tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post5501607761979412171..comments2024-03-18T02:14:57.204-07:00Comments on Google Operating System: Google's Plus Operator, No Longer AvailableAlex Chituhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02618542750965508582noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-49619805800717238672012-02-27T18:51:39.571-08:002012-02-27T18:51:39.571-08:00Even after I enclose a search term that must appea...Even after I enclose a search term that must appear on the sites I'm looking for, quotes doesn't seem to do it. If I CTRL-F on a search results page and can't find the quoted search term I was looking for, you've failed me google.tswatershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00907349167452016524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-19653790544130022592012-01-19T04:49:08.101-08:002012-01-19T04:49:08.101-08:00yeah, it sucks..yeah, it sucks..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-20826522225276207632011-12-19T03:55:28.654-08:002011-12-19T03:55:28.654-08:00"prehistoric" "spears" "B..."prehistoric" "spears" "Brittany" -"britney spears"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-8857246236913314592011-12-18T19:37:06.186-08:002011-12-18T19:37:06.186-08:00So I want to do research on prehistoric spears in ...So I want to do research on prehistoric spears in Brittany. How do I enter a search query to avoid a buJILLION hits on Britney Spears? Is there a better browser for searches?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-52033028383589645492011-12-10T08:49:15.279-08:002011-12-10T08:49:15.279-08:00>So what did the + do? Answer: It turned off sy...>So what did the + do? Answer: It turned off synonymization and spell-correction. That is, with a query like [apples +macintosh] you wouldn't get that term macintosh being synonymized for a term like gala, gravenstein or jonathan. (Those are other apple varieties, if you're wondering.)"<br /><br />BS, It required the word or phrase.<br />"quotes" deactivated synonymization<br />How now do we turn of synonymization?<br />How now do we require a phrase?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-47489386703529245152011-12-10T08:46:32.686-08:002011-12-10T08:46:32.686-08:00@$^%!
^$@%!
*&^@#!
*#&$^#@*!
@$^%!!
#^&...@$^%!<br />^$@%!<br />*&^@#!<br />*#&$^#@*!<br />@$^%!!<br />#^&%! @#^$&*! $%*#@!! 4&^@#! !!!*@#&!!!<br /><br />Its not back!<br />@$^%!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-12274440570682081792011-11-15T16:56:51.135-08:002011-11-15T16:56:51.135-08:00Looks like it's back nowLooks like it's back nowAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-67663141477552536202011-11-03T11:33:21.802-07:002011-11-03T11:33:21.802-07:00bring back '+' I use it all the time and i...bring back '+' I use it all the time and it always seemed to get me what I wanted!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-7059505006332143262011-10-31T16:21:14.723-07:002011-10-31T16:21:14.723-07:00From Google's Daniel Russell:
"LOTS of p...From <a href="http://searchresearch1.blogspot.com/2011/10/operator-is-gone-so-what.html" rel="nofollow">Google's Daniel Russell</a>:<br /><br />"LOTS of people believed incorrectly that the + operator was the opposite of the - operator. You know what – does, it excludes the term from the search results. That is, if you do a search like [apples –macintosh] the results will not contain the term macintosh in the results. That makes sense. (Some places use the NOT operator for this. Same behavior.) <br /><br />Unfortunately, many people believed that a search like [apples +macintosh] would require the term to be in the search results. That's NOT what it did. While the + term would usually be in the results, it was only there because you'd put it into the query! <br /><br />So what did the + do? Answer: It turned off synonymization and spell-correction. That is, with a query like [apples +macintosh] you wouldn't get that term macintosh being synonymized for a term like gala, gravenstein or jonathan. (Those are other apple varieties, if you're wondering.)"Alex Chituhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02618542750965508582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-70137771705050569022011-10-29T17:49:34.163-07:002011-10-29T17:49:34.163-07:00This sucks! I want my + back! Google is starting t...This sucks! I want my + back! Google is starting to get as clunky as yahoo or bing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-82563057010199634682011-10-27T22:29:26.877-07:002011-10-27T22:29:26.877-07:00Arrogance at its peak. How many PHDs does it take ...Arrogance at its peak. How many PHDs does it take at google to write some code that can distingush the placement of the + symbol for example google+ from +arrogance +money etc. Too much money and the on-going epidemic of changing things that have been long-time standards.F. Googlenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-62811076512428496962011-10-27T08:46:35.678-07:002011-10-27T08:46:35.678-07:00You're right when you say that "the quota...You're right when you say that "the quotation marks are NOT the same as the plus operator". The + operator had two characteristics: the keyword couldn't be modified by Google and it couldn't be ignored. For example, if you searched for [+ibook], Google couldn't show results that matched [ibooks] and if you searched for [android app market +free], Google couldn't ignore the word "free". It's pretty rare for Google to ignore a keyword, so the most important use case of the plus operator was exact matching, which can also be achieved using quotes.<br /><br />It would be nice to post some examples where the plus operator was useful and quotes can't replace it.Alex Chituhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02618542750965508582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-16728596196683610932011-10-27T07:35:59.507-07:002011-10-27T07:35:59.507-07:00Stupid decision, Google...
