Google announced that they will take the 2001 search engine offline tomorrow.
google.nl/search2001.html
[Title changed ~ hebbet] |
saying
"Google 2001 will no longer be available after tomorrow. Thanks for celebrating our 10th birthday with us." |
Your nav_page.gif is missing ;)
|
That 2008 version, is that cached ?
Why ? |
> That 2008 version, is that cached ?
> Why ?
Well, the 2008 search could become an interesting archive in itself in a couple of years... |
It's funny, I found the 2001 archive for google not only fun, but useful.
I started searching in both – and got better results.
I wish there was a way to appeal to goolge to keep the archive going..
V |
Is it amazingly lame that Google not only took the search down but has it has the first result on searches and then gives a "The page – www.google.com/search2001.html – does not exist." message? I sure think so. It would be cool to leave it up (it was interesting). But not leaving a page at that address (which was linked to over 95,000 times according to yahoo search) that explains what is was and that it is now offline is lame. Breaking 95,000 links is bad enough for some bozos running a newspaper site or something but for an internet company to do that is pitiful. |
Interesting experiment, i tried the search for 'laptop' and the most important change i noticed was the 90% commercial results on the 2008 serp. If i don't scroll down, i counted 6 sponsored links, 3 shopping results and1 (!) organic result. I realize this also has to do with the small viewing frame but nonetheless it is quiet obvious where Google is making it's billions. |
Is it surprising that search results in 2001 typically took 0.01 seconds while in 2008 it is considerably higher (typical is >0.20 seconds and highest I could see is 0.35)
|
what a bunch of tools you guys are, way back in 2000, I got it and it's alive!
[msmc.la.edu/pages/802.asp] |
I have to catch a plane in a couple of hours, but I had to write a quick note thanking you for making the web page of LOTS of Google 2001 search results, and even showing side-by-side comparison. That must have been a lot of work and I appreciate it.
Steve |
