backtop


Print 44 comment(s) - last by iLikeHam.. on Dec 28 at 10:35 AM

Google is once again on the move

2006 appears to be a banner year for Google. It purchased the highly popular YouTube online video site in early October and saw its stock price dance with the $500 mark in November. Now according to ComScore Networks Inc., Google Inc. has slightly edged in front of Yahoo! Inc. to become the second most visited website for the month of November.

ComScore's figures show that Google's site traffic rose by 9.1% to 475.7 million visitors while Yahoo's traffic rose just 5.2% bringing its tally to 475.3 million visitors. Microsoft still held on to a 26 million visitor advantage at 501.7 million.

News Corp.'s Fox Interactive Media sites also saw a significant increase in traffic thanks to the booming popularity of MySpace.com. Traffic for the company rose to a healthy 130.4 million visitors.

YouTube, Google’s recent acquisition, saw its visitors rise 24-fold to 107.9 million.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Microsoft
By masher2 (blog) on 12/26/2006 10:06:20 AM , Rating: 1
> " think the point these guys are making is that most google users go there voluntarily whilst most microsofts users go there out of neccesity. "

In either case, they're still visiting the site...and thus still open to advertising and whatnot from it.

As for the voluntarily vs. neccesity comparison, that's slightly flawed also. For instance, one could say-- "I don't visit Google voluntarily, I do it only when the neccesity arises to perform a search." See?


RE: Microsoft
By boing on 12/26/2006 4:39:19 PM , Rating: 2
yes but to search you have many options, to update your windows you don't. You may have to visit a search page but you choose to visit google in particular due to their performance advantage over their rivals. You visit microsoft 'mostly' because you have to, not because they are better that their rivals.

To that extent i think google have earned their popularity whilst microsoft have engineered theirs.


RE: Microsoft
By masher2 (blog) on 12/26/2006 4:53:37 PM , Rating: 1
> "yes but to search you have many options, to update your windows you don't. "

Once again, I don't believe Windows auto-updates are counted in these statistics.

> " i think google have earned their popularity whilst microsoft have engineered theirs. "

And, as has been pointed out, even if true, its irrelevant. Every pop music star since the days of Elvis has had their popularity "engineered" to some degree or another. That doesn't change the facts. The sole criteria is the level of traffic...not the reasons why that traffic exists.


RE: Microsoft
By MAIA on 12/26/2006 6:28:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't believe


... and since when what you believe maters ? Level of traffic as you suggest is "blind" data, as it not correlated to other important criteria. In such regards, windows auto-updates do count !

quote:
The sole criteria is the level of traffic...not the reasons why that traffic exists.


Then there's no real importance on level of traffic, isn't it ? What really maters is usability and objective interest, rather than direct hits due to defaults configs.

I don't get it, you revolve around how irrelevant and ingeneered popularity is, but then you don't explain why the level of traffic criteria is in fact worthless if you compare it to objective interest.


RE: Microsoft
By masher2 (blog) on 12/27/2006 12:45:33 AM , Rating: 1
> "and since when what you believe maters ? "

It matters until you prove otherwise. My contention is that traffic data is collected only for site hits which result in a page view, not every Port 80 connection upon which data might flow.. Thus traffic from automated Windows updates are not counted.

Why do I believe this? First, because its logical, as counting such traffic would invalidate the results. Secondly and more importantly, a little bit of simple arithmetic should demonstrate that, were such hits counted, Microsoft would have far more traffic than they currently do.

> "What really maters is usability and objective interest, rather than direct hits "

You seem to believe that traffic data is collected and published simply to inform the public as to what sites are popular and should be visited. The reality is sites are ranked for advertisers, to gauge the relative value of advertising upon that site. They are the WWW version of Nielsen Ratings.

> "I don't get it..."

Read it again; it'll come to you.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki