more attractive URL.
Enter Technorati. Writes Iyengar, "... with XML, RSS feeds and all the other things that blogs and their ilk live by and breathe today, to me it makes more sense to rank sites based on the frequency of their updates. This way, these newer crop of search engines like Technorati that search the "World Live Web" incentivize freshness of an entry (it may be a post or any other content and that is why I am careful to include not only blogs for this discussion but any site for that matter).
It is a real kick to watch your site show up on the top, only a few minutes after you have updated it. If this can become the paradigm for prioritizing the display of relevant pages for keyword(s) search (other than most tradename searches like IBM for example, where it is reasonable to expect that www.ibm.com shows up on top regardless of when it was last updated), I am sure we can move on to a brave new world where anyone can expect to land up on the first page of search results as long as they pass Google's existing methodology *and* update their content often."
If you find information on Google.com because the web page has high rankings due to Google's page-rank system (as some mysterious calculation of the importance of its external/internal links and incoming vs. outgoing links as well as keywords being consistent with the overall purpose and design of the site, to weed out "link farms"), but that page has not been updated for a long time and still shows up on the first page of the search results, how useful is it to the surfer?
You have to admit, it's a good point. Blogger Iyengar (or Aiyangar) from India posed that question on his blog pointing out the perils of the world's greatest search engine (my words) versus a younger, more attractive URL.
Enter Technorati. Writes Iyengar, "... with XML, RSS feeds and all the other things that blogs and their ilk live by and breathe today, to me it makes more sense to rank sites based on the frequency of their updates. This way, these newer crop of search engines like Technorati that search the "World Live Web" incentivize freshness of an entry (it may be a post or any other content and that is why I am careful to include not only blogs for this discussion but any site for that matter).
It is a real kick to watch your site show up on the top, only a few minutes after you have updated it. If this can become the paradigm for prioritizing the display of relevant pages for keyword(s) search (other than most tradename searches like IBM for example, where it is reasonable to expect that www.ibm.com shows up on top regardless of when it was last updated), I am sure we can move on to a brave new world where anyone can expect to land up on the first page of search results as long as they pass Google's existing methodology *and* update their content often."
