A Google alternative needs to concentrate on not being Google.
For too long we have been plagued with spam and system scamming, all because Google decides that things are to be done their way.
Without Google would there be the need for SEO, backlinking and keyword research.
If a new alternate Google were produced from the ground up, would it be built on the premise of authority and relevance, as now?
If it were it would be irrelevant.
Time for a complete rethink methinks.
Google Alternative: SEO, Backlinking And All That Bull
Google alternative of the future, perhaps? Do we need all this SEO, keyword research and backlinking? Or is just a load of bull?
A Google alternative needs to concentrate on not being Google.
LakeErieArtists asked me a while back if I would write a few articles about search engines other than Google. This is the first of those articles. It is about an alternative to Google that I would like to see, rather than one that already exists. I am going to outline the features that would make it the best search engine, for me. But is it all bull?
Current Alternatives To Google
There are many global and local search engines that you can use. There are big ones, small ones, some the size of Neptune. None though equal the global coverage of the Big G. The search engines that could be classed as alternatives rely on personal preference rather than corporate might. Those that I would consider to rival the G Force are:
The last two are included because they have huge following in their respective home countries, Baidu from China (with a billion internet users), and Yandex from Russia (with half a billion). These two are entering the global search engine marketplace with English versions, but they still have a long way to go.
Bing and Yahoo! have found it necessary to join forces in some aspects to try to eat away at G-man. This is becoming partially successful, in that the percentage of search engine traffic that they are getting is rising slowly, whilst the land of G is being eroded.
We can fix it
Gmopoly is also seeing giants of the social media taking much of internet population away.
The younger internet user has no need for staid old search engine techniques.
They use their social networks to find internet information of interest.
G+ has been invented to try to make G- relevant again.
G Plan to fix it with a little social glue.
Facebook and Twitter have reinvigorated the need for thought in the world of search.
Next Alternative To Google: Do We Need One?
What's wrong with the current Google
And so we come to the present day.
This morning (10th March 2012 - so as to establish that my rights to this idea began before anyone else), I received a notification that PamelaNRed recommended a hub, sorry about that Wizzley (that gives me the best segway so - if you want to write at Wizzley:
), that she found to be hilarious [SEO Tips Absolutely No One Needs To KEYWORDS know, by Eric Newland]. You should read it too, if you want to have a laugh(but not now. Wait until after you have finished reading this, as you could otherwise miss the best bit.) I read it. I giggled inside my head. I commented. I tried to be funny also - in my comment - probably unsuccessfully. And I added at the end that perhaps we should club together to make a spoof Google - SPOOGLE. I was not serious about it, then.
It just frustrates me occasionally.
Actually it angers me a lot that, as a writer, I have to:
- jump through hoops
- compromise my integrity
- waste my time
Panda'ing to God.
And as a searcher, Golem annoys me intensely by:
- assuming it knows what is best for me
- still gives me BS results.
En Raging bull
But it got me thunking (sic.). I do thunk occasionally, or at least I have been known to thunk. And that thunking went something like this:
- GBS caused whole industries for SEO, keyword research, back-linking and all that BS.
SEO, backlinking, keyword research. All Shocking!
- These exist only because there is a need to Gloze, get it to tell the world that certain content exists.
- Without the Googlemonster we could write proper stuff, straight from the mind, without having to worry that some algorithm would deem it worthy.
- Without Gila we would not have to try to get 'worthy' websites to link to our offerings.
- Without Ginderella (sic.) we would not have to search for the Ugly Sisters, K & R.
- Without the G-authority test there would be no need to play the system.
Perhaps a level playing field could be in place for all to play on.
That was my thunking.
Next Alternative To Google: A Level Playing Field
We do need an alternative
I had breakfast, thunking all the while. It was becoming a habit - must attend TA.
And this is where I'm thunking at now. Starting from scratch.
Standing for no bull
Incorporating all the current needs, current topics and current possibilities. Incorporating the needs for information and the recommendations from the social internetworks. Incorporating the need for relevance and quality.
