Hummer alert!

No. It's not what you are thinking, so you can keep your dirty mind to yourself...

The first humming bird just arrived at my feeder here in Connecticut. It's a male scout, who has just made the trip from South America, so the female hummingbirds are soon to follow.

He's obviously very tired, because he sat on a wire 'outlook' that I put up last year, but I never saw the hummingbirds spend any time on it at all. They were too busy flying about, but this one was so tired that he sat for almost an hour, which was long enough for us to notice him and get a good look.

Mark this day, because the hummers are finally here in Connecticut!

Solve the user's problems...

Google has taken over the search industry, and they have done it by focusing on one important idea:

Solve the user's problems.

Again and again, I can see that they are focused on that fundamental idea. Say what you will about Google, but they are wildly successful, and they have done it by worrying about the end user's experience. While Yahoo, MSN and others seem to be jealously trying to 'monetize' their search engine results, Google is much more concerned with solving a problem for their end users.

This focus has led the vast majority of the world to use Google to solve a problem: How to find something on the Internet. I try other search engines all the time, but invariably come back to Google for one simple reason:

They solve my problems (finding things).

New Search Engines every day

It seems like there is a new search engine cropping up every day, but they all are lacking one basic feature: a webmaster interface! Just look at the leaders in the search industry, and what they offer to site owners:

Google - webmaster tools, sitemaps, URL removal tool, submit feeds.

Yahoo - Site Explorer, submit feeds.

MSN - submit 1 URL.

Ask - nothing.

Cranky - nothing.

Even Google could improve their communication with web site owners, but at least they are way ahead of the rest. I must admit that I'm starting to like Google more and more, even though they sometimes do things that make me scratch my head.

But in comparison to the rest of the search engines, Google is trying to work with site owners. It's no wonder that Matt Cutts of Google gets mobbed like a "rock star" whenever he goes to a conference. He is the most vocal and communicative of all the search engine representatives.

I just wish that Danny Sullivan's idea of a "Matt Pass" would catch on. I could use one right about now...

Update: Yahoo now lets you delete a URL from their 'site explorer' but it doesn't always work, and there is no explanation to help diagnose the problem...

MSN - Top 10 ways to win us back...

Everyone that I talk to hates MSN and the complaints are mounting, despite Steve Ballmer's attempt to tell everybody that Google is a one-hit wonder. The latest news is that not only has Google beat Microsoft as a brand name, but also that there have been many more visitors to Google's sites than to all of MSN's sites.

So, here is a top 10 list of how MSN can win back user support and stop the complaints:

10. Stop lying to us. We're not stupid, and we can see the difference between a marketing ploy and an honest reason to upgrade.

9. Stop telling us what to do. If we thought hitting the "start" button was the way to shut off our cars, we'd be in a lot of trouble (even Bill Gates' mother knows this...).

8. Stop hiding the truth. An "upgrade" means that there are lots of cool things that you have the option to try out. NOT that you will be forced into dealing with new headaches.

7. Stop "upgrading" us with vacuous vaporware products. We want tools that will help us solve our problems.

6. Stop delaying shipments. Do what you say you're going to do - when you say you're going to do it.

5. Stop forcing us to "upgrade" to new products that we don't really need (like IE7). Even if it really is a great product, there's no quicker way to turn us off than to force-feed it to us.

4. Stop telling us that your competitors don't know what they're doing. It's obvious to anybody with a brain that you're losing, and that you've forgotten that we are the reason why you were once a great company.

3. Stop ignoring us. The Internet is making our lives easier, but when was the last time that you listened to any of us about that?

2. Stop telling us how wonderful you are going to make our lives - someday. It's nice to fantasize about the future, but what about today?

And the number 1 thing you can do is:

1. Put a muzzle on Steve Ballmer and bolt down all the chairs in his office. We've had enough of his childish rants and immature behavior. Every time he opens his mouth and blasts somebody outside of MSN, we cringe and that just drives us further away.

And on that note, I celebrate my one year anniversary of blogging! Many thanks to all of you readers for putting up with my rants, and here's to a new year!

Google Docs and Web 2.0

There are a few problems with Google Docs and the other 'Web 2.0' software programs that allow you to write documents online, instead of on your desktop. Don't get me wrong - I love Google Docs, and I love the capability to write online and then post the content to my blog (that's how this was written). However, I can see a few hurdles that will keep Microsoft Office securely implanted in the corporate world unless Google overcomes these roadblocks to adoption:

1. Latency - It can be really annoying to wait for your changes to update on the page in front of you. Maybe I type too fast, but there are many times when I put in an extra space because the page has not yet updated.