There is no longer an ...Stupid decision, Google...<br /><br />There is no longer an easy way to designate terms that are required... especially to deal with the annoying synonym crap. (I don't mean quotes and I don't want "synonyms".) How about a new "=" operator to specify an exact match (that would make sense for the equals sign), if you can't leave the "+" in the traditional mode?<br /><br />I'm not happy that I now will have to at least explore Bing...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-28808151861812921782011-10-27T04:18:08.060-07:002011-10-27T04:18:08.060-07:00Spread the word...
http://www.facebook.com/pages/...Spread the word...<br /><br />http://www.facebook.com/pages/Google-we-want-the-operator-back/115628008547367Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-49624849078607529002011-10-26T17:46:25.252-07:002011-10-26T17:46:25.252-07:00In the last month or so, Google searches keep assu...In the last month or so, Google searches keep assuming I type ~ in front of every term, as well as not doing the implicit AND. I can't find any setting (like in Advanced search), but it seems instead to come from the google HTTP servers in general.<br /><br />I've been adding + in front of the words, which kind of got the "implicit AND" back. Not sure if I'm victim to some unusually bad experiment. I may even have retried some search in Incognito mode just to check that theory. Oh well. I'll switch to HTTPS I guess -- that could elimininate a bunch of other possibilities.Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08999351403559982314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-60819934139260023412011-10-26T10:28:38.105-07:002011-10-26T10:28:38.105-07:00Someone at Google should notify Google about this ...Someone at Google should notify Google about this change. I just tried searching for<br /><br />googlr plos<br /><br />and got a link at the bottom of the page: 'Tip: These results include the word "google". Show results that include only "googlr".'<br /><br />I clicked it, and got a search page for<br /><br />+googlr plos<br /><br />with the notification that I (or rather, Google) should now be using quotation marks instead.<br /><br />Left hand, right hand...Robert Seddonhttp://rfjseddon.net/log/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-82767026829381086992011-10-25T13:31:08.250-07:002011-10-25T13:31:08.250-07:00That explains why my searches have been so frustra...That explains why my searches have been so frustrating. Right after I learned to use it, too, after years of quotation marks being insufficiently specific.<br /><br />Maybe the advanced search could include an equivalents step, so we could manually narrow or broaden our searches, instead of typing something different in the search bar and getting the same results?Christian Yaeger, skitterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08460436647285031035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-24312781950047723302011-10-25T07:22:47.185-07:002011-10-25T07:22:47.185-07:00i didnt even knew it until now it is closed..i didnt even knew it until now it is closed..Black Goldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04993784760765763724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-24485131806598299012011-10-25T06:26:32.521-07:002011-10-25T06:26:32.521-07:00Another change in syntax! I recently used period a...Another change in syntax! I recently used period as separator in phrases, it worked like a charm: dont.be.evil is entered faster than "dont be evil" but this was disappeared years ago. Now I used plus in almost every search, because I don't like fuzzy search. Damn!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-42317919751355753992011-10-24T23:48:49.421-07:002011-10-24T23:48:49.421-07:00The quotation marks are NOT the same as the plus o...The quotation marks are NOT the same as the plus operator. Quotation marks simply allow for grouping of words together in a query, whereas the plus operator allowed a user to force google to find pages containing specific keywords, even when google's "fuzzy search" algorithms had decided the user was wrong. This is a horrible change.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-24862581937126826922011-10-24T14:39:01.701-07:002011-10-24T14:39:01.701-07:00Actually for Google OR is implicit with the pages ...Actually for Google OR is implicit with the pages containing both words ranked above those with only one. AND, OR, NOT along with quotes paren's and quotes are recognized by Google and allow for nesting (among other things) withing the search string.R Philip Reynoldsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-1568163311618737922011-10-24T11:53:27.736-07:002011-10-24T11:53:27.736-07:00I'd just like to echo the previous comments. T...I'd just like to echo the previous comments. The plus operator is/was not the same thing as using quotation marks. I also use very specific search queries and it's very frustrating to get back results for something other than what I searched.brucedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00296838235720907942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-56891822607051529722011-10-24T08:34:52.439-07:002011-10-24T08:34:52.439-07:00SucksSucksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-13816782206609610692011-10-24T06:28:19.624-07:002011-10-24T06:28:19.624-07:00@igitur:
Plus wasn't necessary for more than ...@igitur:<br /><br />Plus wasn't necessary for more than one word, so you should search for "silver stone" trading.Alex Chituhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02618542750965508582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18157064.post-65271549654293798262011-10-24T02:41:17.673-07:002011-10-24T02:41:17.673-07:00So what is the new syntax of:
+"silver stone&...So what is the new syntax of:<br />+"silver stone" trading<br />?<br /><br />The quotation marks had a different meaning when used with multiple words.igiturhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02601731444820399459noreply@blogger.com