Google "Caffeine" will make SEO harder?

[legendoflink]

I guess the buzz is on about the new version of Google Search, codenamed "Caffeine". There's an article about it on Mashable (http://mashable.com/2009/08/10/google-caffeine/) where it states:

New Google relies more on keywords: SEO professionals, your job just got a lot harder. The algorithm?s definitely different. It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results.

Anybody hear about this and worried? Personally, I think it's crap, same old Google, but they made it return search results a little quicker.

 

[Timbo]

I havent seen it but probably a response to Bing. The name suggests speed. Probabaly alot of marketing hype and little change in product. ya know "New and Improved" I have been in the SEO game for about 10 years and it has gotten easier not harder.

 

[legendoflink]

Yes, I know Bing has been having some good marketshare increases in the past couple of months. The Big G needs to stay competitive.

 

[WickednDivine]

The only reason bing is "gaining" market share is because it's brand new, and people are curious. I can almost guarantee that once the "newness" wears off, so will it's market share.

I also don't think "SEO will be harder". Different? Possibly (though probably not much)..but not harder.

 

[Riposte]

It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results.

What the hell does that even mean? And how does that make SEO any more difficult?

 

[monsterclicks]

The only reason bing is "gaining" market share is because it's brand new, and people are curious. I can almost guarantee that once the "newness" wears off, so will it's market share.

I disagree, if you look at some basic usability elements that Bing has included and Google has ignored its clear to see that bing does pose a serious threat.

I think the worse thing Google can do is sluff it off . . .

 

[freller]

I've tested the new Caffeine on a selection of my sites and they've all got better rankings!

I think the difference is primarily to do with actual page content as opposed to the previous single-minded Google obsession with inbound links. It's the only possible reason my sites would rank higher anyway.

 

[trapmuzik]

seems like this new google will be better if it actual relies more on page content than just inbound links.. i have been getting quite a bit of bing traffic lately and ranking high for some popular keywords too. maybe google is catching on to the whole backlink craze everyone is on to get page rank.

 

[medi8tor]

I... I have been in the SEO game for about 10 years and it has gotten easier not harder.

lol what a load of bull seo was way easier 10 years ago!.. maybe you have more knoweldge now but there are 100's of more factors to consider for seo now has become an industry in itslef, - you wouldn't of even heard of a seo company or job 10 years ago...jeez

 

[Curious George]

What the hell does that even mean? And how does that make SEO any more difficult?

Just a guess, but it may be a move towards some type of LSI algorithm, or if they're already incorporating that, a stronger reliance on it. If you have a content rich website, i wouldn't think that it would be more difficult. A 'thin' site may have problems.

Then again, it could be just marketing bullshit and they've just applied a fresh coat of lipstick on the same old pig.

With google, no one ever knows exactly what they're up to, and that's just the way they want it.
:twocents:

 

[legendoflink]

With google, no one ever knows exactly what they're up to, and that's just the way they want it.

I couldn't agree more. The whole concept of keeping everybody in the dark is a little frustrating, but I see this whole "thing" as a way to just keep coming up with better ways of dominating the Big G.

I will say I hope Bing does well, because I'm getting sick and tired of Google dominating this industry. I'd love to these guys fight to be on top, so they will start innovating more and that means more holes to exploit.

 

[jmascis]

My sites came up pretty much the same in both engines

 

[googlemonster]

me smells more g00gle bullshit aimed to appease shareholders (we're constantly innovating mantra).

 

[Hell389]

Deleted........

 

[catchme]

Поживём — увидим

 

[kiangan]

I think not harder.. because I've compared the search results from old google versus the caffeinated one and I've seen that my webpage is showing at the 5th place of the caffeinated results in more than 20m competition

So I think SEO would be much easier.

 

[sikandar]

I took a test drive of Google Caffeine today. What I found was, most of my sites are ranking much higher in Caffeine than in the current version of Google - for a given set of keywords. I will have to figure out what exactly the new version favors !

 

[SeoPeo]

I have a site on the old google ranking on the first page while is not visible in "caffeine". I think this confirms the importance of content as opposed to link building. The only way I promoted this site was placing links in high PR forums. I just published article rewrites on various topics, so keyword density is not good enough...

 

[S M W]

just wait for someone to figure out the seo side of it... then buy their $4997 program & share it with the rest of us.

 

[jazzc]

I have a site on the old google ranking on the first page while is not visible in "caffeine". I think this confirms the importance of content as opposed to link building. The only way I promoted this site was placing links in high PR forums. I just published article rewrites on various topics, so keyword density is not good enough...

My story exactly... Shit.
Strong inbound links is my strategy and it seems it gets slapped. Unless things change when it goes public.