3 ms·
It's not bad rhetoric, but there are a few problems: First, the ranking algorithm for a local search is not necessarily the same as that for a web search (even
by jsnell 12y ago
It's not bad rhetoric, but there are a few problems:
First, the ranking algorithm for a local search is not necessarily the same as that for a web search (even a web search with possibly local intent). In fact, the results from this tool were total garbage for the last local search I'd done (zurich augenarzt). It gave me results in Germany, results where the address and map pins were wrong, a link to the front page of some local search company I'd never heard of, etc.
To go back to my previous example, in fact the most appropriate result that this extension was able to give was pointing to the Facebook page of a eye care center in Zurich (hey, at least it was the right city) showing content that had basically nothing to do with their business. The only valuable content from the point of view of a potential customer was the link to their actual website. Which brings me to the next point.
Second, the supposed Google+ results are not actually Google+ results. The link is generally pointing to the website of the business itself. At least for me that's generally the result I want. The Google+ page is only used as a fallback when Google doesn't know which website is associated with the business. Of course a local search company's goal is for as many users as possible to be funneled to their web site. It's not a goal I'm very sympathetic to.
Would the "few engineers from different local search companies doing this purely as a side project" still be happy if the link to their site was treated the same way the G+ pages are treated in the results right now? That is, as an auxilliary link rather than as the main result?
Third, companies like Yelp have made it abundantly clear that they don't want "their" data aggregated by Google. While an actual production version of this would depend on that. You can't have it both ways.
As a final note, you guys really need to redo that video with a real human doing the talk. It's hard to get the viewer to sympathize with a bad voice synthesizer, and it comes across almost as cowardly. And worst of all it's pretty hard to understand. It took me almost the whole movie to figure out that the word I was hearing as "parrot" was probably "powered".
- Houshalter 12y agoUnless they changed it since you made that comment, that is definitely a real human talking.