Keep Google image search interface test

Discuss the premium home page Google's continuous image search interface test
On March 3, 2013 (GMT 0) at 12: 33 pm
Saturday afternoon I was searching for some ideas, and all of a sudden when I click on the image, this image shows the new interface:

[img716.imageshack.us...]

However, lefthandside image you will notice that they are "test is too" is by the "regular" show interface.

He has appeared on one of the images, click on the lefthandside. Repeat this and can't do that yet, but at that time I was searching through the image, and perhaps had two hours and I wondered if they were made "to try and help this guy out on the type of functionality"?

The next AdWords for some of us think it's already been mentioned.

On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0), 11: 42 am
"Let's try and help this guy out on the type of functionality"?

Until this morning and came back to the new interface, image search keywords while checking a couple of discount that idea. After entering the keyword + General description appeared.

On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0) at 12: 42 pm
I would like to see ...
"Landing page", "original image view", "image details" left and right below the large image is 8 "thumb" ... "This attempt" ...

Click on one of them.G keeps you from image search and yet more 8 thumbs up "try this" ...

btw...The Huskies ...Your screenshot will time out ...

On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0) at 2: 30 pm
btw...The Huskies ...Your screenshot will time out ...

Hmm ...France will have to make for me, the other machine works:-)

However, some of the images when searching for a particular tool, there seems to be quite fond of this feature very random.

On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0) at 2: 51 pm
The next AdWords for some of us think it's already been mentioned.

They are making money from our images and bandwidth will mean. This will worsen, even stealing.

On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0) 8: 06 am
btw...The Huskies ...Your screenshot will time out ...
Hmm ...France will have to make for me, the other machine works:-)
Screen captures 208 k. .. Images sometimes (browser cache flush) and loads very quickly, but like watching paint dry, even in the United States has been the California road.
On March 4, 2013 (GMT 0) at 9: 10 pm
Interesting ...One is on the left and click on the "big" images I've noticed just ...One can go straight to the G hotlinking on your website ...

He also shows up on the right side of the "thumbnail" images to 8 ...Watermarks are many ... "demotion" doesn't show a watermark on the image: large image can now connect directly to the site and ...On the other hand, for a while there ...Click on the larger image results in isolation, since the actual site page not open but ...

So: click the image watermark image (aside from the tire kickers, thieves and pinteresters, etc.) likely to encourage those who are looking for more ...(G to index your images accepted) If you click to the message in the image of penalising the image would not appear in G image search.

At least ...Now ...

On March 5, 2013 (GMT 0), 11: 38 am
"Demotion" doesn't show a watermark on the image.

No, I have a problem with the new site started about 18 months ago with no watermark image position from the beginning, whatever.

Indeed, lots, and Image Watermarking in the industry, especially with my widget because thousands of People's Republic of China in multiple directories on the site, to be honest, they have their own image.

On March 6, 2013 (GMT 0) 4: 55 pm
Peek the new image search results in Search Preview. Read more.

[google.com...]

On March 6, 2013 (GMT 0) 5: 06 pm
Btw, now that I think about it "test is too" day for me is gone.
.

[Edit: 5: 47 am (utc) on March 6, 2013 Robert_Charlton]
[Why edit] foster's request [/edit] fixed

On March 6, 2013 (GMT + 0) 6: 55 am
It is suitable for Google.de

[google.de...]

On March 6, 2013 (GMT 0) 7: 15 am
My "test" does not refer to the image, click the image to go to the site but can I find. A nice change.

My images are prominent copyright watermark on a map and also with "click to enlarge", which appears to be affecting anything soesnt.

On March 6, 2013 (GMT 0) 7: 16 pm
.De image preview of changes in it's only me? My ff, chrome, Safari, and I don't see it. It seems that there is a but r. f.

Probably another lawsuit, you must love Germany.

On March 7, 2013 (GMT 0) at 12: 09 pm
"These attempts" since my main CMS Gallery is an average 27.4 percent from yesterday to 24.9% less page views

What's the point of Google, I just do not "get"!

On March 8, 2013 (GMT 0) 8: 55 am
@HuskyPup, that's the point. Google made the move over the past year plus, all have been kept in a user's own page. Technical graph, this is suitable for image search update and other integrated. Make more money in their pockets.

Like it or not, each of us has their competition $ $ $ for Gallery easily (legally) can steal those pictures they click on it, and actually enjoy the possibility for regular users will not be tiny "landing page" display button again when you are looking for a specific image you want by clicking on your site are sent only to the users.

I honestly don't understand how this isn't a copyright theft. They have their own website now displays the entire image. No wonder why no longer get almost any image search.

On March 8, 2013 (GMT 0) at 1: 41 pm
I honestly don't understand how this isn't a copyright theft.

It is more than a copyright theft. It's too bandwidth theft. The car is similar to stealing gas from.

 

View the original article here

Optimizing a MySQL Database for WordPress

 6:11 pm on Mar 7, 2013 (gmt 0)
lorax

It's going to depend on your system and where the bottlenecks are, how much memory you have, how much you're writing versus reading. I'm not an expert by any means. For a production system, you should get the tuning done by someone who really knows how to scale InnoDB for you.

I should probably just leave it there and tell the OP to go do some research. I will elaborate, but I will also say that take what follows below as a starting point for your research and please come back and correct any errors I make below - I'm just sort of shooting from the hip here.

In my case, I just do basic playing with values to get my local dev station so that it can run Drupal reasonably well with InnoDB tables (and I assume WP would have the same issues with InnoDB).

The basic principle is this - InnoDB defers writing to disk when it can, but constraints on the memory it's allowed to use, the requirement to be ACID compliant and so forth can force it to write to disk more often than you need.

If you are monitoring disk activity and you run a query (say load a WP page), you'll see disk activity spike to very high levels and stay there long after the page is loaded as InnoDB "catches up", that is takes care of the deferred work it needs to do. With the wrong values, InnoDB can almost max out your disk all day long with hardly any queries actually getting run.

So if you're having I/O bottlenecks, your goal is to get it to buffer to memory more and write to disk less. But if you're having memory bottlenecks...

And if you're having both problems, you need to get more memory and an SSD probably.

Anyway, looking over my config file (my.cnf except on Windows, my.ini) and trying to remember which values I've customized... (again, check my work!)

innodb_buffer_pool_size = 256M

I believe the default here is 5M, which everyone says is inadequate. I've heard it said (I don't know as this is official or speculation) that the value is so low by default so that you *have* to set it to get it to work decently.

I'm running with a fairly low 256M. The docs say you can go as high as 80% of memory, but I would say that would probably only be okay on a dedicated DB server. Like PHP memory, you don't want to go so high that you exhaust memory for other processes. I should probably bump this up to 512MB though - this is an 8GB machine.

Docs suggest 25% buffer pool size

innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 1

This determines how and when the buffer is written to disk. 1 is required for ACID compliance, but if you can afford some data loss in event of a server crash, then you can set this to 0 and reduce disk usage.

Some of these are not straightforward to change. To change some log file settings you need to shut down the server, move the files to a new location, change your settings, reboot the server so it will generate new files, then once you've verified that it all works, delete the original files. You can otherwise end up with a server that won't start.

 10:55 pm on Mar 7, 2013 (gmt 0)
Here's an example for a serious InnoDB setup that can afford 4GB of memory for InnoDB
https://gist.github.com/petemcw/844412
 1:20 pm on Mar 8, 2013 (gmt 0)
Hi ergo,
I split this off so we could all explore this more. For neophytes like me, this is a very useful topic that I fear would hijack the original thread.

So, I'm looking into this more now. My situation is that I have multiple WP installs on a dedicated server with 4GB. Now I'm thinking I want to bump that memory up to at least 8GB but I don't know enough about servers to know if it would even be able to use it. SO, my next step is to speak with the host about the max I can get on the box along with prices. This will set the ceiling for me. Then I can back into the rest of the setup based on what I have to work with.

 6:54 pm on Mar 11, 2013 (gmt 0)
I don't really have a lot to add honestly.

Again, I don't want to present myself as a server ninja. I'm not.

That said, you can always make good use of more memory :-)

I would say that you need to find out where your bottlenecks are though, principally

- I/O
- CPU
- RAM

If your system is bogging, you might want to start by profiling Wordpress, but you may not have control over this. If people absolutely have to have a given feature, telling them it burns a lot of horsepower may not change anything.

Quick example - I had a site that was bogging down after some changes. One change I made was using PHP to grab the image size so I could inject proper height and width attributes into the HTML for the IMG tag. When I profiled the site it turned out that about 80% of the time was spent grabbing these dimensions on a gallery page. Simple fix and now, in the age of responsive sites, it's better to avoid coding dimensions into your image tags anyway.

But assuming that you can't do anything at the software end, you can always shift things around.

If you're CPU/DB constrained, for example, you can put a reverse proxy (Varnish, Squid, etc) on the front end and do a lot more caching.

If you're I/O constrained, you can load things into memory with Memcache so you get a lot fewer disk hits. I'm not sure how big your DB is, but with an extra 4GB, you might be able to just load your whole MySQL database in memory with the understanding that a system crash between writes to disk would cause data loss (a reasonable tradeoff for a pure content site, but not acceptable in other contexts).

And then, finally, if you're not already on an SSD, you might look into spending your money there rather than on memory. But you would first need to benchmark with a high load and find your failure point.

 3:35 pm on Mar 12, 2013 (gmt 0)
Thanks ergo. I hadn't thought of using a SSD - I inhereted the setup I have now. I actually just negotiated a new 2 year contract with the vendor. I could probably get modifications without and issue.

Digging in now. I'll share what I learn here.

First up. Developing a cron job to remove revisions of posts on a regular basis.

Second learn more about how to measure I/O on the database. Any thoughts on using performance_schema ?

 5:36 pm on Mar 12, 2013 (gmt 0)
No thoughts on performance_schema. Looks good

You can get some idea of things with your basic Unix tools
- top
- iostat

But like I said, I've just done what I need to get simple setups running okay.

 5:40 pm on Mar 12, 2013 (gmt 0) 2:22 am on Mar 15, 2013 (gmt 0) 2:48 pm on Mar 15, 2013 (gmt 0)
Thanks guys. I have looked into those resources phranque but to be frank phranque, I have a steep learning curve and it makes my head hurt. :)
shri

msg:4555616

 9:36 am on Mar 16, 2013 (gmt 0)
The best way to optimize your database (and your application stack) is to ensure that you have rock solid caching at multiple levels.

Rendered pages do not need to be rendered again, unless something has changed - content edited, comments added etc. Use something like Varnish with content sensitive purging ( available in W4TC plugin).

This is far superior to application level caching as neither PHP nor MySQL are accessed unless your page has changed.