2. Inability to work off-line - Nobody wants to be held captive if their Internet connection suddenly dies. It's really nice to save a file on Google's servers, but it would be even nicer to be able to save that file in my PC so I can work off-line.

3. Show me the code! - Microsoft killed WordPerfect, which was the best word processor in its day. One of its nicest features was that you could see the formatting tags by flipping to a 'code view' screen, and the tags were so simple that anybody could understand their meaning. The problem with MS Word today is that people constantly ask me, "Why does my font keep changing?" and, "Why do my bullets keep moving?" but there is no way to see the code on the page. It is a complete disaster to keep copying one document and try and re-use it. The hidden formatting codes keep getting copied, so the font suddenly changes and the bullets move with a mind of their own. The only way around this is to start from scratch and create a new document, which defeats the whole point of having a computer in the first place.

So, give us a way to see the formatting codes, and you will win the battle for our hearts and minds. It's nice that we can completely remove the formatting in selected text, but it would be even nicer to see what those codes actually are. Even if it's plain old HTML, at least we would have a chance to fix problems without having to discard so much work.

SEO Myths - Keywords without commas

There is some SEO workshop telling people to use keywords without commas separating them, which is NOT defined in the W3C specification.

I'm always one to experiment, so I tried this on a few pages in a site to see what would would happen, and the pages disappeared from the SERPs within a few short weeks. So, I put the commas back in and the pages miraculously came back up to the top of the SERPs.

There has been a lot of talk on the web that Google does not even look at the keywords tag. However, I fixed a site for a friend who put in carriage returns after each keyword (instead of commas) so his list of keywords appeared as a vertical list in a text editor. After I changed the keyword list, his site magically appeared on top of the SERPs and stayed there for years, until recently, when he changed the keywords and put in odd spaces and took out some spaces after the keywords. His site dropped like a stone, which another, mutual friend pointed out to me.

Hmmm...

I have always believed that a specification is written to be followed, and that most programmers will follow a written specification faithfully. The W3C used to give examples of keywords that included a space after each comma. Now, there are examples of keywords both with and without spaces after the commas that separate the keywords. I must confess that I started eliminating the spaces many years ago to cram a few more keywords into the tag. Is it my fault that other webmasters started to follow my lead?

However, I have yet to see any examples that do not include commas to separate the keywords or keyword phrases, so I always follow this rule: There are other search engines besides Google, so it is best to code for EVERY search engine, regardless of whether they use a feature or not.

And, if you are going after a phrase, such as, "red widgets for sale" you can put that as a phrase in the META keywords, but I would recommend using a comma to separate it from the rest of the keywords in the tag.

As in example #1:

1. < META name="keywords" content="widgets, red, red widgets for sale, green widgets for sale, the phrase you want to show up in the search engines, etc." >

As opposed to example 2:

2. < META name="keywords" content="widgets red widgets for sale green widgets for sale the phrase you want to show up in the search engines etc." >

Where are the breaks in example #2? How is any META engine supposed to re-assemble this random order of keywords?

Oh, and by the way: Do not use quotation marks ( " ) to indicate 'inches' in any of the tags that you use, because that signals the end of the list has been reached.

SES NYC '07

Well, the conference is over and I missed it. Mostly, I missed seeing a lot of friends that I never have the chance to see. However, there is a lot of press on-line, so we can all keep up-to-date.

Check out:

seoroundtable.com
searchengineland.com

Ah, well... Maybe next year...

Sitting Out SES NYC '07

I'm sorry to report that I am not going to make it to SES NYC '07. I know - it's a little crazy, since it is very close (just a few hours by train), but other obligations have taken precedence. And, once I heard that Matt Cutts was not going to the conference, it made my decision just a little bit easier.

Although if you have a chance to hear Vanessa Fox speak, by all means, do not miss it!

Maybe next year...

So, to all my friends there: Have fun!

Brian M

Vanessa Fox joins the blogging fray...

Welcome, Vanessa Fox!

To those who are wondering, Vanessa Fox is a Googler who has recently joined my blogroll, but don't expect a lot of photos at her site - but watch her site for some great comments as she learns more about blogging and SEO!

Again, welcome aboard, Vanessa Fox!

SEO Myths: Revisit-After

Once upon a time, there was a tiny little search engine in British Columbia that thought it would be nice to have a new META tag that webmasters could use to tell them when to revisit a page.

