Like linking content to your copyrights (via webmaster tools), then being able to manually spanning across the Google index to see if content is being taking from you and duplicated on other websites in the index.

More control over expiration of cached pages, like when your website design completely changes or is intentionally taken offline. Faster than disallow in robots.txt.

Control over what countries you do/don’t want your website showing via search results, inspite of google language tools.

Allow comment blocks in HTML to include/exclude content you want to be indexed. The Enterprise search and Adsense does this. A start and finish comment block.

Is there someplace in google where you can see if a website is blacklisted, an untrusted site or can see if websites you’re linked to are either untrusted or could bring down your page ranking? Thanks Matt.

So being very unbiased against Google I think all issues I can imagine are mostly mentioned in this thread, and in Danny’s post. I actually see an issue with lack of rebuttal, not even other webmasters have posted many reasonable explanations for some of the things brought up here. Where are the constructive WHY responses that you’d expect from any other company, or from followers of a company. Here’s one at least…

In regards to #9, Caching pages. Just think long and hard about this one and I think any webmaster can come up with a reason or two why any search engine is better off caching a web page. First off, they’d waste, no, DESTROY your bandwidth if they had to spider your site every time someone wanted to search for something. I don’t know about you but I can’t afford to have Google look at the same pages, 1 million times a piece, per day. You’d be able to sue them for shutting down your site because it went beyond it’s bandwidth capacity. Secondly, it makes searches 100x faster. Since Google spiders sites on a reasonable basis it doesn’t flood my bandwidth, and allows you to type a search and find results instantly rather than over the coarse of what would take, at the least minutes.

What would the alternative be to caching pages? Of coarse Google could just snip your text and images and automate the theft of all your content so that it can be searched without “cached” pages, but they’d still have all your data anyway, and it wouldn’t be direct. It would seem very sketchy to me.

I personally enjoy Google’s honesty in this regard at least, if you can’t view cached pages from a search engine, then they have your data stashed away somewhere, and you don’t even have access to it.

A cached page from Google to me represents a free form of internet security to a website I chose to make public. If someone steels my website content for themselves I not only have my own data for a court case, I have Google on my side to show that my site was in fact cached before their site was ever even on Google. Plus, say I lost every physical possession to my name…I might still get some of my content back.

I’d cover more topics but I have a lot to say just on one, so I’ll leave it at that. Great thread guys, I’m glad there’s a few places around that actually might have the critical throughput that Google needs. It’s not the throughput I’m concerned about though, it’s the feedback. I think they do listen to us fairly well with regards to the concept there’s millions of us to 80,000 of them. They just don’t tell us enough when they actually are listening. I bet they could expand a lot upon their following, if they showed their dedication more often to user feedback.

I know this is an old thread but there is one thing I really hate (ok.. dislike) or maybe just don’t understand about Google search. Why is it by just changing the interface language the results are also completely changed? Seems that any search results changes should be a function of the search language parameter and not the interface language. Also, how does Google decide which language is associated with a website? Is it a page by page analysis or a site-wide analysis?

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

It’s the local results at the top of the page. I hate it because it rewards those that have money or have spent money. I do all my business online and work from home. I hate the fact that larger companies can just show up at the top of Google because they have a bricks and mortar operation. The web should be for the little guy too.

Now I know I can submit a location and have my business listed there but then I’d have people showing up to my house to watch me work in my underwear. I’d rather the local search be a tab at the top like images and maps. That’s all. Thanks.

cheers !!

I just love Page Creator – what a treat that is so simple and attractive. I would pay for this if I could tweak the titles and add sitemaps.

I would happily pay for GMail – Fantastic – I have ditched Y and MSN for emails now that I’ve gotten accustomed to Gmail

I love my Google Mini – paid for happily

Dislike = Search?? I do seo for a living and feel there is still too much garbage out there.

Try searching for djs bay area or realtors charlotte OUCH!

AOL results look much tidier…..

I like the way G involves everyone (or seemingly so)

I like that I’ve got a real chance of making a living with Google (sharing is good)

I like the occassional webinar

Em – that’s it for now

David 28078@ gmail dot com

Google has converted the web in a link collection, where everybody is valued as “tell me how much links you get and i will told you how much you value”.

Thats is, ni my point of view, a big distortion of things and, the horrible part is that its distorting the entirely was that people develope web sites.

I know that links can be, in an IDEAL world, a good way to know the relevance of a site… BUT that is NOT anymore the true in this real world.

Theory behind Google is good… just in theory. In real world is becoming just in a collection of tricks to get traffic. How much tricks did you know, how much traffic did you get.

But nobody is still talking about giving the results based on its content.

The same page, with no content changes, can be ranked VERY different in Google, depending on the links the owner can get AND -in some extreme cases- on his knowledge abot many Google’s preferences about how he uses ALT, titles, etc.

Again, we are talking about anything but NO about content.

I hope that some day Google go back on analize CONTENT to make ranks and forget all this ‘spam’ stuff of links, anchors, ALTs on images, etc.

Finally, user is searching content, just content.. and nobody seams to remember that.

thanx a lot. Seems to be working now.

Greets Martin