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 sorry
I 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
-
What does it exactly means when Google brings the "brand name" to the beggining of the page title in search results when it was actually given at the end?
We see many times...page titles starts with "brand name: page for etc" where actually "brand name" has been given at the end and keywords at beginning. Why does Google make this change? I noticed this happens when similar title tags are used by multiple websites for high difficulty keywords. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Search Results Above Adwords
Hi, Can anyone help me in understanding the results which are appearing above adwords in the screenshot below. These are the knowledge graph results or something else. strip_zpsmxsufx55.png.html
Algorithm Updates | | SameerBhatia0 -
Can a page be 100% topically relevant to a search query?
Today's YouMoz post, Accidental SEO Tests: When On-Page Optimization Ceases to Matter, explores the theory that there is an on-page optimization saturation point, "beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank" for the keywords/keyword topics you are targeting. In other words, you can optimize your page for search to the point that it is 100% topically relevant to query and intent. Do you believe there exists such a thing as a page that is 100% topically relevant? What are your thoughts regarding there being an on-page optimization saturation point, beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank? Let's discuss!
Algorithm Updates | | Christy-Correll1 -
Transfering newly created targeted landing pages on an existing domain to a new domain
Hi - Hope someone can help me with this please I have a question regarding if its possible or advisable to create and host targeted landing pages and a blog on an existing domain, and then move these pages only to a brand new domain? The existing site has good authority and is established. Due to tight timescales in delivery I suggested creating specific landing pages and installing a blog to build authority and trust over time to target completely new keywords. Also the new pages will be helped by the existing domain authority. I've just found out client may want a whole new site, complete with new branding etc and completely new domain in time. Has anyone experienced migrating specific pages and a blog across to a completely new domain and leaving the existing site as it was. I have a whole host of concerns over this, but the main one is that I will be building relationships and content to landing pages and the blog, aswell as linking out etc and then these URL's will have a re-direct on them, going to a completely new domain.
Algorithm Updates | | McCannSEO
Also, the existing domain could lose any authority gained as although I wont only be targeting these pages, these will be the main ones being optimised and this will look unnatural. Do I? A./ Create blog and new landing pages on existing domain eg - www.testing.com/blog
www.testing.com/new-landing-pages, and then migrate these across to a brand new domain. or B./ Create the new landing pages and blog and leave them on the existing domain - period? Concerns here;
Client wants to re-vamp and have a new style and these pages will not necessarily be supported by the existing site, there is no guarantee that we are even allowed to create new pages, let alone internal linking. or C./ Bite the bullet and simply suggest a brand new domain to start with and explain the timescales and its either complete new domain or work on existing one. If anybody else has any other ideas I would really appreciate them. The client is re-branding and the company who host the existing domain, might not want to support the new pages and blog. I was hoping to provide a short term and long term solution as a brand new domain will take time to build up, especially as they are also brand new keywords we are targeting. However, I dont want the existing domain to be hit with any penalties or flag anything un-natural to Google. Many thanks in advance for any advice.. Tracey0 -
New Zealand rankings - Is Google taking city into account now?
I've just noticed over the last 24 hours that Google New Zealand seems to be taking city into account with the search results - when I search from Christchurch - I get CHCH companies and Auckland results when searching from Auckland. I would like to rank my client nationally - any tips? Has anyone else noticed this? I need to be the top of Google for my keyword throughout the country. Any articles that could help? Kind regards, David
Algorithm Updates | | David_Buckingham0 -
How come google image search doesn't link to the right page?
For one site I work with the images link to the home page of the site rather than the page the image lives on. I think this is hurting my bounce rate quite a bit. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | NetvantageMarketing0 -
Organic Search dropped 50% Wednesday and has not recovered
I've included two charts below. 1. Our organic search results for the last year and, 2. Results for the last 6 weeks. We were up to about 350 visits per day in June 2011. In late june we added affiliate links to our site and took a hit down to about 120 a day. At the end of august we moved the affiliate links behind a login. Only registered users saw them. And we started moving back up. Last week January 8-14 we were averaging about 550 per day. Then this Wednesday we dropped to 287. Thursday 268. And today is under 100. We have not updated our website at all. No changes. Does anyone have any idea what might have caused this plunge. Has anyone else seen their traffic drop in half. Thanks for your help. dash_month.jpg dash_year.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | openspan0 -
Does searching for brand names really affect search results?
Hey all, So I heard Rand Fishkin speak the other day at an event in Palo Alto and I tokk anyway an interesting little concept from the day. He mentioned that there might be some overall ranking benefits to having people search for your company's brand and hence arrive at your home page root URL. I was thinking and I'm going to put into place a little test to check this out, does anyone know if search results as a whole are positively affected by having a large number of searches for your company's brand name? I've referred to this in the past as "Branded Search" but perhaps there's another term... I'm interested in running a test whereby I actually remove our URL from the web almost entirely. From social media profile and potentially even from our business cards and instead replace this with "Google Us" or "Google: Junction Marketing". 25907011
Algorithm Updates | | blahblahblah20150