Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What it looks like when Google links to your website

raaw.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#61

Post by raawmarkus »

ColinWright wrote: post #49

Not sure you'll see this, but this is what your page looks like on my browser: http://www.livmathssoc.org.uk/images/AlternativeTo.png I have, of course, scrolled down past the image. It took some considerable time before I realized there was any text there. Just thought you'd like to know. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11 (don't ask)

Hi Colin,

I just HAVE to ask :)

Anyway, that doesn't look good and I'm sorry for that. I use a Wordpress theme that I bought and I guess it just doesn't support your browser.

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#62

Post by olaj »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #25

I'd like to hear how they were able to handle the dramatic increase in traffic over such a short period of time.

It was actually pretty easy to deal with. Since we usually have around 50-70K visitors/day we are used to a lot of traffic.

Our setup is one Windows Server 2008 R2 with 12gb RAM and Intel Xeon E5520 @ 2.27Ghz with 8 cores. The page is built with ASP.NET MVC + Web Forms (The alternative page is Web forms).

Anyway, ASP.NET scale really really well and since only a small % actually login to the site we can just cache more or less everything. Usually when sites go down because of massive traffic increases i think there is some kind of bug somewhere or they are just being blocked by their hosting provider.

/Ola (From AlternativeTo)

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#63

Post by olaj »

seagreen wrote: post #54

Markus, what license is the content of AlternativeTo under? Have you considered one of the Creative Commons licenses like Stack Overflow?

We haven't thought that much about it actually. The only experience I have with it is that the whole web is filled with crappy spam sites that is using the content from Stack Overflow to earn a few extra bucks and that is kind of irritating.

Maybe someone has done something really useful with the data as well that i don't know about though.

But if someone have any awesome idea and want to do something together we are always listening :)

/Ola

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#64

Post by dorfsmay »

mortehu wrote: post #50
dorfsmay wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that's like writing: Kg 19 300 g I understand it's tradition, but the fact that people keep using it kills me. Especially when people start using kilo $, and in "$ 100K".

Tip: It's written with a lower-case k. Capital K in front of B means 1024 to some people (including me), but 1000 is always written as k.

Thanks. You are correct about lower case k for kilo (but upper case for mega and up), but the official unit for 1024 bytes is the kibibyte, which is KiB:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#65

Post by seagreen »

olaj wrote: post #63
seagreen wrote: post #54

Markus, what license is the content of AlternativeTo under? Have you considered one of the Creative Commons licenses like Stack Overflow?

We haven't thought that much about it actually. The only experience I have with it is that the whole web is filled with crappy spam sites that is using the content from Stack Overflow to earn a few extra bucks and that is kind of irritating. Maybe someone has done something really useful with the data as well that i don't know about though. But if someone have any awesome idea and want to do something together we are…

Spam sites are definitely a legitimate concern.

I really love the idea of AlternativeTo, but unfortunately don't feel comfortable adding content unless my contributions will be under an open license. So I'm not sure what great stuff could be done with the data (though I bet there is something) but you might get more users if you go with a CC license.

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#66

Post by mortehu »

dorfsmay wrote: post #64
mortehu wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tip: It's written with a lower-case k. Capital K in front of B means 1024 to some people (including me), but 1000 is always written as k.

Thanks. You are correct about lower case k for kilo (but upper case for mega and up), but the official unit for 1024 bytes is the kibibyte, which is KiB: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibibyte

That's why I said "Capital K in front of B means 1024 to some people".

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#67

Post by ColinWright »

raawmarkus wrote: post #61
ColinWright wrote: post #49

Not sure you'll see this, but this is what your page looks like on my browser: http://www.livmathssoc.org.uk/images/AlternativeTo.png I have, of course, scrolled down past the image. It took some considerable time before I realized there was any text there. Just thought you'd like to know. Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11 (don't ask)

Hi Colin, I just HAVE to ask :) Anyway, that doesn't look good and I'm sorry for that. I use a Wordpress theme that I bought and I guess it just doesn't support your browser.

In short ...

Some time ago I needed a machine that lets me browse the internet, write programs, deal with email, connect with Skype, and run a small wiki. More, it needed to have roughly an A5 footprint, more-or-less 210 mm x 150 mm. The Asus Eeee running a variant of Linux fitted my needs perfectly. It has a perfectly usable keyboard, and drives almost every projector without problem.

It's still running, and has now been extensively personalized. However, upgrading the browser has repeatedly defeated me. Until recently that hasn't been a problem, most website are still usable, although sometimes (but not always!) the "mobile" version is better/more tolerant than the "desktop" version. It's only in the last few months that there are web sites that simply don't work. For them I often drop to a command line, pull the html directly, post-process with a AWK script, and read the extracted text.

Interestingly, sometimes that's faster than my desktop rendering the full page, with ads, images, and analytics slowing everything down.

Re: What it looks like when Google links to your website

#68

Post by bhaak »

Gurrewe wrote: post #44
bhaak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

s/217.000/217'000/ FIFY

Actually, no. The way he wrote it is (one of) the official way(s) to do it in Sweden.

That's the joke. There are about a dozen different language and cultural dependent "standards" for writing decimal separators and number groupings.

I especially like the ambiguity you get in those cases where some places use the period as decimal separator and the period as number grouping character and then other places do it the other way around.

Post reply on HN