Is Google’s algorithm really over-hyped? In some circles, questioning the merits of THE algorithm is a blasphemy. After all, Google has managed to grab a huge market share lead thanks to its oh-so reliable SERPs, and it’s really hard for folks to game the system, right? Wrong! I have been an advocate of Google forever now, but I can’t explain how disappointed I am with Google and its lack of focus on what matters the most.

Unreliable SERPs: A few days ago, I talked about how I was impressed with Google’s SearchWiki, and how bringing the human factor would help improve the results for all of us. But I am astonished by Google’s refusal in addressing the holes in its algorithm and putting the organic search gamers in their place. I am not talking about some magic black hat technique that folks are using to get ranked. But it’s truly disappointing to see a parked site be in the top 10 results for a fairly competitive keyword (for more than 6 months). And let’s not forget that you can put a keyword phrase in your domain and if you are lucky you may end up in top positions without lifting a finger. Reliable? No. Pathetic? You could say I am going there.

Denial: I am still surprised that Google continues it’s PR based ranking system when it has proven wrong over and over again. The fact that folks can buy links and get ranked high does not sit well with us purists. I have been an advocate of white-hat SEO for a long time now, and It amazes me when Google penalizes one company and then turn its cheeks the other way.

Bullying Tactics: Google’s recent tactics in dealing with those who violate its guidelines show why a monopoly is not the way to go in the search industry. With Microsoft poised to take over Yahoo!, the consumers are going to be left with even less options. Microsoft is not exactly the fairest company in the world, but here is pulling for them to get their search business straight.

At the end of the day, Google is still the best we have in the search industry. Will there be drastic changes in this market? I mean now sure. But I certainly hope that companies such Cuil and Microsoft can mount a serious challenge to Google in the organic channel.

You decide: Is Google the fairest of them all?

When I posted a story about the new search engine, Cuil, a while back, I never thought that Cuil had the potential to surpass major search engines in the short run, as far as driving traffic to my site. After testing Cuil for a while now, I am personally stunned that it is driving more traffic to my site than Yahoo! (I am actually getting traffic from Yahoo! and Live). I have a very small niche site that gets about 100 visitors a day from Google, about 20 visitors from Yahoo! and about 10 visitors from MSN. I do get traffic from Twitter, which is my 2nd highest traffic generator, but that’s pretty much the order. Cuil brings me about 30-40 visitors a day. It’s not huge traffic, but it’s still about the amount of traffic that I get from Yahoo! and Live combined. The results are still not significant enough for me to go out and focus on Cuil specifically, but if this trend continues, I may have no choice.

Are you seeing similar results with your sites? Have you had any success with Cuil?

You have probably heard already that Cuil by ex-Google engineers is finally out and open to public. They claim that they have indexed over 100 billion pages and are the largest search engine on the planet. That is al fine and dandy. But let’s see how Cuil stacks up in design and algorithm:

Design: Simple all black design for Cuil make it look like Black beauty (not the horse). But my experience with black pages shows that they all fail. Does that mean Cuil will fail? Not for this reason but I would’ve preferred a better background color. I guess that’s one way to differentiate yourself.

When you search for a term, the results pages are shown in three columns. The first two columns are basically are your normal results pages while the third column allows you to search by category, which is very neat. Overall, I like the design though it could be too distracting. Reading items one by one is easier for most folks than looking at 3 columns at once.

Algorithm: I picked the term “Federer” to see what I can find on the Swiss genius. To my surprise, Cuil not only shows results for Federer, but also shows a few tabs at the top predicting what I may be looking for (e.g. Federer vs. Sampras, Federer Nike, Nadal vs. Federer). But the same search for UFC showed “ultimated fighting championship and United Fruit Company). Does anyone actually use UFC for united fruit company?

Over all, I don’t see anything that makes me want to drop Google and start using Cuil. It’s nice and cool. It’s different, but no thanks. I’ll stick with Google.