Tag Archives: Web search engine

How to Improve the Cross-Platform Compatibility with Mobile Widgets?

11 Aug

mobiles_devices for cross platform

Having a website or a mobile application with the number of online visitors is not as straightforward as initially recognized. The world of the internet is booming and the way the search engines index website or app information is always showing signs of change, as is the way you look for data on the web.

For any business that has a website or applications and need to be visible, get excellent review from number of online visitors, you need to adapt and envision how online visitors will search for your kind of business or services. Add this to what kind of medium or technical platform is set to be utilized for the online look.

Now a days there are numerous routines for scanning for content, additionally  different technologies like; Smartphone, iPad tablets, games consoles, digital TV sets, mp3 players with Wi-Fi and even in-car web devices to name yet a couple. So with some of these technologies you need to verify that, you have a cross-platform able applications and website that meets the most recent guidelines and technologies widgets.

Widgets are rapidly turning into fundamental devices for developers that need to enhance the purpose and characteristics of cross-platform mobile applications. This point suggests, it has been very important for developers to develop and modify native applications for the different platforms like iOS, Android, Windows, Rim, Symbian, and so on. With the approach of responsive design application development, these redundancies could be removed. Further you will know, why and how these mobile widgets could be utilized for the development of cross-platform applications.

Mobile widget is only a little compact mobile apps with an extremely basic user interface and a particular usefulness. Widgets give access to real-time, live information, for example climate reports, stock exchange data, news, sports scores, and so on. If users are searching for the closest gas station, flight landing time or traffic status widgets are the ideal answer for adding dynamic substance to applications. Widgets can never replace the functionality of applications; however can essentially help in cross-platform mobile application development.

Many developers as far and wide are making open source widgets each day because they are not difficult to construct and look after and are very attractive to mobile and tablet application developers. Widgets additionally give an amazing chance to circulate adapted content and games to huge gatherings of people by means of application developers. Furthermore since these widgets load speedier and require lesser data transfer capacity to perform, more users are liable to adopt it, subsequently increasing the extent of business sector.

On the other hand, mobile widgets are not as robust as native applications. Widgets intended to run on different platforms have constrained usefulness as they are not able to approach a device’s API. Meanwhile, we accept that widgets can give the most fantastic worth when conveyed as characteristic upgrades to cloud-based mobile applications for smartphones and tablets.

Posted By: Pooja Runija



Google’s Broken Promises, Does Google Requires Some More To Keep Trust In Search?

29 Nov

google-promises brokenFor two years in succession now, Google has backtracked on major promises it made about search. It started doing paid inclusion in 2012, which it once called “evil.” This year, its exploring banner ads might never be permitted. Both speak to major philosophical movements for the company about search, yet shifts it has avoided to demonstrating. Does that dissolve user trust?

However, the bigger picture is that as Google has entered its fifteenth year, it confronts new challenges on the best way to convey search products that are fundamentally not the same as when it began.

That’s the focus of my column at Mobile Pundits Blog this week, Google’s Broken Promises & What Google Do To Keep Faith On Search?

In the past, Google might have explained such moves in an attempt to support user trust. Right away, Google either accepts it has so much user trust that explanations aren’t necessary. Or, the lack of responsibility might be due to its “fuzzy management” structure where no one seems in charge of the search engine.

Broken Promise 2012: Google Shopping Goes Pay-To-Play

Google-ShoppingThe first broken promise came a year ago, when Google took the extraordinary step of transforming one of its search product, Google Product Search, into an immaculate advertisement product called Google Shopping.

Awhile ago, Google Product Search worked in the same way that Google’s standard search engine still does. It accumulated listings from over the Web, demonstrating comes about accelerating merchants, at no charge to them. As merchants needed to be ensured better situation for a specific search, they could purchase ads, which ran above and to the right of the unpaid “editorial” postings.