Also consider using a plugin like W3TC to cache queries and a bunch of other stuff in a memcached like setup. This will ensure further scalability.

Using these strategies we were able to get the query load down from 1000+ queries per second down to 20-50 queries per second on a WP based site that had around 2 million visitors over a weekend.

With a low query load like that you don't have to mess with changing your DB structure / indices etc.

 3:23 pm on Mar 16, 2013 (gmt 0)
No question that some sort of caching (or the combination of several sorts of caching) should usually be your first step if your server is bogging down.

This originally came up in the context originally of complaining (as I understood it) that a single page load was maxing him out and after a single page request he was having persistent high I/O and CPU activity and this was true even with plugins disabled.

That means that something is wrong on the server end, because Wordpress with very low traffic and no plugins should be fast without any caching at all.

So yes, in most cases people should look at the obvious. Especially for a content site with few logged in users, caching will give the biggest return for most people.

 1:22 am on Mar 17, 2013 (gmt 0)
Good thread... it's worth mentioning that MyISAM relies on the OS cache but InnoDB will take care of its own cacheing, and that WP will use whichever storage engine is the default for your particular MySQL version (AFAIK).

InnoDB became the default in MySQL 5.5

If any WP tables do not have sequential inserts then they will become fragmented and will perform at less than optimal speed. [mysqlperformanceblog.com...]

 2:59 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
shri! Goodness, haven't seen nor heard from you in years. Welcome back.

So caching at different levels is a good thing. Like the database, rendered pages, and what about DNS (using a CDN like cloudflare or amazon s3)? What are some of the gotchas in using caching at multiple levels. One I can think of might be that the results of tweaking anything in the delivery chain might not be apparent because one or more caches further down the delivery pipe haven't been updated or cleared.

BOL - how would one tell if they're using InnoDB or MyISAM? Is it easy using PHPMyAdmin or is this a command line type of check?

 3:28 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
how would one tell if they're using InnoDB or MyISAM

For a whole database, something like
SELECT table_name,engine FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES WHERE TABLE_SCHEMA = 'databasename';

Or on a per table basis
SHOW CREATE TABLE tablename

Is it easy using PHPMyAdmin or is this a command line type of check

Whichever you prefer, both will show the same output. I prefer the command line as phpmyadmin will perform an extra query for pagination on the ui.

 7:18 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
lorax - FYI - any site that was built on MySQl before 5.5 will still be running on MyISAM tables unless the site admin actively did something to convert to InnoDB.

As an aside, one should be careful about converting willy-nilly between MyISAM and InnoDB. As just one example, InnoDB by default has a lower max index length, being set to something like 765 bytes (as opposed to 1000+ for MyISAM).

If you have an index that's on a VARCHAR(255) field, that's all good... until you go fully international and switch to the utf8mb4 character set to support full Unicode... which means that your VARCHAR field now has 1020 bytes (255 chars * 4 bytes/char) and your site crashes.

>>PHPMyAdmin

If you want a nice GUI tool, check out SQLYog or HeidiSQL (the former being nicer in most respects, the latter having a great search feature though where it will search through all tables for text)

shri

msg:4558114

 12:34 am on Mar 25, 2013 (gmt 0)
>> a single page load was maxing him out and after a single page request he was having persistent high I/O and CPU activity and this was true even with plugins disabled.

Enable the mysql slow query log.

log-slow-queries = [path to the log file]
and
long_query_time=5

That should reveal the slow query issues.

Most blogs will not have enough content to even slow down a half way decent server on a select * from wp_post type query.

The problem with innodb is that it does require a fair bit of tweaking - far more than MyISAM and is non-trivial, specially if you're not technical enough to drill down the code or the query that is causing the slow down.

InnoDB shines in high concurrency situations when tables are being hammered with updates. In MOST situations, myISAM works perfectly and is much more suitable for anyone who classifies themselves as a webmaster, as opposed to a database admin, IMHO.

If by chance you happen to be running PHP-FPM instead of mod_php in apache, take a look at the PHP Slow Query logs too.

request_slowlog_timeout - The timeout (in seconds) for serving of single request after which a php backtrace will be dumped to slow.log file. Default: "5s". Note: '0s' means 'off'
slowlog - The log file for slow requests.

>> shri! Goodness, haven't seen nor heard from you in years. Welcome back.

Lorax, I visit atleast once a day... but rarely have anything to say. :)

 5:36 am on Mar 25, 2013 (gmt 0)
>> but rarely have anything to say

Well thanks for saying it when you do - some good stuff in your additions.

 1:05 am on Mar 26, 2013 (gmt 0)
Yes, all valuable information. I'll report back as I work through my particular situation.

OT
@shri
Well I hope to see you in person someday soon. I believe I owe you some scotch and a few cigars - hmm... I think I owe the same to webwork too... coming to Vegas this year?

 

View the original article here

Microsoft Bing Betting On Deep Search Integration

Featured Home Page Discussion Microsoft Bing Betting On Deep Search Integration
 3:50 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
"A massive transformation of search as a product is playing out in very profound ways," says Microsoft's Bing chief, Qi Lu. Speaking at TechForum last week, the unassuming president of Microsoft's search efforts revealed a new approach Redmond is betting on to compete against Google. "As we build our product, we're converting the Bing technology stack into an information platform," says Lu. This new platform can then be embedded into any devices and services, pushing Bing directly into Microsoft's products.Microsoft Bing Betting On Deep Search Integration [theverge.com] This integration is a core part of the way Microsoft sees Bing's future at the company. "Bing as a platform presents the universal platform," says Lu. This extension and change in user habits has Bing thinking it might be able to catch up. "The battle between us and Google is going to be over who can build understanding more quickly to serve people in a much more anticipatory way," says Microsoft's Adam Sohn.
 4:19 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
Techno(MBA)babble ..from a company who were looking to sell their "bing platform" and couldn't get any interested buyers even at facebook..
 5:58 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
I recken it'll be as great a success as Windows 8. What ever happened to the KISS principle?
 8:02 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
Microsoft has never been an innovative company like Apple and others. They are simply a marketing machine.

Pretty much every piece of technology they have ever sold was acquired through mergers, copied from innovators like Apple (Windows) or bought outright going all the way back to MS-DOS.

It will take an innovator to beat G at search IMO. And I just don't see that ever coming from Microsoft.

 8:44 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
Nice to see that people in this forum have not lost their sanity yet, and are not buying the Bing nonsense.

Search will evolve. But the fundamentals of search will remain crawling and gathering immense volumes of information, and processing / delivering that information. How can you ever deliver what you have not gathered?

Search requires the kind of investment that "NoEvil" G has committed, and MS refuses to commit. Good luck to them then . . . . .

albo

msg:4554941

 9:28 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
Leosghost: Spot on. "...converting the Bing technology stack into an information platform" sounds like some of Donald Rumsfeld's "known knowns...things we know we know."
 11:40 pm on Mar 14, 2013 (gmt 0)
I see history about to repeat itself and it's getting weary.

This is how it started all with Netscape when MS decided that the browser was the interface of the OS and had to be tightly integrated directly into the OS. They sure as heck better make sure the API for their information stack is plug 'n play so that other providers and be replaced based on the consumer's needs or we're back to square one with the choice issue and the EU will start hopping up and down all over again.

I think marketing speak aside Bing is absolutely right in their long term strategy but currently I, and many others, prefer apps that tap into Google's information stack, not Bing's, and while that may change in the future it's the current reality.

Next thing you know apps will start prompting consumers to switch to the Bing stack like they used to say "THIS SITE CAN ONLY BE VIEWED WITH INTERNET EXPLORER" and other such nonsense.

What ever happened to the KISS principle?
Having in the past been more than one big cross-company API design committee you quickly learn that the KISS principle is what you do to the backsides of people at other companies to get what you want implemented at all and is why most programming APIs from places like MS look like they were designed like a bill full of pork barrel passed by congress and not engineers.

 7:21 am on Mar 15, 2013 (gmt 0)
Microsoft has never been an innovative company

This says it all. I'm not getting my hopes up that the future of anything is going to originate with MS.

 3:32 pm on Mar 16, 2013 (gmt 0)
I think . . . Bing is absolutely right in their long term strategy
Not really - when you put a dead cat in a room with two live cats, you don't get three cats in a room. Maybe Bing is not exactly dead, but it is closer to a dead cat walking rather than a kitten up and coming.

I, and many others, prefer apps that tap into Google's information stack
Much to the point.

while that may change in the future
I wouldn't hold my breath.

.

 

View the original article here

Report: Facebook Looks At Incorporating Hashtags

Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 24.11.144.110
register, login, search, subscribe, help, library, PubCon, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld

View the original article here

SEO Benefits of Responsive Web Design

Featured Home Page Discussion This 41 message thread spans 2 pages: 41 ( [1] 2 )  > >   Responsive web design... any SEO benefits?
 7:00 am on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
We are about to complete a project of implementing RWD, responsive web design, to our websites.
We worked quite hard to bring almost the same content for every screen size. The only differences are in content presentation were with tiny pixel screens (lower than 320px) we have no choice but to remove one of the sidebars.

My question is - Does any webmaster who accomplished RWD has seen any SEO benefit? Such as -
1. Better site performance for mobile users, tablets and other visits from small desktop screens - page per visit, time on site, BR.
2. More traffic from Google (well, I doubt. At this point of time! But shouldn't they, soon? :-).
3. Conversion rate increased.
A note - Google Adsense (and many other ad networks) has yet to provide a solution that supports adaptive ads. I think this puts many webmasters on hold.

 1:23 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Good question I have been wondering this myself about RWD.
 1:31 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
From a pure SEO standpoint, if you change the code, you'll see ranking changes commensurate with how well your code change matches algorithmic relevance.

I haven't seen any direct impact on rankings at all (nor did I expect any). User metrics all improved on sites I've done this with (as expected) including increased conversions from mobile users.

 1:31 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
I don't have responsive ecommerce sites as yet. On my information sites though, my mobile users are probably more than half the traffic now, with millions and millions of pageviews. The first thing I noticed is that time on site and number of pages per visit for mobile went way up. I definitely think the usability improved - not just because I try to fit most screens now, but also it caused me to trim some of the excess for desktop, so that it wouldn't get in the way of mobile.

I have at least one long form on the site (for event submission) and I never thought anyone would fill it out via mobile, but darned if they don't. So I looked into how I could shorten that up some.

But I don't know that I could say it was an SEO improvement; the sites were doing pretty well to begin with.

 4:41 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
I switched my sites to responsive a few months ago. It didn't have a positive impact on SEO but it wasn't negative either - more status quo.

I saw a 2-3 day slight drop in rankings in Google until it adjusted to the new layout.

I did this because my mobile traffic was increasing and after research determined that the responsive layout was the way to go (as opposed to a mobile only version of the site).

