New Search Engine.... Vanoogle.com
-
I'd like to see google start a new search engine. They might call it Vanoogle.com (Vanilla Google).
This search engine would not be stinked up with social data, freshness inclusions, crap from my last query, skewed based upon my IP, warped because of my browser, targeted because of my cookies, no personalization, no image results, product results, none of that stuff.
Ads are OK if labeled.
I just want a plain vanilla search. Something that I know is "clean".
Just like the good olde days. Millions of people will start using it right away.
Would you use Vanoogle.com?
-
I wonder how much money Google make per user of their search engine. Would you pay for vanoogle.com? Say, US$20 a year? $50? $100?
TV channels without commercials isn't so strange a concept - here in the UK we have the BBC! Though we have to pay a yearly license. Partly as a result of the lack of adverts, I watch more television on the BBC than all other channels combined. The quality is often higher too. The TV license converts to about US$240.
-
This has to be the most entertaining thread I have read since Q&A started!
http://blekko.com/ states right on their home page "the spam free search engine
I don't see any adwords stuff on there. Maybe Blekko will take over the world. Oh wait, facebook search might take over. No wait... Bing is taking over...... No no no, my xBox 360 is taking over! Yeah that's it. My xBox 360. Nothing but Bing.
-
I use Google custom search to filter out a lot of things I do not need or want. You can put as many urls in that you want . Very useful in looking at your competitions SERPS.
-
We currently have a browser session on a local server used for serving search results without any of the cr*p that Google like to push. This gives a completely clean and accurate search results page in any brand of search engine (Google, Yahoo, Bing etc) and type of search engine (web, image, maps etc).
This is mainly controlled via the use of query parameters in the URL string. No results are ever clicked on within the session as to not influence rankings. There is no web history, no personalisation, no geo-targeted within the results.
I hate everything Google have done to make search results more 'personalised' or 'targeted'. And that's not just because I work in the SEO industry either.
Granted, stripping back your search experience to the raw criteria as we have done shouldn't be this difficult and I would certainly be a solid user of Vanoogle but what we've done works for us and ensures we don't see skewed results (when we require).
-
Like SEO Moz has Roger, Bulloogle.com could have this as their mascot http://bit.ly/HUIovX
I think advertising is so overkill and its only getting worse. I really don't like route search engines are taking when showing their SERPs and other content, personally I use google with JavaScript disabled the "page preview" on hover of the link/arrow is useless and really naff.
FYI: The twocents html tag is depreciated and won't help your SERP rankings on bulloogle.com
-
I tested this out myself but couldn't replicate it, however I can imagine it happening - like you and others have said they are testing things all the time.
Maybe they ran out of bananas that day! Just imagine all those years we have spent trying to second guess the algo of Googlebot and the key was a monkey haha.
The only problem with vanilla is that it is easily influenced by other flavours around it don't you think..?
-
Bulloogle.com would definitely have to be a metacrawler - putting emphasis on metatags - oh the good old days haha!
-
I remember what Google was like a few years ago. The SERPs were full of relevant information (in my opinion). Now they have a few relevant at the top and marginally relevant below... and some other things that are tangents.
-
It would also enable us to see how much better these additional factors make the search results with out own eyes and not have to rely on Google's promise that they do. Show us the evidence and let us come to our own conclusions!
At the moment it's a bit like a kid being told to eat their greens...
-
I would most definitely use it! Dare to dream, dare to dream.................
-
When I want to access the "official" site without having to dig through the commercialized sites on the SERPS, I use Bing instead of G. Much more pleased with the results when I'm not searching for "long tail" phrases. Vanoogle (your idea of a toggle to get "pure" results) is a great idea but G wants ALL the ad revenues it can bleed out of a page.
-
For pure results we should have all the sites that match the search term listed in alphabetical order.
-
Thanks for your dad's perspective.
He thinks any weakness in the results returned are because he "must have types the wrong thing."
That is eyeopening!
