digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Matt Cutts: Five things you didn't know about Google

mattcutts.com — Matt Cutts writes a long post about the NY Times article on Google. Great post!

Who dugg this? Made popular Jun 6, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

54 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • sickswaystop, on 10/11/2007, -5/+71The Five:
    1. Google continues to have a strong focus on search
    2. Google makes lots of improvements that most people never notice.
    3. Getting search right is really hard
    4. Google has some good internal tools
    5. There are a lot of people “behind the curtain” at Google that improve search

  • Mizzike, on 10/11/2007, -14/+37please digg this comment down, thanks.
  • orangysb, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18......

    you are freaking retarded
  • orangysb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8there's a major difference between Google and other companies before the dot com bust, Google makes money, lots of money whereas internet companies before were just hypes with no profitable business models

    last year alone Google's revenue was 10 billion
  • orangysb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7that's exactly what the article said, Google is continuously putting in lots of money and effort to improve their search

    "Google's method is slowly being exploited by spammers"
    spammers have always been trying to exploit any search engine since the day world wide web is born, it is an ongoing battle that will never end
  • matdevdug, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Want to know the five things I actually want to know about Google?
    1. How to get their money.
    2. Where they store their ideas so I can steal them.
    3. How they manage to look like they are having so much fun at work in all the pictures.
    4. If having pets at the office is a pain in the ass for everyone around you or if it just works.
    5. How much does Google actually know about me, and if they give a damn.
  • accidental, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Wasnt THAT interesting. I mean all 5 are pretty much the same thing.
  • optigon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I think you're in the wrong thread.
  • ca34ro, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5You quote everything except the original resource. Sorry to burst your bubble, but this was not first revealed to "John". John's version had a little bit added to it and a little bit changed here and there by the time Rome finished revising it.
  • gregdigg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Once you find the thread you meant to post in, keep in mind that "taring someone with the same brush as a killer of a child's innocence" makes no sense.
  • ilana, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I already know all there is to know about Google ;) Okay, maybe I don't, but I do have a good sense for the obvious.

    Seriously: "Google makes lots of improvements that most people never notice." Hmm... I would surmise that pretty much every successful company without incremental releases (e.g. Microsoft) does this on a continual basis. Even those with incremental releases have improvements that are not immediately apparent to the casual user. (Not every change is as obvious as the introduction of a mapping product or the death of Clippy)

    I like learning about successful companies, but need a story with a little more depth than "We get better because we work, like, wicked hard." Sorry, but I had to mark as lame. =(
  • Scarfy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2FTA:
    "I think it’s important to get more Googlers out into the spotlight."

    He said "Googlers." Sounds like someone is going to get a good talking-to.
  • oesj, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7@mikecampbell
    alexchiu.com contains the following line:

    'NEW INVENTION ALLOWS HUMANS TO STAY PHYSICALLY YOUNG FOREVER'

    google may be out of line banning him, but frankly only the seriously moronic and gullible will miss it.
  • ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Many telecom companies were valued ten times more (customer value) before the bust a few years ago.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You are a smart-ass, so you pull "facts" out of your ass.
  • MatttK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1We're allowed dogs where I work but only if your dog isn't noisy. So it really isn't a bother to anyone - actually, everyone loved the dogs that were there.
  • drilldown, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I compared a search today on ask.com, which I ran last night on Google for a particular image. Google won.
    On size, I'm guessing they cached it somewhere.

    Crappy bandwidth... sorry, looking at that post up there.

    Anyway, both found the image (pic: a tattoo) I was looking for. I ran the exact same search and google turned up the full size image in one less task. Ask didn't have a full size image to work with, 'nough of that. Obviously, google is cheating and ignoring the rules on limiting access to what's out there. Anyway... regardless of internal bickering, Google still leading in the search dept.
  • picardo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What happened to Matt Cutts' site? Did we digg it to hell? When I hit his page, I get "Not found on this server" error. That's not your average type of error resulting from a digg deluge.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1only reason people read digg is be cause of the snorg ads
  • coldfusion1970, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I guess its because both companies do a lot more good than bad.
  • tanto, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1# Myth: High Page Rank = high traffic.
    Fact: Big mistake. Page Rank only shows the popularity level of a website and has no connection with traffic. In fact, many websites with low Page Rank even have high traffic.

    # Myth: Once your website is listed in a "link farm", Google will penalize it.
    Fact: Nonsense. Everyone is able to submit your website to a "link farm"; so what if it's one of your competitors who did it to ruin your reputation? Google will not be that stupid.

    7 Myths and Facts About Google SERPs
    http://customerdataplus.com/blog/?p=31
  • timusca, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Try this.

    http://digg.com/tech_news/Pirate_Bay_founders_host_paedophilia_site
  • sunshinelife, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1For anyone truly interested in Google I advice to look up even the buried comments from this thread.
    There is a very strong pro Google and pro Apple bias among Digg readers that will bury critical comments about Google and Apple.
    That is why this comment most likely also will be buried. Well well.
  • ehelbush, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I enjoyed the article and Matt Cutts' comments were redundant.
  • clickfire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think most people who follow Google already knew about or at least assumed these five things.
  • koregaonpark, on 10/11/2007, -9/+9Interesting read to say the least. Nice to see stuff like this coming from a Google employee.
  • GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1You worship the internet? Get a ***** life, man!
  • Kolbrener, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Yea there is no such thing as bad one way links... but google will penalize you for not reporting paid links however....
  • drilldown, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4You should really check into a clinic for that.
  • koregaonpark, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5@ fober: Yeah, thanks. He kinda links to it in his post.
  • omejoop, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0So why are most of my searches returning crap then? I think I put at least 500 sites into Customize Google to be removed from search results, since they always mess up my searches. If I search for say a type-numer of a gadget, I don't want to see second-hand offers or shops selling it from the USA (does not work for Europeans). If I start map-search, I don't want it to search for Dutch cities in the USA. Maybe for Americans Google puts up reasonable results, but in Europe, it sucks big time.
  • orangysb, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3erm no, Google takes up 50-65% of the search queries depending on the sources
    Yahoo is 2nd at 20-25%

