<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Changes in url queries</title> <atom:link href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/</link> <description>neat fun stuff</description> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:30:01 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: sberhan</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-611183</link> <dc:creator>sberhan</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2010 18:46:06 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-611183</guid> <description>Nice Article. As you had mentioned, for the &quot;N&quot; crowd who are the &quot;super-duper power-users who know how to refine site: or info:&quot;, you can harness the power of tweaking the URL with http://URLParser.com For example, you can tweak the Google search URL to have Extreme Pagination (Fast Forward or Fast Rewind) as described here: http://urlparser.com/example-pagination/#startExample</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice Article. As you had mentioned, for the &#8220;N&#8221; crowd who are the &#8220;super-duper power-users who know how to refine site: or info:&#8221;, you can harness the power of tweaking the URL with <a href="http://URLParser.com" rel="nofollow">http://URLParser.com</a><br /> For example, you can tweak the Google search URL to have Extreme Pagination (Fast Forward or Fast Rewind) as described here:<br /> <a href="http://urlparser.com/example-pagination/#startExample" rel="nofollow">http://urlparser.com/example-pagination/#startExample</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Scented Candles</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99525</link> <dc:creator>Scented Candles</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 21:16:16 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99525</guid> <description>Google trying to kick out bukake from search results.....</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google trying to kick out bukake from search results&#8230;..</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Sterling Silver Jewelry</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99524</link> <dc:creator>Sterling Silver Jewelry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 21:14:31 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99524</guid> <description>Just curious why Google not showing most links using link: command ?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just curious why Google not showing most links using link: command ?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Throw Pillows</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99522</link> <dc:creator>Throw Pillows</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 21:13:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-99522</guid> <description>I think this should work fine for most poeple.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this should work fine for most poeple.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Rose Water</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-90079</link> <dc:creator>Rose Water</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:45:50 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-90079</guid> <description>Since when did google become a bunch of p*ss**s!The world needs a Geek-ONLY Search Engine that shows millions of results, not thousands, and isn&#039;t easy to use!Somebody out there has to be doing this! So get on it!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since when did google become a bunch of p*ss**s!</p><p>The world needs a Geek-ONLY Search Engine that shows millions of results, not thousands, and isn&#8217;t easy to use!</p><p>Somebody out there has to be doing this! So get on it!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Brian</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-89248</link> <dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2006 07:30:03 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-89248</guid> <description>Oh, and when I say I use the address bar as my bookmarks, I just mean for my very frequently viewed sites - email, investments, blogs, etc.  I also use the traditional booksmarks for many other sites.  It&#039;s just that the drop down bar is much quicker to access than the bookmarks tab.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and when I say I use the address bar as my bookmarks, I just mean for my very frequently viewed sites &#8211; email, investments, blogs, etc.  I also use the traditional booksmarks for many other sites.  It&#8217;s just that the drop down bar is much quicker to access than the bookmarks tab.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Brian</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-89247</link> <dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2006 07:27:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-89247</guid> <description>This change is a huge let down for me.I regularly paste full URL&#039;s into the google search bar (or should I say, used to).The reason is that if you paste directly into the address bar, it leaves a history.  Sometimes at work, or on someone else&#039;s computer or even my own computer, I don&#039;t want sites left in the history bar.On my own computer, it&#039;s because I use the drop down address bar like my bookmarks.  And every time I paste something in the address bar directly, then it&#039;s stuck in my &quot;bookmarks&quot;.I&#039;ve found a solution though, I just use yahoo now instead of google, since it still works with yahoo.  This and a few other things have made me start using yahoo more frequently.Bottom line is that I don&#039;t understand the logic in removing features other than to appease advertisers.  Which is a sad statement about such a profound and powerful tool.  I almost see google as a tool for humanity.  It kind of reminds me of how the media is so biased, because in the end, it&#039;s not about news - it&#039;s about money.Google could have done all of the changes, but kept the same feature, with the description &quot;if this REALLY is what you intended, here&#039;s the link...&quot;  What good does displaying the non-clickable URL and saying &quot;did not match any documents&quot; do?  If you&#039;re going to display it, just make it a link??And for the record I don&#039;t buy the coddling &quot;You guys are sooo much smarter than everyone else&quot; bit.  It&#039;s just a lot more PC than saying &quot;Well, we did it to make more money, even though it is less functional&quot;.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This change is a huge let down for me.</p><p>I regularly paste full URL&#8217;s into the google search bar (or should I say, used to).</p><p>The reason is that if you paste directly into the address bar, it leaves a history.  