Experienced people might enjoy the toggle feature you suggest... that will allow them to filter the "fluff" and get pure results.
-
That's all well and good, but how do you get the average man on the street to switch?
For example, my dad has never "chosen" a search engine in his life. He just goes with whatever he browser defaults to / manufacturer set up as a default and failing that "google" because it's the only one he's heard of... He thinks any weakness in the results returned are because he "must have types the wrong thing."
It would be really nice to be freely toggle all the factors your mentioned on/off (and set defaults) so that you could have the search that you wanted.
-
I used to have a "clean machine" that I used to check rankings, never signed in and never clicked anything in the SERPs. That has stopped working because previous searches are stinking up the SERPs.
I want a button to "turn off all bias".
-
Yeah that would be nice, the nearest thing I got to that is going 'incognito' in chrome.
-
It would be nice if they gave you google classic (AKA Vanoogle.com) as an option. That way everyone would be happy.
-
The other 20% with the yellow pages.
No need for vanoogle, why don't you just go back to the very beginning and use http://www.dmoz.org/.
-
Your sites ranking well is the most important criteria for Vanoogle!!
-
I like it. The Faveicons add character. (... and my sites rank well)
-
So, you would use vanoogle for the other 20%?
I think that most people would use it all of the time.... so if 80% of people use it all of the time and the rest use it 20% of the time that would be 84% market share.
-
Nice Post, EGOL. You don't like Google with all the "improvements" - like to I rank 6th on page 1 or 17th, depending on what Google decides to display on the SERPS.
How about DuckDuckGo? They are pretty generic and without personalization.
-
I don't think so EGOL, maybe you are just looking at it from the SEO side of the fence.
When im searching for my own purposes Google 80% of the time delivers everything I want, whether its a map of places to eat in my local city or youtube rich snippets of a band ive heard about.
-
Right! It might replace StumbleUpon.
-
SEOs would like to have it to know "where they really rank".
The average guy would like to have it just to enjoy "crap-free SERPs".
-
Now Bulloogle.com, that is something I can get behind
all BS all the time, you never know what you will get!
-
ha... That's really funny.... and I think you are right!
-
Never Seen BS tags before, is that a way to rank higher in Vanoogle?
Heaven's no!
We will need yet another search engine for that.... Bulloogle.com
Lots of what I write should be indexed there.
-
I was surprised last week when I searched for "georgia" and then searched for "guitars" a moment later and found that google was delivering results contaminated by previous queries. http://www.seomoz.org/q/google-query-contamination
They monkey with the SERPs and don't tell.
So, I agree, sometimes vanilla is the best flavor.
That's why I want Vanoogle.com
-
Never Seen BS tags before, is that a way to rank higher in Vanoogle?
I would not
sorryI am a convert, I like the way search is going. of course there are gonna be bumps along the way, but I think the social integration is a better way to connect people. We have already shown our predisposition to loving this mentality of online communitites, so i think this is just another stepping stone to the new social "It"product.
I also like geolocation, I think as an SEO/Internet Marketer it makes my life more confusing and more confusing to clients/employers, but as a general user I think it is definitely on the right track to helping people get with local resources, as well as brands, which i thinks makes for a more informed consumer.
just my 2 cents
-
yea i'd like to see TV channels with no commercials too.
-
mmmmmmm.... I like Vanilla!!
My life would be complete if Google decided to do that!
-
Vanilla sometimes is the best flavour - I'd definitely give it a go! Here's to making the web a better place Egol.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Are you seeing 404's from utililab.mysearchguardian.com?
I've been noticing a lot of 404's popping up in my Google Webmaster accounts coming from utililab.mysearchguardian.com. Utililab itself seems to be some sort of malware, but why is Google indexing it and sending 404's?