    http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/013595.html
    http://blog.compete.com/2007/05/10/search-market-share-april-yahoo-google-ask-msn-aol/
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Actually its the customer that should be paying Google 1$ for opening his eyes and taking him away from the grip of Microsoft (like in those anime movies with possesed people). And I say, pay Google, not Mozilla. Although Firefox is an excellent browser, hadn't it had Google's support Mozilla wouldn't have been where it is now. Their Mozilla browser and Opera couldn't get anywhere against IE by themselves. And while people may argue that Mozilla is a heavy browser, Opera stands at only 6MB, probably less than what Firefox 3 will be. And pretty much everyone who has used both browsers agrees that while Opera looks better, is faster, is more stable (AJAX and Flash do hurt Firefox's stability, I, as a developer call tell), has more features (without taking into account Firefox's plug-ins) and on the whole misses nothing that Firefox has. Yet people go for Firefox (including me), unable to properly argue the reason. I tell you, Google's propaganda is the reason, and I am damn glad about that.
    I also have a Gmail account and use Google's toolbar because I like saving stuff like bookmarks and web history on an internet server both for accessing them anywhere and after a system reinstall. I've configured it to just replace the Firefox search, so the toolbar is completely unnoticeable.
    NOW I AM PSYCHOLOGICALLY UNABLE TO USE INTERNET EXPLORER, and I find version 7 even harder to use.

    One thing I would love Google to endorse is an office suite, probably OpenOffice.org. Once they make a Google sponsored version that includes the full functionality of their web office (the option to save documents to your Google account etc.) and they put some money on ironing out the bugs, improving the drawing features (including equations) and rethinking the interface (which is about on par with MS Office 97), Microsoft Office will have a very hard time retaining the title as the standard in document creation (believe it or not, in most developing countries students and emplyees must write Word documents, Powerpoint slides, Excel spreadsheets. Its a "must", not a "should")
  • peetv, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Umm... I usually don't comment that much, but that was one of the dumbest lists I have ever seen on the digg top ten. But I do have a serious question, can someone tell me when Google search spiders will be able to crawl flash and interactive web experiences??? Anyone? Or maybe that will some day be part of 2) Google makes a lot of improvements that most people don't notice.
  • sunshinelife, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Google is bound for a fall of epic propotions.
    The shareprice just reached USD 518.

    Market cap is then 161.64 billion USD. (See Yahoo Finance http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=Goog)
    Lets say for simplicity that Google has 1 billion users or "customers" (there are 6,6 billion people in the world total).
    This means EACH FREE GOOGLE USER is valued at USD 161! This makes any old .com deal blush.

    Interestingly on AdSense Google will pay webmasters USD 1 (yes ONE DOLLAR) for a new fresh installation of Firefox with Google toolbar and Google homepage, presumably taking that customer from Internet Explorer and the Microsoft grip.
    This tells us that Google itself on the margin values one new customer somewhat in relation to USD 1.

    1:161 - You do the math - something will give spectacularly.
  • bradg2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0It's ***** like you that make people hate evangelicals.....
  • tommah, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5I didn't know Google was a Wordpress error.
  • Caladain, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2@mikecampbell:

    Perhaps it's the trolling at the bottom of the site...the little text box filled with keywords..

    Just a guess i suppose...
  • Visarga, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3stupid, stupid

    One thing I bet anyone didn't know about Google:

    ALL their employees BREATHE every second!!! Did you know that?

    I am sure this will make the top of Digg. Such an interesting fact must be on top.

  • ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Things you really did not know:
    http://www.google-watch.org/
    Or not.
  • roddy10, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0Google needs to spend a ton of resources on search, because search companies are inherently vulnerable. it doesn't cost anything for a user to switch to a new search engine that does something better or differently (look what happened to excite, lycos, altavista etc.) Google recently got owned by Yahoo on social search, which is a huge up and coming search category. Ultimately I think Google will get their lunch money taken by another crafty start-up that figures out a new way at looking at the web...Google's method is slowly being exploited by spammers, just look at the link farms.

    my 2 cents
  • TheClincher, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0Great. More opportunities for advertisers...

    If it starts selling me something, can I burn it?
  • djmounce553, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0Alex Chiu's website has been blocked by Google since August 2006, possibly because of keyword stuffing. -From Wikipedia
  • TheClincher, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0OH CRAP, I TOTALLY POSTED ON THE WRONG THREAD.

    My bad.... disregard this. It was supposed to be for the talking paper.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+150 Diggs and it died and DuggMirror didn't catch it.
  • Vash63, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1Erm, wtf? 50 diggs and it's already dead? Buried for ***** servers.
  • jlebrech, on 10/11/2007, -11/+5I think Rape of any kind it totally abhorent and the perportrators should have their members disabled.

    But a lot of people confuse paedophilia with ephebophilia.

    More often than not some young ladies don't tell their age and are fully adult-bodied,
    and sexually active, and taring someone with the same brush as a killer of a child's innocence can be have the same consequence as murder itself.
  • thepumer, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2@chinchillamateo

    yea we already know that, pointing out the obvious is something thats useless to do cause it shows that you are just trying to sound smarter but infact you arent cause we already know that.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.