The thing I love about responsive is that my sites look normal no matter whether i look at them on my computer, my phones or my tablets (2 different screen sizes). I also have a blog that has a mobile version of the site (not responsive) and while it looks fine on the smart phone screen it looks crappy on the tablets.

I noticed my mobile traffic had been increasing the previous months. When I hit about 12-15% of total traffic I made the switch to responsive on my main domains and my mobile traffic has increased. Is that because google recognized my responsive design and decided to give me more referrals? Hard to say since my mobile traffic had been steadily increasing beforehand. But my feeling is I did get a slight preference in Google mobile searches because of it.

The other reason for switching is that I do expect having a responsive site WILL be a ranking factor (if it's not already) later this year.

FYI the sites I switched are Wordpress sites - one uses a customized version of the "responsive" theme while the other users a different named, but still responsive theme. The theme choice has not made a difference either.

 6:01 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Thanks for the responses.
Since site's overall performance must impact ranking, RWD may have an indirect positive effect on ranking (if it hasn't have any direct effect).
@netmeg
Have you taken care to serve the appropriate size of ads on every screen size or you just left the ads of the wide screen version?
Our sites also see millions of visits per month where many of them are from mobile devices.
Thanks for your tip. The very basic reason for switching to RWD is our eCommerce sites.
@canuckseo
I agree with you.
Responsive layout is the future. No doubt about that. Our sites are Wordpress sites too, but the original theme we use wasn't responsive. Now it is. It took us ~ 3 days to get the idea of responsive design and 3 days more to implement. It's a way better design approach. Very flexible.

I still can't ignore the risk of switching to a new design. It exists, but we will do it even if Google screams. That's how we always work.

 6:10 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Have you taken care to serve the appropriate size of ads on every screen size or you just left the ads of the wide screen version?

Yea we came up with a solution and got permission to test it.

 6:39 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
The item from adsense concerning the use of alternative sizes of ads on responsive sites..was also posted on the official adsense blog in French..

[adsense-fr.blogspot.fr...]

Why Google have still not posted this "google approved" method of integrating adsense into "responsive sites" in English ( so as to make it clear for the non French and German speakers is strange )..I, or anyone else ( or even Google's translation engine ) can translate it..but no "translation" is as definitive as if Google were to just post it in English on their own inside adsense pages..

Either their approved method can only be used on responsive sites whose TLDs are in the languages that Google's approved method pages are in..( Fr and DE )..or the lack of this info in English from Google is a mere oversight ?..

Or they have got so used to using FUD..that they are hedging their bets in case adsense on responsive sites on mobile devices results in a flood of complaints from advertisers about inadvertent clicks..that they don't want to take the risk of sanctioning this method is the far bigger English speaking markets..

Below is what is at the foot of their French article giving this Google approved method..

Publi? par Dairine Kennedy, au nom de l'?quipe Google Mobile

I find it very hard to believe that Dairine Kennedy ( Irish ) has for a "mother tongue" , French or German..So surely this approved adsense implementation for responsive sites version was written in English first..and then translated internally by Google..

So they should repost in English..and clear up the "confusion"..unless the "test it in smaller markets first"..is the reason..

Responsive sites SEO benefits ? ..bounce rate reduced ( mobile and tablet users land, and stay to read, and as G measure such things ..and track mouse movements and IMO touch gestures )..I'm recoding my old sites ( with the exception of one which I'm leaving as a "control"..it is falling in SERPS slowly ) to "responsive" and creating my new sites in "responsive"..

Long hours and late nights..a lot of sites to do..But based on observed results ..well worth the effort..

 6:45 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
I don't have ads on my site but I was looking for a way to put a responsive google map on the page. I wonder if that code works? It uses some css and div tags:

/* Responsive iFrame */

.responsive-iframe-container {
position: relative;
padding-bottom: 56.25%;
padding-top: 30px;
height: 0;
overflow: hidden;
}

.responsive-iframe-container iframe,
.vresponsive-iframe-container object,
.vresponsive-iframe-container embed {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}

And then wrap your Google Map or Google Calendar iframe in a div like this:

<... iframe code >

 7:45 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Google AdSense told me (last week) that an English announcement was coming "very very soon" to the AdSense blog. They added the extra "very", I didn't.

My sites are mostly naturals for responsive design because most of them are event sites of one type or another, and most lend themselves to a ton of mobile visits (in some cases I get more mobile users than desktop users)

But I'm not convinced that mobile users in every instance search or use the web the same way on their phones as they do on their tablets or their desktops. I don't have any other types I'm working on now, but some of my clients' sites - if they wanted to go responsive, I'd really have to think and do some research about how mobile users might use the site first.

Responsive design is a relatively easy solution, but I don't necessarily think it's the *only* solution. You really have to delve into how people use your site.

 8:15 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Google AdSense told me (last week) that an English announcement was coming "very very soon" to the AdSense blog. They added the extra "very", I didn't.
That would make sense ( thanks for the useful news for the English readers here :) if they have "tested" our smaller markets and not had flack from advertisers..interesting to see if the name of the English announcement is "Dairene"..or if it is the translation of what she posted on Google France or Germany..

Agree with you entirely about responsive being the easy way, but possibly not being suitable for all sites..:)

There is never a, "one size fits all" solution..for anything..:)

 9:21 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
I find it very hard to believe that Dairine Kennedy ( Irish ) has for a "mother tongue" , French or German.
You don't spend a lot of time in Canada do you?