Google Shopping is an alternate brute. Nobody gets listed unless they pay. It’s not an immaculate illustration. Paid inclusion doesn’t ensure you’ll rank better or get good stories. Anyhow you don’t even get an opportunity to seem unless you shell unconscious hard money.

Evil In 2004, Embraced In 2012

google-good-evilThe Company Wrote, Because we don’t charge merchants for inclusion in [Google Shopping], our users can peruse product classes or conduct product searches with trust that the outcomes we furnish are significant and impartial. 

Broken Promise 2013: Banner Ads In Search

Google promised in December 2005 that there will be no banner ads on the Web search results pages or Google homepage. Eight years after the fact, Google’s testing huge banner ads like these:

google banner

You could contend that the promise was made by vice president of Google’s search products Marissa Mayer, obviously, has proceeded onward to be CEO of Yahoo. At the same time Mayer made that promise on behalf of Google. It didn’t somehow lapse just because she exited.

“Why” Google Broke Promises?

google stop

  • Google no more considers “it’s best to do one thing really, really well – we do search,” nor does “vote based system on the Web”.
  • The more intricate response is that things do change and require organizations and products to adjust. Possibly it does make sense that Google moved to a paid inclusion display for shopping hunt, in spite of its prior stance against this.

I accept there must have been some open conversation. I trust there was. However if there was, Google hasn’t felt it beneficial to demonstrate these decisions in the way it once may have previously, to the shoppers and other people who may mind. Issues that were huge enough to make loud, open explanations about appear to deserve at least some public acknowledgment of a change of heart.

 Posted By: Pooja Runija

Web Crawler Ranking Factors 2013 – Time to Come Up in Searches

11 Oct

Consistent with overview in every two years, over 100 top industry experts to assemble our biennial Search Engine or web crawler Ranking Factors. For 2013, the study with true correlation data from a scientific examination of over 17,000 indexed lists.

ranking factor

Why call as Ranking Factors?

Google claims to use over 200 signs in its search algorithm. While we don’t realize what precisely these signs are, it’s supportive to examine high ranking pages with the intention that we can start to understand the characteristics for pages web indexes jump at the chance to remunerate. This can give us an “insight” as to the ranking factors the search engines truly utilize.

“Correlation is not causation however it beyond any doubt is an indication.”

Case in point, if the correlation information reveals to us that high-ranking pages are connected with a high number of external backlinks, we may speculate that backlinks are still a vital part of Google’s algorithm.

On the other hand, the correlation information doesn’t dependably indicate us an immediate ranking factor (causation), however rather just focuses us towards the attributes of high-ranking pages. For instance, this year information demonstrates an amazing relationship between the amount of Google+1’s and higher rankings, yet Google agents state +1’s aren’t utilized within the algorithm.

This doesn’t mean offering on Google+ isn’t important, however does let us know we might as well give careful consideration to why pages with a lot of +1’s are likewise pages that have a tendency to rank higher in search results.

This post and outline aides show the distinction between correlation and causation:

ranking factor

This practically illustrates the need to not bounce to conclusions with correlation information, for while we think Google might utilize social information within its hunt algorithms, its additionally correct that pages that get countless offers likewise have a tendency to gain a high number of links.

Simply since a metric is quite connected, doesn’t mean Google utilizes that metric straightforwardly.

This is the by and large Google’s algorithm breaks down taken from the respondent’s survey:

• Domain level authority link metrics (20.5)

• Page-level join metrics (19.31)

• Page-level keyword and subject based (14.87)

• Domain level mark measurements (8.83)

• User utilization and traffic/query information (8.28)

• Page-level social measurements (7.28)

• Domain level keyword use (6.74)

• Domain level, keyword skeptic characteristics (5.26)

However, SEOs feel that the universal ranking factors, for example the anchor text and careful match area will soon grow dim as different elements takes a risk in the search engine, for example the webpage’s recognized worth to users, authorship, organized info, social sites and many more.

Posted By: Pooja Runija