Yes, badly. Nothing about Google stands out anymore and they've been rotting from multiple ends for a long time.
Search rarely returns credible results and I find myself adding 'site:reddit.com' frequently to at least get some organic discussions about things rather than articles which look like they were sponsored and artificially inflated to the top. They've turned into a joke about releasing something and killing it off a few years later. Android is a nightmare for developers (and users) with how they handle API changes and the Google Play store as a whole. Any kind of customer support is non-existent in basically any of their products. Their hardware is good but software gets worse over time and stagnates (their smart home ecosystem). I still don't trust them for a second with my data.
Gmail is fine, Maps are fine, YouTube is... well, we don't really have a competitor and nobody wants to switch because they wouldn't have access to a large audience. Whatever they release I have no faith in it, not with it keeping my data, not with its longevity, not in its reliability.
Maps are not fine at all, not anymore. They have started showing "sponsored locations" on the maps very prominently. For eg, some outlets (restaurants, electronics, apparel etc.) will be shown very large and prominently, even at very zoomed out levels. It is highlighted very disproportionately, obscures the nearby area and has bigger in size that public attractions like parks, local monuments etc. This is happening in my area for some time atleast. Really cheapens the experience.
I think that is perfectly acceptable for a product that is otherwise very good and completely free. You don't even need a Google account to use it (at least in the browser, not sure about on phones).
You 100% need a google account on Android. Recently, for a month or so, Maps had been malfunctioning for me -- it wouldn't show any maps. It would still do turn-by-turn directions, but not maps.
It turns out that I had logged out of my google account and forgot to log back in. Once I did that, I could see the maps again. Not that I really want to -- those sponsored locations are much too annoying to tolerate. So I've switched away from Google Maps and logged back out of my account.
Agree. Google maps are definitely getting less reliable. I see weird ui bugs often. Sometimes it also forgets the search history somehow. I’ve never seen that happen before a year or two ago
When I use the quotation marks "xyz" to ensure that the result contains the string "xyz", goog no longer gives me results that have "xyz" in them.
It's not for all cases, but is most noticeable when trying to debug a program. I'll get an error, then search for that error online, putting the outputted error in quotation marks. Granted, these tend to be obscure errors and I'm not exactly expecting to find an answer.
But goog will return a bunch of SEO spam, ads, and then ~2/3rds of the way down the page, finally some real answers. But! These 'real' pages/answers don't contain the string that I made sure to specify to return. Often, it's very badly related to what I'm searching for to begin with.
Like, I'm okay with goog not returning anything. That helps me know that the thing I'm trying to do is headed in the wrong direction.
But goog is very much not okay with not returning anything.
I imagine that some KPI was set by some manager at google that they have to decrease the number of pages that don't return anything. So to do that, some check was implemented to strip the quotation marks away if a query doesn't have a result. And I just so happen to get caught in this a lot. I understand, google get more money when that happens, as it makes sure to show a lot more ads to me when it does this (pretty certain of this, but not 100%).
Still, yeesh!, it's so frustrating when I try to use the tool and it just ignores me!
Maps is not fine. There are random gaps in Streetview data all over the place for places that previously had coverage or where the data was obviously collected. I've tried reporting the bugs through multiple routes, but it never gets completely fixed. There's nothing more infuriating as a software developer than being unable to open a ticket for a software bug.
The 3D rendering is falling behind what competitors are offering. I also find the UI very convoluted, they are trying to do too much.
And OH MY GOD DO NOT CHANGE MY ZOOM LEVEL!! I spend so much time trying to find the area I want to search, enter Chinese restaurant and it expands to the entire freaking region. PLEASE STOP DOING THAT!!
OH MY GOD I thought I was the only one who noticed that! I still prefer gmaps for most things, but the zoom out after I narrowed into exactly where I wanted is just infuriating UX. If I wanted that broad of a search I’d just… I dunno… go read a food blog.
