Earlier quoted context omitted.
An extra logo (regular users won't understand) in all the search results? No thank you.
AMP results already have a symbol marking them.
Must be my script blockers then. Not seeing them.
Introducing the new Google Search Console
21–30 of 49 posts
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#22Doesn't work well in Firefox. WTF google? Hangouts doesn't work. Now search console too?
But it's Safari that's the new IE, right? Killing the 'open web'?
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#23Instead of making us follow these Amp non-standards, Google should give an AMP logo in Google search results and preference (the same as an amp site) if the load time of the page is under 100ms. So now you have a choice, either DIY or use Google's tech to make your site fast. This way it will create dozens of tech companies competing with AMP focused on making the web faster - the end result that Google supposedly wa…
Yes they should. But they will not. Because that is how small companies do it. Ride the wave of open standards and become big. Remember how Google embraced the web in the early days? Now it's time for them to lock users in and milk them. I would love to see a startup tackling the issue. Creating a score that takes into account load time and other factors. If sites like HN and Reddit would use that score as a ranking…
> Now it's time for Google to lock users in and milk them.
I don't think Google is remotely at that point, and from their competitive perspective they're still winning by letting their open-standards-straw reach all the way across the room and drinking Microsofts/Oracles milkshake.
And for a tech behemoth with Billions of dollars flying around and fingers in all the pies I think Google has one of the, if not the, best track records in standardization. Concretely, when comparing their products at the personal and Enterprise with their competition they're consistently more open...
I think not having a massive clump of RDMB revenue helps them think freely about problems :)
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#24Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#25Doesn't work well in Firefox. WTF google? Hangouts doesn't work. Now search console too?
In my case it looks broken in both, I can't select anything...
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#26Perhaps I'm missing something but why do we need a "console"?
Why can't we just post these search-engine related settings in a special file on our servers?
That way, we don't have to manage 10 consoles for 10 different search engines.
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#27A link to the Search Console would have been great to have in the blog post.
Agreed. The article was pretty opaque.
"Google Search Console is a free service offered by Google that helps you monitor and maintain your site's presence in Google Search results." -- https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/4559176?hl=en
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#28fuck google. evil crap.
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#29That was about time. I was always flabbergasted by how rough and confusing the search console was. I really like how Google are revamping their marketing/admin tools. The Google Optimize [0] tool is pretty nice and the only A/B testing tool I know that is already pretty powerful in the free tier. 0: https://www.google.com/analytics/optimize/features/
I found it a bit clunky, personally, but you can't complain too much about free when the alternatives are rather expensive.
The majority of A/B tests I run are not "visual" and based on javascript DOM changes, along with CSS changes. That workflow takes very little time to execute in VWO but wasn't that apparent with Google.
Re: Introducing the new Google Search Console
#30Instead of making us follow these Amp non-standards, Google should give an AMP logo in Google search results and preference (the same as an amp site) if the load time of the page is under 100ms. So now you have a choice, either DIY or use Google's tech to make your site fast. This way it will create dozens of tech companies competing with AMP focused on making the web faster - the end result that Google supposedly wa…
In reality both approaches will result in webpages faking being fast.
Why faking? As a user, I prefer AMP pages because they load much faster. Often it's just because they don't have as many ads (and a non-amp page would be as fast then) but I can't see that from the search result.