Matt Cutts' Super Session At Pubcon
Posted 11 November 2010 - 06:15 PM
In mobile G is looking at:
* tethering (using mobile device as web connection for multiple other devices)
---definitely a shot at operators as many/most/all charge premiums for tethering or expressly disallow in their ToS.
* voice input.
* near instant indexing and serving of crawl data (aka Caffeine).
---not new but important to revisit.
---crawl frequency and crawl depth now significantly more important.
---therefore real time tracking of SE bot site activity is best practice to identify bottlenecks, dead or neglected pages/sections.
---therefore also crucial is considering site SE bot crawl budget in site architecture and/or backlink building.
---it really helps those (on Apache with appropriate access) who haven't a clue about page optimisation. Ambivalent about it becoming a one solution fits all answer.
* asynchronous Google Analytics
---waves to EGOL, bites tongue about GA results quality and necessity given available log files. Tugs tinfoil down securely...
* SPDY Protocol
---potentially open to server side abuse but interesting. Latest in long line of protocol improvement suggestions.
* Rich Snippets Improvements
---aka microformats, RDFa
---near critical in local site search
---learning how to utilise for non-local sites likely crucial advantage.
---nothing like trying to own the world's URLs.
---will stay with own whitelabel shorteners where necessary for potential branding and competitive advantage.
* pay attention to first link.
---still believe that links value scale down page content.
* read content aloud
---see above mention of mobile voice input interest.
* meta descriptions should match popular queries.
---confirms thoughts about why sometimes G shows content in place of description.
* meta descriptions should be enticing
---possible inference re ctr in SERP calculation.
* each of the ~200 G ranking factors may have ~50 input signals.
---stop chasing the algo unless that is your business model.
---stop checking SERP, you need to improve regardless of position, your competitors probably are; track traffic referers, traffic volume, and traffic changes, not SERP; understand the difference between signal and snakeoil.
* sidesteps quality issues, especially re Maps and Places.
* mentioned will look into how Places pulls reviews.
---could be very interesting...watching, waiting....
* sidesteps Android Aps spam, customer service.
---G will never have quality customer service as that requires humans not algos.
---G will never 'defeat' spam because (1) algo vs algo == tie, (2) Google Partners, (3) content 'farms', (4) spam == revenue.
* instant previews sometimes by domain, sometimes by keyword
--unsure if better value to deny as with cache.
* domain age value: after 6-months not important
---interesting, not convinced but...
---puts the weight back on link graph over time...maybe...
* video in YouTube auto-captioned via voice recognition
---see other voice interest above, this looks to be a full press area for Google; worth investigating further.
---always caption own videos just became even more important; do not want auto-caption just as don't want auto snippet in place of meta description.
* looking into value weighting of exact match domains
Posted 11 November 2010 - 06:32 PM
* looking into value weighting of exact match domains
You know, if exact match domains are really such a problem, then why do people with exact-match domains point so many links at them?
I wouldn't expect much movement from Google on this. They have always maintained that their rankings are influenced by URL and not by domain.
That said, even if they do find a way to dampen whatever benefit exact-match domains get from all those links, I would be very surprised to see most exact-match domains lose their search positioning.
Posted 11 November 2010 - 07:22 PM
I always assumed it was simple google reading the "keywords" in url links.
Posted 11 November 2010 - 08:58 PM
Posted 11 November 2010 - 10:30 PM
What I meant about stop chasing the algo unless it is your business model is that very few people/businesses derive revenue from deciphering algorithm, that one should fixate on one's revenue sources not someone else's algo, that putting all one's traffic eggs in traffic source's basket is long term hazardous, etc. ad nauseum.
Posted 11 November 2010 - 10:47 PM
lol.... I just spent a lot of time and money speeding up my site the old fashioned way. That's my reward for jumping on speed immediately.
-waves to EGOL, bites tongue about GA results quality and necessity given available log files. Tugs tinfoil down securely...
I am still not using GA... but I don't think it makes any difference. When I go into webmaster tools they know an awful lot about my site without me using GA.
Posted 12 November 2010 - 06:39 AM
Posted 12 November 2010 - 07:19 AM
- Users who have the Google Toolbar installed in their browsers (used for the average times in the graph)
- Googlebot crawling of the embedded elements (used for the recommendations below the graph)
It gets a bit confusing when Googlebot sees slightly different HTTP headers than normal browsers do. In some instances, that's hard to avoid (browsers have weird quirks sometimes and sometimes need some tweaks). Sometimes that results in recommendations in Webmaster Tools which point out missing caching of embedded content (or content that's not served in a compressed form), even though most of the normal users would get the data served optimally. It would be possible to tweak that in Webmaster Tools, but doing one-off fixes for our content isn't really that great, so instead we just show it like we see it.
Because of things like that, I'd take the recommendations as recommendations - and use that input to try to tweak your pages directly in browsers using the PageSpeed / YSlow / SpeedTracer (and similar) plugins. Use Webmaster Tools to get a rough idea of what you could look at, and then look at the details in the browsers that your users really use.
Posted 12 November 2010 - 01:52 PM
I admit to having ignored GA until I really needed to learn it and lo and behold, I love it~! GA offers a lot but some of it requires an education first so I've been monitoring advice and tutorials from those who have figured out how to drive the thing.
By comparison, Bing has a pathetic webmaster tools area.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users