Can't help but note that over the past couple of years G### has used three separate Googlebot-Mobile UAs, as against just one for, er, Googlebot-Desktop. Obviously they're doing something with that information.

:: detour here for massive train of thought involving feature detection and recent pleas for access to .js files ::

 9:51 pm on Mar 20, 2013 (gmt 0)
Does anyone in Canada speak French ;)

Qu?b?cois is not the same thing..

 5:11 am on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
Google AdSense told me (last week) that an English announcement was coming "very very soon" to the AdSense blog. They added the extra "very", I didn't.
@netmeg
I guess/hope you are talking about enabling Arbitrary Sized Ads (non standard ads) to all publishers.
The moment this feature will be released, hundreds of sites will go responsive.
 5:30 am on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
Qu?b?cois is not the same thing..
Well, it definitely isn't English :P

Aigu on both e's? Really?

 9:05 am on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
When it comes to those who have carried out responsive design, is it really a case of "light touch" - small adjustments to your site (css widths etc) rather than wholesale changes? I ask this because I do see a lot of sites that completely stripdown their site into something that I personally would consider TOO simple for small screens. Personally I find these sites frustrating because they go TOO far - navigation is cumbersome because they've gotten rid of their standard navigation into Three Big Buttons To Click On The Home Page, then Three Big Buttons To Click For My Next Option. It's like the website equivilant of those horrible phone systems ("press #1 for...") that frustrate you. Traversing backwards and forwards through these sites is a chore. Also, I can't get a grasp of the site's size (in regards to overall content) and what's available to me - it's like they're leading me way too much, rather than letting me roam around their site as you would normally like to do.

I do think the pinch/zoom gesture was a game changer that actually made browsing the web a lot QUICKER and easier. However, I know that even with that gesture, you get sites that could use a little responsive design as they becomes troublesome on small screens (rollover navigation that doesn't really translate to touchscreen, etc).

 12:39 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
I guess/hope you are talking about enabling Arbitrary Sized Ads (non standard ads) to all publishers.

No, I don't think AdSense is ready to release anything. I think they're just going to give their permission to using a PHP if/then situation to serve ads based on the viewport, as long as you don't alter the code.

is it really a case of "light touch"

I'm not sure what that means exactly. It did force me to think hard about what I put where, because I want the most important stuff above the fold, and the fold changes depending on the viewport.

In my case, most users don't want to roam the site like they might on a desktop, they're looking for specific information, probably while they're out and about, and that's it (although given how the number of pages per visit is going way up, I might be wrong about that)

I still have tweaking to do as far as font sizes, and getting an image header to work okay and look right in all sizes is a serious struggle for graphically challenged people like myself, but at least the *site* part works.

 4:30 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
navigation is cumbersome because they've gotten rid of their standard navigation into

This isn't mandatory for responsive design - my responsive sites switch to a very functional dropdown menu on smaller screens

is it really a case of "light touch" - small adjustments to your site

nope - mine were complete redesigns - sure they looked similar to what they did but the code did change a lot - plus I added features to one site (social media stuff) that didn't exist there before. I reorganized things and moved sidebars - everything was completely changed.

 7:00 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
@canuckseo, Your code looks good, except, I would not set any width or height for your div only padding and margins to let it resize correctly and in accordance with the screen that it's being viewed on unless it is absolutely necessary, in which case I would also create css for various media screens. I have it on one of my sites, without any width or height and it works fine.

@Zivush, I have RWD now for almost a year on 3 of my sites. So here is what I have observed, at first and for about good 4 months there was no noticeable changes, but I was kind of expecting it to be like this for a while anyway. So after about 4 months, we have started to see increase in mobile traffic, nothing major, about 3-5% of overall mobile traffic and 1-3% increase of overall site traffic, no major impact on SEO or PR. NO the funny fact, traffic is still increasing, but mostly from social sources, which means that mobile visitors are mostly visiting from Facebook, Twitter, G+, LinkedIn and Pinterest rather then organic search again proving that people is spending more time on the social networks than searching on the mobile platforms. So, we are now little over 1 year with RWD and still no major changes is noticed in relation to SEO or PR, just simple increase in traffic mostly related to the amount of posts we make daily.

At the beginning of this year, I have been discussing the problem of RWD and Adsense with G in London, UK. It seemed that at that point and I am only talking about January this year there was not major movements towards creating add containers for variable screens and devices, but after discussing this with their programmers, one solution, which I am sure most of the guys already either implemented or at least know about is to recognize screen resolution using javascript and populate your adsense block with correct adsense code as JSON object using ajax POST or GET method after your page is loaded. This actually have no negative effect on the page load at all, I have checked it twice and most importantly it all works, at least for us.

 7:08 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
@AlexB77 thanks for the feedback - i've only used it for google maps and yesterday a google calendar - nothing smaller than that (IE Ads)
moTi

msg:4557259

 11:19 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
sorry for being slightly off topic, but here is an important note many of you might not consider.