Removing any need to dupe the algorithm. Removing the out-of-date and replacing with the contemporary. Removing spam and corn beef. Removing the plagiarism and copyright infringement. Removing the monopoly and replacing with Cluedo.
We should no longer have to pass 'Go' to collect our just rewards. I want just rewards for just content.
Time for a level playing field - unless you are Yeovil Town (ancient British football humour there).
What's Wrong With Google?
Let's check out how they decide what we 'want' to see
The BIG problem with Gserps is that they make assumptions about what we 'want' to see.
Googlings assume that we are interested that:
- someone other than us decides which other content is worthy of a link (backlinking)
- some webpage has just the right number of occurrences of a phase (SEO)
- someone has worked out that a phrase would be good to write about because that could earn them some money (keyword analysis)
All this is NOT what we want.
What we want is well-written content that:
Is this 'pie in the sky' or just utter bull?
Is it bull?
- Entertains us (a voice we can relate to, poems, short stories, music, YouTube)
- Fulfils a need (How to, sales articles)
- Gives us the information we require, to the depth of our need (Wiki, short informative articles)
- Keeps us up to date (recent content, News)
- Deconstructs what others say, and puts a new twist on it (blogs)
- Compares and contrasts what is available (reviews and sales articles).
- Does all the things that we cannot be bothered to do (research, sales pitch articles)
That is NOT what we get.
Come on 'make my day'!
Built from the bottom up
How do we get this Utopian alternative to Gaudi?
Bottoms up. Oops, Freudian slip, I mean 'bottom up'.
We start from the position we want to be in.
- Level playing field
Whether a page has been around for years or a few minutes (recency) should not impart any positive or negative relevance. The only criterion that should be of interest is whether it is relevant (to the individual).
Whether it has 20 billion back-links or none cannot determine relevance.
Whether or not a particular keyword sequence appears cannot determine relevance.
- User generated relevance
It is only the searcher that can determine if the content fulfils their need, not another website (backlinks), nor the fact that an irrelevant result has been placed in front of them (bounce rate).
Each page should be rated by the searcher for relevance - your vote counts!
Each searcher could be rated for the relevance of their ratings.
If you are worried about privacy, all this kind of data is already held by Gsnooper, somewhere.
- Semantic alternatives (we decide what meaning we meant).
Instead of placing connotations on the meaning of an entered keyword search by an algorithm, we should be asked which alternative meaning we had in mind. The keyword database should be used for this.
Once this has been established, then the most relevant keyword alternatives should be presented and all those we deem to be relevant should be used in the database search. Any user generated relevance should be used to determine the order in which the results are presented.
Google & Alternatives
A lot of stuff about what you did not know you needed to know
Name the Google Alternative
Which of these names would you prefer?
Add the name you would like
as an alternative to my names
Alternative name I like
If this Google alternative is implemented by anyone, I will sue. To stop me from suing for billions of dollars, you will need to employ me as a consultant.
My fee for my services is set at 0.01% of total revenue. Not just profit, nor net income, just total revenue!
We can consider that a contract is in place by the simple fact that you read it here first.
The following words and phrases deserve explanation:
- Big G = 'Google' alternative
- G Force = alternative to 'Google'
- G-man = different 'Google'
- G = alternate Google
- Gmopoly (pronounced gee'mopoly) = a Google monopoly
- G+ = Google future
- G- = Google past
- G Plan = Google plan
- SPOOGLE = not Google
- God = Google as a deity
- Golem = Google as a monster
- GBS = Google BS
- Gloze = Google flattery
- Googlemonster = differentiated 'Google'
- Gila (monster) = poisonous Google
- Ginderella = oppressed Google
- K & R = the ugly sisters Keyword and Research
- G-authority = Google authority
- TA = Thunking Anonymous
- 'Go' = Google platform
- Gserps = Google results pages
- Gsnooper = Google personalized information (see adchoices)
- Googlings = Google employees
- Gaudi = Google Gothic