Algorithm Updates | | EthanThompson0 -
Googles Search Intent – Plural & Singular KW’s
This is more of a ‘gripe’ than a question, but I would love to hear people’s views. Typically, when you search for a product using the singular and plural versions of the keyword Google delivers different SERPs. As an example, ‘leather handbag’ and ‘leather handbags’ return different results, but surely the search intent is exactly the same? You’d have thought Google was now clever enough to work this out. We tend to optimise our webpages for both the plural and singular variations of the KW’s, but see a mixed bag of results when analysing rankings. Is Google trying to force us to create a unique webpage for the singular version, and another unique webpage for the plural version? This would confuse the visitor, and make no sense.. the search intent is the same! How do you combat this problem? Many thanks in advance. Lee.
Algorithm Updates | | Webpresence0 -
Looking for Search Engine Ranking Factors more recent than 2013
The 2013 Search Engine Ranking Factors study is a very useful study. However, it was completed more than two years ago, and a lot of algorthim updates have been made since then. Is there a more recent study of this than the one produced in 2013? Any and all information would be valuable. I am also trying to understand the importance of site speed as a ranking factor. Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | JorgeUmana0 -
Microsites for Local Search / Location Based sites?
Referring to the webinar on SEOMoz about Local Search that was presented by Nifty Marketing (http://www.seomoz.org/webinars/be-where-local-is-going). I have a question my client asked us regarding why we broke out their locations into microsites, and not just used subfolders. So here are the details: The client has one main website in real estate. They have 5 branches. Each branch covers about a 50 mile radius. Each branch also covers a specialized niche in their areas. When we created the main site we incorporated the full list of listings on the main site; We then created a microsite for each branch, who has a page of listings (same as the main site) but included the canonical link back to the main site. The reason we created a microsite for each branch is that the searches for each branch are very specific to their location and we felt that having only a subfolder would take away from the relevancy of the site and it's location. Now, the location sites rank on the first page for their very competitive, location based searches. The client, as we encourage, has had recommendations from others saying this is hurting them, not helping them. My question is this... How can this hurt them when the microsites include a home page specific to the location, a contact page that is optimized with location specific information (maps, text, directions, NAP, call to action, etc.), a page listing area information about communities/events/etc., a page of the location's agents, and of course real estate listings (with canonical back to the main site)? Am I misunderstanding? I understood that if the main site could support the separation of a section into a microsite, this would help local search. Local search is the bread and butter of this client's conversions. AND if you tell me we should go back to having subfolders for each location, won't that seriously hurt our already excellent rankings? The client sees significant visitors from their placement of the location URLs. THANKS!
Algorithm Updates | | gXeSEO
Darlene1 -
Webpage is ranking on google.ie / google.co.uk but not google.com?
One of our site webpage appears to be found in the first few pages on google.ie / google.co.uk but not on google.com. Is there such a thing being penalised on a specific Google domain? Traffic is healthy despite this but I want to rank well for the page in google.com. Any ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | notnem0 -
Do search engines penalize for too many domain aliases?
I have a main domain name and 20+ related alias domains pointing to it. Is there a danger, penalty or concern that I should be aware of related to alias domains? I saw something on Google "Apps Administration" under "What is a domain alias" saying "you can add up to 20 domian aliases" but I don't use Google Apps. Please advise... Thank you, Chris
Algorithm Updates | | caliboyz0 -
Redirected old domain to new, how long before seeing the external links under the new domain?
Before contracting SEO services, my client decided to change his established root domain to one more customer-friendly. Since he had no expertise on board, no redirects were set up until 6 months later. I ran stats right before the old domain was redirected and have a report showing that he had roughly 750 external links from 300 root domains. We redirected the old domain to the new domain in mid Jan 2012. Those external links are still not showing in Open Site Explorer for the new domain. I've tested it a dozen times, and the old domain definitely points to the new domain. How long should it take before the new domain picks up those external links? Should I do anything else to help the process along?
Algorithm Updates | | smsinc0 -
What is the most reliable source for search engine market share?
I would like to look at data or sources to get the most accurate measure I can on search engine market share. Does anyone have reliable sources on search engine volume/market share etc?
Algorithm Updates | | MarloSchneider0