What's the competition out there? It seems like every year I scope out Apple Maps and Bing Maps and get disappointed and come back to Google Maps. Is there stuff out there that I'm just not aware of?
And as you reach the highest zoom level on mobile apps, increase the font size of the street names etcetera.
Keeping font sizes tiny at high zoom levels is a real anti-pattern against usability for older people.
I wonder if they test maps being used by anyone over the age of 60? Testing a UI on older people (or any group out on the edges) really shows up usability and accessibility flaws.
Maps has become buggier and buggier over time. These days I can't figure out how to use the UI and my navigation to work has become completely wrong (it used to be correct for years) out of nowhere.
To what site were you expecting to see a link? Isn't the better complaint here that there simply isn't any good public content on this subject and that all the official docs are behind paywalls or NDAs?
FWIW: I just tried "mazda 5 wiring diagram", and indeed there's nothing good there. But... I think that's because there's nothing good there. I suspect if I really want that document I'm going to have to buy it.
I mean, everyone in a technical field deals with this. There's stuff out there, but it's going to be on some rando adware site with questionable licenses. Datasheets for old ICs. Repair documentation for consumer electronic devices. Even regulatorily required stuff like MSDS sheets for older products tends to not be available in public places.
But the search engine can't fix that for you.
[1] With the notable exception of software development, where open source has freed us from those walls. But also instilled in us the attitude
The info is there and has always been there: in traditional, non-SEO optimized forums. But they have been flushed off the search results pages by irrelevant SEO optimized GitHub copycats and mediocre fluff text recipes.
When I test your hypothesis by searching for "2019 honda cbr1000rr wiring diagram" [1] the first results are images of the wiring diagrams and then links to the exact non-SEO optimized forums you're talking about with a post that contains a PDF file available to download for the exact motorcycle I'm interested in.
Its not the exact term I used over the weekend in my original post, but this is a basic enough one. Since it's more basic, it actually has a good result or two first. Then falls into spam upon spam. My original search over the weekend has only spam.
I eventually found results by adding forum to the search.
But even if there weren't any good results, which I know there are because someone somewhere has asked for a wiring diagram of the tail lights many times, and someone out there has access to a diagram (usually a mechanic).
But regardless of results or not, Google serving 20+ pure spam and malware results less technical users might fall for is insane IMO.
> I think that's because there's nothing good there
One problem is that Google can't bear to serve you up no results, because potential delicious advertising revenue.
Rather than say there aren't any results, they'll serve up fifteen ads (barely recognisable as such) that match something vaguely similar, ignore a few words in your search term that would have excluded some profitable results, rewrite your search term into something that it feels like you should be searching for, drop the quotes around your phrases to find more pages, or some other infuriating reinterpretation.
So even if there isn't anything good there, it's hard to get a feel for whether the data are sparse or you're just being funnelled to stuff that's more profitable.
>YouTube is... well, we don't really have a competitor and nobody wants to switch
A lot of youtubers (more than I expected, anyway) I see now promoting Rumble and Odysee, and they aren't even the cancellable types who'd have reason to move. Maybe they're being paid better or maybe they're just seeing the writing on the wall with youtube striking tech videos and tutorials, or everyone flocking to mastodon over twitter stuff and I guess it's opened their minds to new platforms.
I got scared from the Rumble front page with borderline scams, conspiracies, and click-bait. But then I realized it's the same with YouTube if you don't log in.
When I search for a keyword, I see an ad for the same product as the first item in search results.
For eg. If I search for "rav4", I see "2023 Toyota® RAV4 - Toyota® USA" pointing to toyota.com.
I often wonder why show an ad, why can't you show non-ad version of the same? Is it to get commission from Toyota for the click OR Toyota listing an ad for keyword "rav4"?
They get paid for during the ad, but my understanding is that it's more insidious than that.
I searched "buy rav4" and the first ad I got was Toyota, but the second I got was VW, "Compare the VW Tiguan."
