<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>developedtraffic.com &#187; Search Engines</title>
	<atom:link href="http://developedtraffic.com/category/search-engines/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://developedtraffic.com</link>
	<description>Web design, search engine optimization and Internet marketing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:12:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Google admits compromise of principles</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2006 02:53:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes: Google admits compromise of principles with respect to Google's dealings with China &#8230; and not just "Google", but Google co-founder Sergey Brin at a meeting with reporters in Washington: Google Inc. co-founder Sergey Brin acknowledged Tuesday the dominant Internet &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/12/art-principles-animated/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Art Principles Animated'>Art Principles Animated</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/01/17/google-domain-aging-versus-the-sandbox/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Domain Aging versus the Sandbox'>Google Domain Aging versus the Sandbox</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Sandbox and the Patent'>Google Sandbox and the Patent</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Ganged Against</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 12:20:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not to jump all over Google (though a quick search here shows I've delineated some of my Google concerns over the past couple of years), but I thought it important to point out Business Week Online's Ganging Up on Google. &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/20/google-smarttags/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google SmartTags?'>Google SmartTags?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: WSJ re Google Autolink'>WSJ re Google Autolink</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/25/protest-increases-against-google-toolbar/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Protest increases against Google Toolbar'>Protest increases against Google Toolbar</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Abusive Spidering: don&#039;t do it</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/26/abusive-spidering-dont-do-it/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/26/abusive-spidering-dont-do-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/26/abusive-spidering-dont-do-it/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Without naming names, I discovered that a particular site was requesting our RSS feed to the tune of 15,000+ times last month. I'd tried various ways to throttle it, and then to ban it, all of which were unsuccessful. Given &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/26/abusive-spidering-dont-do-it/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2007/08/30/domain-names-resolving-and-reverting/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Domain Names Resolving and Reverting'>Domain Names Resolving and Reverting</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/04/revisiting-domain-name-transfer-policies/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Revisiting Domain Name Transfer Policies'>Revisiting Domain Name Transfer Policies</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2006/09/13/msnyt-reader/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: MS/NYT Reader'>MS/NYT Reader</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/26/abusive-spidering-dont-do-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AOL to use MSN.com?</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/18/aol-to-use-msncom/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/18/aol-to-use-msncom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Sep 2005 09:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/18/aol-to-use-msncom/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MarketingVox reports that AOL may use Microsoft's search engine in place of Google. Not exciting? Well, back when Yahoo dropped Google in place of its own (newly improved) search, SEOs new to the game predicted no change in the world &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/18/aol-to-use-msncom/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2004/12/14/desktop-search/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Desktop Search a Threat to &#8230;?'>Desktop Search a Threat to &#8230;?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2006/06/06/google-admits-compromise-of-principles/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google admits compromise of principles'>Google admits compromise of principles</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/01/31/microsoft-not-integrating-desktop-search/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Microsoft Not Integrating Desktop Search'>Microsoft Not Integrating Desktop Search</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/09/18/aol-to-use-msncom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FontHit Font Search Engine</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe I'm late to the party, but I'd not seen the FontHit Font Search Engine before. Search results display the font itself, where to get it, and possible alternatives. Of course, you need the font name, which can be another &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Brainboost Search Engine'>Brainboost Search Engine</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2004/10/19/seo-versus-search-engine-friendly/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: SEO versus Search Engine Friendly'>SEO versus Search Engine Friendly</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2004/10/15/flash-intolerance-and-search-engine-news/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Flash Intolerance and Search Engine News'>Flash Intolerance and Search Engine News</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google and Website Owners</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/16/google-and-website-owners/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/16/google-and-website-owners/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2005 17:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/16/google-and-website-owners/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since Google doings are of interest to website owners and site publishers, there's a thread a Threadwatch entitled Publishers vs Google &#8211; Backlash Brewing. In particular, read down to lots0&#8242;s summary. Related posts:Google Ganged Against Google SmartTags? WSJ re Google &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/16/google-and-website-owners/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2006/04/25/google-ganged-against/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Ganged Against'>Google Ganged Against</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/20/google-smarttags/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google SmartTags?'>Google SmartTags?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: WSJ re Google Autolink'>WSJ re Google Autolink</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/05/16/google-and-website-owners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Sandbox and the Patent</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On-point discussion at cre8asiteforums.com regarding a delayed-publication Google patent and the much-theorized Google sandbox. Interestingly, the patent suggests a number of elements to determine both the age of a website and whether the website itself is "valid" &#8212; that is, &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/01/17/google-domain-aging-versus-the-sandbox/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Domain Aging versus the Sandbox'>Google Domain Aging versus the Sandbox</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: WSJ re Google Autolink'>WSJ re Google Autolink</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/20/google-smarttags/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google SmartTags?'>Google SmartTags?</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brainboost Search Engine</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New to me, the Brainboost search engine is pretty interesting. Ask it a question and the answer may be displayed right in the search results. Our brief testing indicates that Brainboost still needs to work on the algorithm, but it's &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2004/10/19/seo-versus-search-engine-friendly/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: SEO versus Search Engine Friendly'>SEO versus Search Engine Friendly</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2004/10/15/flash-intolerance-and-search-engine-news/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Flash Intolerance and Search Engine News'>Flash Intolerance and Search Engine News</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/06/17/fonthit-font-search-engine/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: FontHit Font Search Engine'>FontHit Font Search Engine</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/28/brainboost-search-engine/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google on Nofollow</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/18/google-on-nofollow/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/18/google-on-nofollow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2005 07:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/18/google-on-nofollow/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thread on Threadwatch.org: at the recent Search Engine Strategies conference, Scottie Claiborne asked Google about nofollow. The response was telling, and Scottie's remarks pretty much follow my January 22 analysis of WordPress and the Google Link Attribute. They were very &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/18/google-on-nofollow/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/01/20/new-google-anti-comment-spam-link-attribute/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: New Google Anti-Comment Spam Link Attribute'>New Google Anti-Comment Spam Link Attribute</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/01/22/wordpress-and-the-google-link-attribute/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: WordPress and the Google Link Attribute'>WordPress and the Google Link Attribute</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/02/a-peek-at-wordpress-15-and-nofollow/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: A peek at WordPress 1.5 and nofollow'>A peek at WordPress 1.5 and nofollow</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/18/google-on-nofollow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WSJ re Google Autolink</title>
		<link>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/</link>
		<comments>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:04:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Vigil</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since Google seems to be remaining silent with respect to webmasters' and website owners' concerns about the Google Toolbar's new beta Autolink feature, how's this from the Wall Street Journal's Walter Mossberg in today's Google Toolbar Inserts Links in Others' &#8230; <a href="http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/05/google-autolink-funnies/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Autolink Funnies'>Google Autolink Funnies</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/02/25/protest-increases-against-google-toolbar/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Protest increases against Google Toolbar'>Protest increases against Google Toolbar</a></li>
<li><a href='http://developedtraffic.com/2005/04/01/google-sandbox-and-the-patent/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Google Sandbox and the Patent'>Google Sandbox and the Patent</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://developedtraffic.com/2005/03/10/wsj-re-google-autolink/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