This tag is now commonly seen in the header of sites across the web:

<meta name="revisit-after" content="7 days">
or:
<meta name="revisit" content="7 days">

There are a few logic problems with this entire concept, which is why the Canadian search engine quickly abandoned its use and no longer supports it, and why no other search engine has implemented it as a standard. Aside from the fact that there is no convention that defines the variables (could you say 1,365 days and still expect it to work?) let me point out a few problems with this logic and see if I can dispel this myth:

1. A search engine schedules its own crawl rate, so if it takes 19 days to crawl the entire web, and then the robot comes to a page that says 20 days - what happens? Does the robot leave and come back later when the 20 days has expired?
2. What happens when a webmaster gets impatient, and keeps changing the number? What is the robot supposed to do when it sees the number change from 20 down to 2 days? Or, then to 7 days?
3. Most importantly, why would a search engine come back every 2 days when a page doesn't change for several years? Many pages become 'orphans' and never change as their webmaster forgets about them, so why come back every 2 days to crawl a page that never changes?

And yet, this 'myth' is perpetuated, as one webmaster sees it on a competitor's site, and thinks, "Oh, oh - I better add that META tag if my competitor has it." Before you know it, the web is filled with this META tag and people start to believe in the mythical properties of this tag. Like you somehow need it in order to get your page up on page one of the SERP.

It's a lot like when somebody sneezes, and you say, "Bless You." Does it help that you say those words? If you never said a word, would that person really shrivel up?

The 'revisit' tag is a myth, but I guess that if it makes you feel good, go ahead and use it. Will it help you get your page up to #1 in the SERP? No. Not as far as I know. But I've been wrong before, so why should you listen to anything that I have to say...

I'm sorry that I have blogged about this before, but this myth just won't go away, and a new client seems to be stuck on this idea as being valid...

MSN's adCenter content fiasco!

I just got this email from MSN:

"We're excited to welcome you to the Microsoft adCenter Content Ads pilot. On April 12, 2007, we'll upgrade your account and your ad distribution will expand to content-based webpages within the Microsoft network. Your ads will continue to run on search results pages as usual."

Come on, MSN! When are you going to wake up? If I wanted to pay for ads on your stupid content network - don't you think that I would have signed up for it? Obviously not, which is why you figure the ONLY way to get ads to appear on your content network is to force everybody to 'opt-in' whether they like it or not.

And then, they have to 'opt-out' in order to save the few bucks that you are trying to squeeze out of them. And I thought that you were listening to the advertisers in the forums, where webmasters are bashing you mercilessly.

Maybe you'll start to listen when everyone shuts off their ad campaigns, which is what I intend to do if you go through with this madness. That would be a lot easier than going into each campaign and removing the check in the check-box that you have so carefully hidden...

It's not that your content network is bad, but the fact that you are forcing advertisers into displaying ads there under the guise of an "upgrade" is absurd, and I, for one, will not tolerate it...

MSN attacks Firefox

OK, enough is enough... I came home to find that my Icon for Firefox had suddenly disappeared from my desktop, which is really odd, since that was the only Icon that was missing. It was conspicuous in its absence because my desktop is full, and its Icon used to be in the upper left-hand corner of my screen.

I wouldn't mind so much, except that it also was gone from Joey's desktop, so there is a pattern here that is really starting to annoy me.

Give it up, MSN - your IE7 browser stinks! I can't even access my MSN adCenter account and see all of the details in IE7 that are available in Firefox. Never mind the fact that IE crashes every minute when trying to access MSN adCenter. The fact that information cannot be seen is absurd, which is why I have switched to Firefox.

I am not alone, since I can see a steady switch in visitors to my web sites that now has Firefox with 15% of the market, and that number is only going to climb if you persist in these childish attempts to control what users want to use. Anybody that wants a slower, more inefficient browser is welcome to use IE7, but don't try to get me to switch by taking the Icon off my desktop. That just makes me want Firefox even more!!!

Google adds [BOOK] results

Keep your eye out for [BOOK] in Google's SERPS. It may not be apparent, but if there is some book that fits your search, Google will add that to their SERP with a pre-tag notice [BOOK] where [PDF] occasionally appears. Here's an example:

[BOOK] Sightseein' and RVin': Travel Adventures After 50 - Google Books Result
by Cook, Sue, Cook, Ed - 2005 - 258 pages
March 17, 2003 LETS DO LAUNCH ! "Let's Do Launch", "Failure is Not an Option" and "Nothing is Impossible" are a few of the slogans of NASA and the Kennedy ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=1412053722...