My understanding is that if Toyota doesn't cough up the money to buy a high placement ad for "Rav4," the VW ad might actually be at the top of the list.
By making the "promoted" search results barely distinguishable from the organic ones (they used to be so distinct, now it's just a little tag that says "Ad" or "Sponsored") Google gets to reap the benefits of a bidding war for direct searches for a product.
Your Google Keyword Account Specialist also recommends you buy your own brand keywords.... and those of your competitors. Just to make sure that people spend the 10-15% percent of their budget on this
Right, but I think that buying an ad for a competitor's product would generally be a fairly low-value opportunity (if you're searching "Rav4" you'd most likely be looking to click on a site related to a Rav4), particularly if ads are clearly demarcated.
But, because ads now look organic, there's an increased chance that someone will click on it, so because of that UI change on Google's part, people now have to spend more on ads.
I'm not sure about the low value. If I'm searching for a Rav4, it probably behooves other makers of small SUV models--or even substitutes like a Suburu Outback--to help plant a seed about the other options out there just in case you're not thinking that way.
Companies pay top dollar to show an ad when someone searches their name, otherwise a competitor could make a paid ad slamming the product. We dealt with this first hand a year ago in my company.
Yep. Which is kinda insane when you think about it from a user perspective. You search for Rev4, as a user, and unless the company you’re searching for has paid Google not to basically fuck up the top result, you don’t actually get back what you wanted.
It’s almost like when you’re searching for a movie on Netflix and it only shows you similar titles because the movie is not in the catalog. Super annoying.
Sure, Netflix and Google have very different reasons to do that. Bus as a user: you search for A, but get B.
Not even taking into account how annoying it is from a company perspective.
The big problem is context. If someone is looking for a new car showing competitors offerings is really just classic advertising. If they're not they're probably looking for info about the car they own and it's mostly dead ad spend other than generic brand awareness.
> For eg. If I search for "rav4", I see "2023 Toyota® RAV4 - Toyota® USA" pointing to toyota.com.
You searched for a product and got... the manufacturer's web site as the top link. And you think that's... wrong? I mean, even if it's a paid ad, it's still a paid ad for the most relevant link to the content you searched for, right?
Are you just complaining that you saw an ad at all? But... surely if there's going to be a good market to advertise RAV4's to, it's to people searching for "rav4", no?
FWIW: I just tried this in an incognito window (to try to suppress ads). The top hit is indeed a tree of links to toyota.com, but they aren't marked as ads. The second hit is wikipedia. The third is a Car and Driver review page. The most SEOish link on the page is a still-legitimate-seeming link to "buyatoyota.com".
Is Reddit the least open platform on the internet? It's the only place I can think of where accounts are easily permabanned. Even Twitter gives a multitude of options and now practically allows everyone back on after a 6 month timeout. Aside from this place of course. But this place is a bit of an outlier.
I'll give you a reason why it's not just trouble makers getting banned. Let's say you allegedly break a rule of a sub. You feel this is unjust so you complain on one of the other friendly subreddits. This will be considered brigading and harassment. Immediate ban.
Is Reddit really good anymore? It's hardcore enforced group think.
Accounts on reddit aren't really attached to an identity like they are on other social media platforms though, so getting an account perma-banned doesn't have all that much impact.
Search rarely returns credible results and I find myself adding 'site:reddit.com' frequently to at least get some organic discussions about things rather than articles which look like they were sponsored and artificially inflated to the top. They've turned into a joke about releasing something and killing it off a few years later. Android is a nightmare for developers (and users) with how they handle API changes and the Google Play store as a whole. Any kind of customer support is non-existent in basically any of their products. Their hardware is good but software gets worse over time and stagnates (their smart home ecosystem). I still don't trust them for a second with my data.
Gmail is fine, Maps are fine, YouTube is... well, we don't really have a competitor and nobody wants to switch because they wouldn't have access to a large audience. Whatever they release I have no faith in it, not with it keeping my data, not with its longevity, not in its reliability.