Comments on: NEW: Ben Parr’s Posterous Experiment http://www.benparr.com/2009/08/new-ben-parrs-posterous-experiment/ (Mostly) Practical and Entrepreneurial Musings Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:17:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: steve http://www.benparr.com/2009/08/new-ben-parrs-posterous-experiment/comment-page-1/#comment-1134 steve Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:16:51 +0000 http://www.benparr.com/?p=574#comment-1134 hi Ben,<br>Good luck with your posterous experiment!<br><br>I saw your article [Google Caffeine: A Detailed Test of the New Google] on Mashable with almost 100 comments, and wasn't sure if you were still responding there, so I thought I'd ask a question here, if you don't mind...<br>In the article about the new Google (Caffeine) you wrote:<br>"It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results."<br><br>What do you mean by "keyword strings" and how does it handle them differently? Are you talking about "strings" on the webpage or in the links to the page? I thought google already focused on keywords, and already counted "strings" more than unconnected words on a page. Can you give an example? Thanks! Steve BTW, great article. hi Ben,
Good luck with your posterous experiment!

I saw your article [Google Caffeine: A Detailed Test of the New Google] on Mashable with almost 100 comments, and wasn't sure if you were still responding there, so I thought I'd ask a question here, if you don't mind…
In the article about the new Google (Caffeine) you wrote:
“It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results.”

What do you mean by “keyword strings” and how does it handle them differently? Are you talking about “strings” on the webpage or in the links to the page? I thought google already focused on keywords, and already counted “strings” more than unconnected words on a page. Can you give an example? Thanks! Steve BTW, great article.

]]> By: steve http://www.benparr.com/2009/08/new-ben-parrs-posterous-experiment/comment-page-1/#comment-1100 steve Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:16:51 +0000 http://www.benparr.com/?p=574#comment-1100 hi Ben,<br>Good luck with your posterous experiment!<br><br>I saw your article [Google Caffeine: A Detailed Test of the New Google] on Mashable with almost 100 comments, and wasn't sure if you were still responding there, so I thought I'd ask a question here, if you don't mind...<br>In the article about the new Google (Caffeine) you wrote:<br>"It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results."<br><br>What do you mean by "keyword strings" and how does it handle them differently? Are you talking about "strings" on the webpage or in the links to the page? I thought google already focused on keywords, and already counted "strings" more than unconnected words on a page. Can you give an example? Thanks! Steve BTW, great article. hi Ben,
Good luck with your posterous experiment!

I saw your article [Google Caffeine: A Detailed Test of the New Google] on Mashable with almost 100 comments, and wasn't sure if you were still responding there, so I thought I'd ask a question here, if you don't mind…
In the article about the new Google (Caffeine) you wrote:
“It has more reliance on keyword strings to produce better results.”

What do you mean by “keyword strings” and how does it handle them differently? Are you talking about “strings” on the webpage or in the links to the page? I thought google already focused on keywords, and already counted “strings” more than unconnected words on a page. Can you give an example? Thanks! Steve BTW, great article.

]]> By: Daniel Brusilovsky http://www.benparr.com/2009/08/new-ben-parrs-posterous-experiment/comment-page-1/#comment-1080 Daniel Brusilovsky Sun, 23 Aug 2009 03:31:19 +0000 http://www.benparr.com/?p=574#comment-1080 Posterous rocks. Period. :) Posterous rocks. Period. :)

]]>