I also have a blog that has a mobile version of the site (not responsive) and while it looks fine on the smart phone screen it looks crappy on the tablets.
the recent years have introduced one fundamental challenge in layout delivery, namely for mobile devices. so there are really only two different basic screen sizes to regard:

1. desktop computers, notebooks and tablets

2. smartphones

the confusion arises, because tablets are commonly labeled mobile devices. in fact, they are, but keep in mind, that in terms of screen capacities, even in portrait mode tablets don't differ that much from devices like small notebooks. in order to correctly cater to tablets, it is more important to keep an eye on things like touch gestures and device compatibility features and integrate them properly.

which has nothing to do with responsive design but rather with usability aspects. so, what is the fuss really about with responsive design when the only new and fundamentally different player in the game is the tiny smartphone screen? which for obvious reasons is actually rather useless to adequately regard with a responsive design approach. why do you think apps even exist? so better come up with a separate mobile version: a webapp.

and it's not hard to detect browsers for smartphones (only smartphones, not tablets) on the server side and deliver a mobile site for them. there are solid scripts in every programming language available for free.

Responsive layout is the future. No doubt about that.
not in my opinion. in my opinion you are subject to a hype that is not thought out.

 11:37 pm on Mar 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
Hey, does anyone know how wide to code for Google Glasses? Someone saw a google class hit on their stats ...
 1:11 am on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
Just got out of a meeting with Adsense rep talking about this very thing.

They are starting to let publishers (whom they have a relationship with - (ie. you have an account manager) use Javascript to test viewport width, set different ad units accordingly.

This code has been bouncing around online for a long time, but its not good enough IMO (thus the reason for our meeting).

We went responsive about 2 months ago. It is challenging to adapt an existing site, and if you manage to lift metrics on your mobile size you are doing well. We've noticed a small improvement in mobile usage. Ads? They are tricky to get right at the best of times.

 2:35 am on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
I feel sorry for anyone having to adjust a large, existing site to be responsive. Designing Responsive is like designing three websites at once.

I'm not sure of the effect it has on SERPs, just whatever you do, don't be like NASCAR and design with tablet users in mind first, then mobile, THEN desktop.

 9:20 am on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
@Panthro
Designing Responsive is like designing three websites at once.
In a way. It is quicker than creating a separate site (or app) in order to serve smartphone users.
Also, using em and % instead of Pixels gives a lot of flexibility. RWD is just a better approach to CSS design.

@moTi
There are really only two different basic screen sizes to regard:
1. desktop computers, notebooks and tablets
2. smartphones
Agree. I don't see any difference between Tablet users, Laptop users and Desktop users. They all have the same experience.
The main RWD purpose is to giving the all content of an information site to smartphone users while keep providing better user experience than what they could have without RWD.
When it comes to a webapp you compromise with the content. Smartphone users nowadays want the all thing not part of it. Therefore, I see an app as a mini-site, a different approach. Nothing to compare to a website.

@AlexB77
Thanks for you inputs about the traffic movements.
As of Adsense, I know the solution that you're talking about. Since it hasn't been officially recommended by Adsense, I am not going to use it.
As market leaders, they should introduce an arbitrary sized ads. Not a partial solution.

 9:26 am on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
They all have the same experience.
But they don't have the same range of input methods. And that becomes crucial the moment words like "hover" enter your code.
 12:56 pm on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
I feel sorry for anyone having to adjust a large, existing site to be responsive. Designing Responsive is like designing three websites at once.

I'm not sure of the effect it has on SERPs, just whatever you do, don't be like NASCAR and design with tablet users in mind first, then mobile, THEN desktop.

There's always been this kind of developer peer pressure to get your site "made for mobile" going back as far as the late 90s. I think if you keep your original page designs simple, you shouldn't have to make radical changes for a smartphone version, if make a version at all (depends how simple the layout is).

 7:16 pm on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
We're about to relaunch our site with responsive web design.

There's various types that we'll focus on, basically creating a separate css depending on user agent, and the other would be to have responsive design when you shrink your browser.

it's going to remove many elements such as content and various other things, so I'm curious how you guys handled this for SEO purposes.

Does GBOT primarily index and rank based on desktop version?

Thanks for any insight.

 7:37 pm on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
I think you're looking at the SEO value all wrong here because whether visitors can find your site or not has no bearing on whether they stay more than two seconds after discovering it's not friendly for a tablet or phone.

With tablets and phones sales skyrocketing and exceeding new desktop purchases you should damn well be designing for RWD if you expect to survive at all!

I did 2 sites with help from PageoneResults from scratch which are fantastic and did another experimental site, very technical with lots of form inputs, using Twitter Bootstrap and that worked out really well too and both methods have done extremely well as far as SEO goes.

 8:31 pm on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
incrediBILL, i understand what you're saying ,just curious on SEO rankings. We rank well now ,and just trying to make sure we can preserve that with responsive design so just looking for tips on that since many "SEO" elements are going to be stripped out in favor of "bare bones ease".

thanks

This 41 message thread spans 2 pages: 41 ( [1] 2 )  > >  

View the original article here

Study: 50pct of All Email Spam Comes From Only 20 ISPs

Featured Home Page Discussion Study: 50pct of All Email Spam Comes From Only 20 ISPs
 4:33 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
About 50% of all junk mail on the net emerges from just 20 internet service providers (ISPs), a study has found.

The survey of more than 42,000 ISPs tried to map the net's "bad neighbourhoods" to help pinpoint sources of malicious mail.Study: 50pct of All Email Spam Comes From Only 20 ISPs [bbc.co.uk]

Many of these networks were concentrated in India, Vietnam and Brazil. On the net's most crime-ridden network - Spectranet in Nigeria - 62% of all the addresses controlled by that ISP were seen to be sending out spam.

Networks involved in malicious activity also tended to specialise in one particular sort of malicious message or attack, he discovered. For instance, the majority of phishing attacks came from ISPs based in the US. By contrast, spammers tend to favour Asian ISPs. Indian ISP BSNL topped the list of spam sources in the study.

