Re: Altavista better than Google for genealogy searches

"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:rm7n241ao77d1j16gc4cp7lpbb8birjat2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It seems that Altavista is much better than Google for genealogical 
> searches.
>
> A distant cousin is organising a GROWDEN family reunion, and I have 
> a GROWDEN
> family web page, and was trying to see what there was on the family 
> on the
> web.
>
> I entered "Growden family Growdon" (both spellings are used) in both 
> Google
> and Altavista (http://www.altavista.com)
and Altavista returned far 
> more
> relevant results on the first page. My page dedicated to Growden 
> family
> history did not show up on the first couple of Google pages at all, 
> but it was
> the first one on Altavista. It also appeared on the first page on 
> Dogpile
> (http://www.dogpile.com).
>
> "Google is your friend" has become something of a cliche in 
> genealogy
> newsgroups, but it is worth remembering that it is not the only 
> search engine,
> and for genealogical purposes it is not even the best.


As one of those wont to say Google, and not about to change that, I'll 
explain why.

It is nothing to do with whether Google is the best or not, and 
nothing to do with whether any other search engine could be got and 
installed, and would prove better. It is most definitely nothing to do 
with sophisticated searchers who are familiar enough with searching to 
make value judgements and sufficiently energetic to pursue those 
judgements until they get the optimum search procedure for themselves.

What I am addressing is the reality. The vast majority of PCs in the 
UK come with Google installed. They are sold to people who wouldn't 
know, and aren't interested in knowing, what the alternatives could 
be. People who clearly have not used any search engine before, which 
is deducible from the fact that they asked a question which could be 
answered in a fraction of a second if they had used the search engine 
they already have installed and it is reachable through the same 
keyboard as they just used to ask the question. People who don't seem 
to have twigged that the core technology in genealogy is searching!

Such people will go on and on and on asking basic or stupid questions, 
expecting help from those who have done their homework, and never 
giving anything back to the readers of the newsgroup. It is no good 
doing a specific look-up for them. They learn nothing, except where to 
come back for the next freebie. They'll only ever become useful if 
they learn the basics, starting with searching as their first response 
to a problem. And the first place they can start learning about 
searching is right there in front of them at their fingertips. Go and 
Google.

It'll probably be a year or two, after they have learned fairly 
sophisticated searching, that they get fed up with the irrelevant crap 
and advertisements, and start wondering whether there is something 
better. By that time they'll be sophisticated enough searchers to find 
it. There will be a big fall out during that learning time because 
many people will be unable to learn or decide that learning is not 
worth the bother. That doesn't matter. Genealogy is not a compulsory 
subject but an optional extra. If they can't or won't do the work then 
they have every right to go an play tiddlywinks or any other time 
filler which does not involve searching.

Don