Joe Blow - Kyocera A101K Simple Phone
This is not misleading. Googleâs traffic counts visits to Google search results from toolbars. Comscore measures all traffic to the sites, not just the homepages.
It is misleading. If I got to yahoo.com and execute a search, that is two page views. If I search google from a from a toolbar (ie Firefox or new Explorer beta) then that is one page view.
The Main reason I use Google, is because Iâm lazy. I do have broadband internet, and a pretty quick PC, but like most PC users when I want my browser window to come up, I want it to come up ânow.â I guess waiting for the 2 or 3 extra milliseconds it takes to load yahoo just turns me off to it 
So as google for a homepage I click, boom its there I just type in what I want and itâs always in the first 2 to 5 results.
Iâm quite happy being lazy when it comes to the Internet. Thank you google, for helping me keep up with my lifestyle.
Yahoo WAS great until a year or two ago when the first 10 links were always cleverly disguised links to OTHER search engines that came up with spy ware and assorted spam. Got me to switch to Google pretty quickly.
Yahoo teamed up with GAIN, Google being sued over PPC Fraud and Page Rank fraud. I prefer to search with the address bar and it defaults to google wah wah wahâŚ
You realize that you can set what search engine you get from the search bar. At home I choose Yahoo and work Google. Why google at work? Because the industry I am in relies heavily on Google, but their results are far less relevant than Yahoo. Yahoo has more on their homepage true, but the search isnât hard to find. In fact itâs right up there on top, not buried underneath tons of stuff.
Google was a great search engine when it was the search engine of the geeks and they hadnât started on subtle advertising such as paid mentions in television shows. I mean did anyone really know about google before it was casually mentioned on ER back in 1999? I doubt it. Google went to hell as soon as it sold out, and itâs getting worse. Their main focus is shifting to paid advertising only. Give it a year and the next âGoogleâ will be out, it will be some amazing little known search engine that only geeks use because itâs results are relevant and non commercialized.
At least with Yahoo they are honest with being commercialized.
Jeff Atwood, if you want to just search, then use just a search engine. End of story.
The whole point of the Comscore stats are that seemingly more people want to be able to multitask from a single, still relatively simple(compared to many other websites) interface.
As for toolbars/built-in searches, even if it doesnât count toolbars, Firefox has a very small share of the browser market. Geeks are a very minor minority(redundant?) in the grand scheme of things. And Yahoo has a toolbar just like Google, so that would make it a moot point.
One of the better things that google has going for it is that it doesnât have any partnerships with adware companies. Yahooâs deal with GAIN has done little more than piss a WHOLE lot of people off.
Iâm still wondering how some people make such good arguments over two things that I see as completely different objects. Yahoo is a website that tries to guess what you want. Google is a website that lets you tell it what you want. Google is like an internet slave, and the internet was created for lazy people. It also covers the three basic needs for most internet users: 1.Finding Information 2. Finding Entertainment 3. Finding Pornography. If you want a website that will try to run your life, go to Yahoo. If you want a website that will try to make your life easier, go to Google. Itâs that simple.
I donât think this is necessarily about Google being âbetterâ than Yahoo. Itâs about having a single focus and sticking to it.
I still think Normanâs comparison is specious. Google has all those other services, true, but nobody cares. The most important one is probably Gmail, and you get there by typing in gmail.com, not by navigating via a link on google.com.
Yahooâs portal style of service federation is meaningless. I want news from the site thatâs best at news-- which probably has its own URL. I want email from the site thatâs best at email-- which probably has its own URL. If I want auctions I am going to www.ebay.com, because Yahooâs auctions are a joke.
I think you can see where this is going.
The future of the internet is a bunch of disparate URLs. Yahoo will never link to anything other than blah.yahoo.com, so itâs an evolutionary dead-end, no matter how many zillions of links and images they plaster all over their home page.
Hereâs a great post that riffs on the same themes
http://www.goodexperience.com/blog/archives/000576.php
The tech industry is full of people who really, really like technology.
It should be so obvious, by definition, right? Birds of a feather: Arenât Star Trek conventions full of people who really love Star Trek? Whatâs the big deal?
What struck me in San Diego was that technology doesnât need to actually help users, or improve their lives in some way, in order to look really, really cool. Something that looks cool and exciting to me (as MIT-trained geek) can also be largely irrelevant to me (as user advocate).
The love of technology isnât, by itself, for or against helping people - itâs a different interest altogether. Now for the most part I do think that technologists tend to have an interest in helping people - but technology itself doesnât have a bias⌠and what you choose to love defines your outlook.
Itâs important to draw that distinction, I think. What some techies call great, cool, exciting, slick, compatible, open - all those have nothing to do with whether the technology is useful, productive, simple, valuable, meaningful, indispensable.
So the âsimpleâ version of google has 25+ input boxes? I hope thatâs some kind of parodyâŚ
Try my usable google homepage âSimply Googleâ at goo-home.com
Thereâs a reason âto googleâ is a verb. Iâve never heard anyone say âIâm gonna Yahoo! that!â
Hello all swingers. More information for your life.
So it seems like DITA is doing something quite useful. But despite what Norm admits about DocBookâs old-style paper-documentation feel, Iâd have to argue that it does contain an example of this kind of modularity: the refentry structure. (Though I have long thought that we didnât quite hit a sweet spot with this structure; it was too man-page-specific on the one hand, but trying to be too generic on the other â why not call it manpage and then also invent something with fewer structural assumptions? It looks like DITA has done the latter, and I guess what Norm has also just succeeded in doing.)
Put simplyâŚ
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.
Albert Einstein
Ah, that is what I like about Google.
Notice too, that whoever took the screenshots uses a parsimonious browser window. I hate that MS Explorer defaults to using 15 to 20% of your screen on buttons and menu choices.
@codinghorrors: If talking in terms of simplicity do you think that services like Github need to be simpler, to attract more users? In particular, to beginners git isnât that easy to begin with or do you think that there should be atleast a threshold? I mean a person who is not even able to figure out git and thatâs why not using Github would most probably be pushing code which is not of much worth to the community. What is your view on this?