 9:19 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)

This is nothing new. I've been routinely blocking all these countries (plus Turkey, China, Russia and Taiwan) from every server I have set up for the last decade.

 9:21 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0) 9:46 pm on Mar 18, 2013 (gmt 0)
That list probably includes the top 20 most popular free mail services. On one site we have a sign up form for a free service and the subscriber needs to validate their email. So many people have so many different email addresses... if they don't receive their confirmation mail they sign up using another email address and so on. Some don't even remember their correct addresses.

Billions of dollars worth of data wasted in spam traffic and all they have to do is stop providing free mail services. What's wrong with the mailbox that one's ISP provides with their internet service?

 8:48 am on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)
What's wrong with the mailbox that one's ISP provides with their internet service?
Most people will change their ISP at least once every few years.
 9:02 am on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)

What's wrong with the mailbox that one's ISP provides with their internet service?

The free services are usually pretty effective and block bulk mailings from their accounts. On the other hand my original ISP regularly had its IP addresses blacklisted because it did sweet F.A. about botnets using its cusomters' infected machines.
 10:04 am on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)
Most people will change their ISP at least once every few years.

Most people change their free mail service more regularly to get away from spam.

 11:49 am on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)
Almost everyone I know has had the same free email address for years, apart from one or two who switched away from Hotmail at some point.

My ISP had its mail server blacklisted for being an open relay.

 8:43 pm on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)
Almost everyone I know has had the same free email address for years

Sure, so do I. But I keep that one for elite contacts. Anything used for general business and correspondence needs to be disposable and is.

 10:29 pm on Mar 19, 2013 (gmt 0)
The e-mail address you get from your ISP changes every time the ISP gets a new owner-- and no, they don't auto-forward. The old address simply disappears. If the phone company worked that way you'd have to tell everyone a new number every other year. The preceding sentence probably had a lot more meaning ten years ago when people didn't change cell providers every five minutes with accompanying change in entire number, possibly including area code. But still.

This is a major annoyance when sites insist on using your e-mail address as your account name. Let's see now, did I join this service when I was on AOL, or Cox, or something dot edu, or...

 6:20 am on Mar 22, 2013 (gmt 0)
@lucy24 - When I sign up to siteA, I create a disposable email from one of our domains that uses siteA@ - if you find spam going to that address you know where it came from. NO, it's not enough to have one or two disposable email accounts, I want to know exactly who lies and who tells the truth "We will never sell or trade your email address... honest".... we'll see.

Waste of time? Not at all: less than 60 seconds to log in to server, create new email, forward that to a "personal" email address and finish the sign up to siteA. The tricky part is replying to those using an email client that doesn't really have those credentials but it's very rare that a siteA type site is going to need replies; like this very forum, the email account is just for notifications.

Spam it, sell it or spoof it, I'll delete it. Anyone remember a time when some sites wouldn't accept signups from email addresses that weren't major ISPs? I don't feel like I missed anything by not having signed up to them, matter of fact, I'm pretty comfortable with it.

 11:50 pm on Mar 25, 2013 (gmt 0)
anyone remember a time when some sites wouldn't accept signups from email addresses?

Sure do. In fact we used to reject mail sent from web forms using Hotmail addresses. Even today, if someone is using a free mail service, we realise that they are not using their domain mail address and probably have many different disposable email addresses. So many in some cases that it takes weeks for them to find your support response.

If your clientele are companies, allowing them to use disposable email addresses for purchases and support is an absolute waste of time. How in the blazes will they ever get proper support and be advised of critical software updates?

With ISPs the old address can disappear

Not if they are using an email based on their domain. After all, if your clients have web sites and email @ their domain, why settle for anything else. What else can they expect when seeking your expert advice at the expense of your time? So they should at least use a legitimate email address.

 12:44 am on Mar 26, 2013 (gmt 0)
After all, if your clients have web sites and email @ their domain, why settle for anything else.
This only works if the person at the receiving end can get your mail. I remember when I first registered my domain name I was told-- by a fellow human, not by the host-- that I wouldn't be able to use it for e-mail because it wasn't an ISP. Remember when cyberpromo sprouted a dozen new aliases every other day? ISPs simply slammed their doors and would accept mail only from known domains, which mostly meant fellow ISPs.

Except, of course, for services like AOL that fought spam with one hand while handing out unrestricted free trial accounts with the other. Sigh. I can remember people getting banned from forums and coming back half an hour later with a new name and IP after, presumably, pawing through that week's trash and fishing out the latest Free Trial CD.

 8:09 am on Mar 26, 2013 (gmt 0)
@lucy24 - I remember when I first registered my domain name I was told When was that, back in the 90s? I remember hearing the same advice back then but in the last few years it hasn't been an issue for any of ours.
 9:03 am on Mar 26, 2013 (gmt 0)
More recent than that-- but the person I heard it from had had her own domain for a lot longer, so she may have been going by early experience. (I just looked it up. She goes back to 1999. Things were different then.)

I've never tried sending e-mail from my own domain, though. I only use it for incoming-- and not much of that.

If nothing else, it prevents the ghastly blunder of forgetting to set one of your addresses to auto-forward. See, ahem, unrelated thread elsewhere in foo.

 

View the original article here

Twitter Revamps Its Ads Center

Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 24.11.144.110
register, login, search, subscribe, help, library, PubCon, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor

View the original article here