Sometimes at work, or on someone else&#8217;s computer or even my own computer, I don&#8217;t want sites left in the history bar.</p><p>On my own computer, it&#8217;s because I use the drop down address bar like my bookmarks.  And every time I paste something in the address bar directly, then it&#8217;s stuck in my &#8220;bookmarks&#8221;.</p><p>I&#8217;ve found a solution though, I just use yahoo now instead of google, since it still works with yahoo.  This and a few other things have made me start using yahoo more frequently.</p><p>Bottom line is that I don&#8217;t understand the logic in removing features other than to appease advertisers.  Which is a sad statement about such a profound and powerful tool.  I almost see google as a tool for humanity.  It kind of reminds me of how the media is so biased, because in the end, it&#8217;s not about news &#8211; it&#8217;s about money.</p><p>Google could have done all of the changes, but kept the same feature, with the description &#8220;if this REALLY is what you intended, here&#8217;s the link&#8230;&#8221;  What good does displaying the non-clickable URL and saying &#8220;did not match any documents&#8221; do?  If you&#8217;re going to display it, just make it a link??</p><p>And for the record I don&#8217;t buy the coddling &#8220;You guys are sooo much smarter than everyone else&#8221; bit.  It&#8217;s just a lot more PC than saying &#8220;Well, we did it to make more money, even though it is less functional&#8221;.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Luis</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87648</link> <dc:creator>Luis</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 13:51:20 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87648</guid> <description>Hey Matt! First of all, congrats for your blog, it rocks!Have a question for you (I don&#039;t know if this is the place to ask, or if I should ask you this at all), but here I go, feel free to ignore it :PI work for a pretty big company that has a pretty big website. Let&#039;s call it Example, and the website is www.example.com. Periodically they run a query in Google for all of their domains to check keyword density, the query is:example site:example.comand google returnsResults 1 - 10 of about 49,200 from example.com for example. (0.48 seconds)The problem is, we have not made any changes that may affect those results in the last months, but take a look at those numbers:3 AugustResults 1 - 10 of about 49,200 from example.com for example. (0.48 seconds) Results 1 - 10 of about 12,600 from example.fr for example. (0.48 seconds) Results 1 - 10 of about 920 from example.co.uk for example. (0.50 seconds)And now, 6 OctoberResults 1 - 10 of about 6,830 from example.com for example. (0.08 seconds) Results 1 - 10 of about 1,580 from example.fr for example. (0.23 seconds) Results 1 - 10 of about 1,270 from example.co.uk for example. (0.20 seconds)Do you know if some of the google updates/changes could have affected those results? Also, the changes in the numbers coincide with the adding of google analytics to our website. Do you think google analytics may have something to do with this?Regards and thanks!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Matt!<br /> First of all, congrats for your blog, it rocks!</p><p>Have a question for you (I don&#8217;t know if this is the place to ask, or if I should ask you this at all), but here I go, feel free to ignore it <img src='http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /></p><p>I work for a pretty big company that has a pretty big website. Let&#8217;s call it Example, and the website is <a href="http://www.example.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.example.com</a>.<br /> Periodically they run a query in Google for all of their domains to check keyword density, the query is:</p><p>example site:example.com</p><p>and google returns</p><p>Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 49,200 from example.com for example. (0.48 seconds)</p><p>The problem is, we have not made any changes that may affect those results in the last months, but take a look at those numbers:</p><p>3 August</p><p>Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 49,200 from example.com for example. (0.48 seconds)<br /> Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 12,600 from example.fr for example. (0.48 seconds)<br /> Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 920 from example.co.uk for example. (0.50 seconds)</p><p>And now, 6 October</p><p>Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 6,830 from example.com for example. (0.08 seconds)<br /> Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 1,580 from example.fr for example. (0.23 seconds)<br /> Results 1 &#8211; 10 of about 1,270 from example.co.uk for example. (0.20 seconds)</p><p>Do you know if some of the google updates/changes could have affected those results? Also, the changes in the numbers coincide with the adding of google analytics to our website. Do you think google analytics may have something to do with this?</p><p>Regards and thanks!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: eszter</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87270</link> <dc:creator>eszter</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:33:19 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87270</guid> <description>This is a good move on the part of Google. Those of us who study average users&#039; online actions (and I don&#039;t think there are as many of us as there should be) have known all this for years and it&#039;s nice to see the changes made. I have a few other thoughts on where Google (and others) could tweak the interface to help out the non-experts...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a good move on the part of Google. Those of us who study average users&#8217; online actions (and I don&#8217;t think there are as many of us as there should be) have known all this for years and it&#8217;s nice to see the changes made. I have a few other thoughts on where Google (and others) could tweak the interface to help out the non-experts&#8230;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Robert G. Medford</title><link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87156</link> <dc:creator>Robert G. Medford</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 30 Sep 2006 19:43:16 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/#comment-87156</guid> <description>I think Matt is trying to corner the market on &quot;Bukkake&quot; searches.;)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Matt is trying to corner the market on &#8220;Bukkake&#8221; searches.</p><p> <img src='http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (enhanced)
Database Caching 4/11 queries in 0.006 seconds using disk

Served from: www.mattcutts.com @ 2012-02-08 23:06:33 -->
