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

The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

searchengineland.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 79 posts

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#11

Post by DanBC »

Matt Cutts gave some numbers about how often the + operator was used - and even then it was mostly used incorrectly.

> > In the past, we provided users with the + operator to help you search for specific terms. However, we found that users typed the + operator in less than half a percent of all searches, and two thirds of the time, it was used incorrectly.

http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your...

Check my math, but I think that means that + was used correctly in only 1 out of 600 searches.

People mention "power users". Google does not want power users. Google wants a mass market of people who see, and click, ads.

EDIT: i guess I need to say that I hated when Google changed the plus operator; and I find using Google now to be a frustrating and annoying experience. I'm shown results tha often are not relevant to my queries.

And Barrkel makes a good point about my confusing potentially misleading description of the times + is used correctly.

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#12

Post by InclinedPlane »

danmaz74 wrote: post #3

I've never been a google+ basher, but I really hated Google dropping the + search operator. It also showed me in a very personal way just how lazy users can be: Wrapping a word in double quotes is "just" 4 keystrokes instead of 1 for the + in front of it, but I effectively stopped using that feature after the change.

The shitty thing was that they dropped the + operator at the same time they significantly increased the "fuzziness" of their search algorithm.

For some searches it might have helped, but for extremely targeted or highly technical searches it was a disaster. Almost as horrible as the bad old days when search engines tended to use "or" for search queries instead of "and". Still it's very, very difficult to tell google that you actually for really really realsies want to search for all the terms you typed in.

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#14

Post by marcosdumay »

chris_wot wrote: post #8

Is there a search engine that is as accurate as Google? Does Bing really stack up?

As far as I know, no, there isn't. I've tried going away from Google, but always failed.

The problem is that Google clearly care about search less and less each day. If the trend continues, we'll be able to change some day, but not because the other sites got better.

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#15

Post by barrkel »

DanBC wrote: post #11

Matt Cutts gave some numbers about how often the + operator was used - and even then it was mostly used incorrectly. > > In the past, we provided users with the + operator to help you search for specific terms. However, we found that users typed the + operator in less than half a percent of all searches, and two thirds of the time, it was used incorrectly. http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your.…

When you say "+ was used correctly in only 1 out of 600 searches", it seems to imply that it was used incorrectly in 599 out of 600 searches. Your phrasing makes too strong a claim as most people understand the language, IMO.

Let's not forget how large an audience any Google feature has, though. + being used correctly, even by 0.33% of users, is still probably a million people.

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#16

Post by brownbat »

DanBC wrote: post #11

Matt Cutts gave some numbers about how often the + operator was used - and even then it was mostly used incorrectly. > > In the past, we provided users with the + operator to help you search for specific terms. However, we found that users typed the + operator in less than half a percent of all searches, and two thirds of the time, it was used incorrectly. http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your.…

Less than one out of six hundred trips takes anyone to the hospital, but we wouldn't want a car that breaks down as soon as anyone is injured.

People don't often need a power search. But when you do, you really want it to work.

Google gets ad clicks by building a brand, they want us to associate them with "competent to handle all my search needs." This is why Ford and Dodge make stock cars, not because they want to sell them on a mass market, but because they want to convince people the brand is capable of excelling beyond their needs.

UPDATE: I think you're right about Google's rationale, I just think execs are missing some counterarguments.

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#17

Post by Kleinlieu »

0x0 wrote: post #5

The Verbatim search option often isn't verbatim enough. Also it can't be combined with a time limited search; selecting "last month" clears the verbatim option :(

So true. I run into this when needing to debug some weird stack trace error but have recently run into google fuzzing my "" exact searches. Now I know I'm not the only one

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#19

Post by k__ »

ht_th wrote: post #9
reitanqild wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger problem was it showed very clearly googles lack of care for search power users. The plus operator was just one problem. Soon after they started fuzzing words in doubleqoutes and at some point they even fuzzed verbatim searches. (Luckily it now works to some degree again.)

The bigger problem is that you, as a user, don't have any control over internet search. Not only are you dependent on Google (or another provider) for what search commands you can execute, you also don't have no control about how these commands work nor on what subset of the database. Especially advanced features, complex queries, or power tools for searching are unavailable to the common user. I have no idea about t…

What about p2p search engines? Are they any good?

Re: The Feature Google Killed The + Command For Is Now Dead

#20

Post by ttctciyf »

AshleysBrain wrote: post #4

mars - 197m results "mars" - 228m results +mars - 19k results +"mars" - 197m results Assuming the estimated result count is at all meaningful, it looks like + still does have an effect: it turns ["x"] in to meaning the same thing as [x].

So, I was skeptical that only 19k webpages would contain the actual word mars (as per the +mars query), and curious why "verbatim" search wasn't included for comparison.

So I tried verbatim search for mars, to find the estimated results count disappears. However, skipping along the pages got me the counterintuitive result that verbatim search for mars finds only 188 results - I'm pretty sure that google has indexed more mars-mentioning pages than that!

Oh, not counting the "very similar" results:

> In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 188 already displayed.

Clicking this "include similar results" link gets me 45 results pages or about 450 results that mention mars found with a verbatim search.

I feel like I've gone back to 1994!

Post reply on HN