Did Google Go Instant Just To Show More Ads?

eldavojohn writes "Google, already the largest search engine in the United States, went instant a few weeks ago. MIT's Tech Review asks why Google went instant and is skeptical that users actually look at search results before they finish typing their query. Othar Hansson, Google's lead on the initiative, informs them otherwise and claims that Google's traffic monitors didn't even blink at the extra data being sent across — primarily because of its insignificance next to streaming one video on YouTube. Hansson also reveals that Google's search engine is no longer stateless and therefore takes up a little more memory in their server hives. The Tech Review claims that 'sources at the company say Google Instant's impact on ad sales was a primary focus in testing the service. Google only gets paid for an advertisement, or sponsored link, when a user clicks on the ad, and ads are targeted to specific searches. By displaying a search's ads onscreen a couple of seconds sooner, the frequency of users clicking on those ads could only go up.' So money seemed to be the prime motivator and the article also coyly notes that the average length of time a user spends between typing in any two characters is 300 milliseconds — much too fast for old JavaScript engines. Of course, you might recall Google's efforts to change all that with JavaScript speed wars. Do you find Google Instant to be useful in any way, or does it strike you as just more ad gravity for your mouse?"

Wrong

[Hatta]

By displaying a search's ads onscreen a couple of seconds sooner, the frequency of users clicking on those ads could only go up.'

By displaying ads for shorter periods of time, click frequency will actually go down.

NEWS FLASH! Google Makes Money On Ads!

[Frosty Piss]

Google doesn't make money by selling searches to "end users", they make money by selling ads. So this new "functionality" is a surprise how?

What ads?

[tibbetts]

What are these "ads" of which you speak? Sincerely, Just Another AdBlock user

I find it annoying

[Artifice_Eternity]

I turned it off as soon as I figured out how.

I don't want results before I even finish formulating my search request. It's distracting and confusing: a burst of visual noise while I'm trying to focus on what I'm typing in the search box (which I may decide to change as I'm typing it).

Why do I want to read results of a search that doesn't even represent my complete inquiry?

I actually find in moderately usefull

[wjh31]

in so far as I don't have to keep on hitting return.

It means that typing a few letters at the start of a search instead of having to type out the full phrase is sufficient sometimes to pull up the necessary results. It also makes it quicker and easier to tweak a search for slightly different keywords, or to browse through the auto-suggest searches.

I turned Instant off almost immediately

[istartedi]

I turned Instant off almost immediately. JavaScript speed was not the issue. Seeing a screenfull of "jumpiness" was just "loud" and obnoxious. I didn't like the aesthetics of it.

You still get hints in the text drop-down, even without Instant. Those are useful.

It's amusing.

[Anonymous Coward]

I like google...but having spent ungodly amounts googling anything and everything: I know how to get the results I'm looking for. It's a cute trick but I think it'll be mostly lost on the slashdot crowd. The payoff will be for people who aren't good at understanding search methodology and work a computer consistently slowly...because you can actually see what makes your search get the desired results and what derails it.

As for google's intent, this strikes me as some developer with a little extra time doing something for shits & giggles. People liked it. So bam! I'm interested to see how it might be implemented into things like youtube.

I could also imagine some pretty cool functionality if implemented into the google code search.

Re:Profit!

[Locutus]

and did I just read that Google wanted to boost JavaScript performance so they could show ads faster? Those evil people! I'm going back to Internet Explorer and BING were things are slower and never evil.

LoB

Just another pointless gimmick

[jenningsthecat]

I don't even see this 'feature', nor the annoying and distracting 'fade in' effect launched a few months ago. NoScript handily takes care of that junk for me. And I've switched off suggestions in Google prefs, which means I don't have to look at what other people have searched for as I'm typing in my own search criteria. Now if I could only find a way to permanently switch off Web History - I refuse to open an account with Google, (aka 'Big Brother'), just to be able to disable this, ewpecially given that I don't trust Google to fully disable it even if they say they have done so. In my experience, when a company starts down the road of intrusiveness, invasion of privacy, and excessive 'eye candy', they've usually come to the end of their tenure as true innovators. I suspect that Google will slowly become less and less relevant over the next 5 to 10 years, just as Microsoft has in the previous decade or so.

Increases keyword bids, not click rates

[fridaynightsmoke]

My take on Google's rationale is this; Now I'm a small-time Adwords advertiser in my day job, which gives me a little insight into how the ad empire runs.
For the uninitiated, Google sells the ads on a per click basis, with the price per click decided with a keyword auction. So, if one was in the business of renting out monkeys, one might bid for "monkey rental", "monkey hire", "hire monkeys in Smalltown" etc etc.
Popular keywords (eg "monkey hire") will cost more per click than less popular keywords (eg "short term monkey rental in Tinyplace"). Savvy advertisers might spread their bids to avoid overpaying for the highly competitive search terms and get some cheaper clicks in the 'long tail' of obscure searches.

This is where 'instant search' comes in. Say a user was seeking to rent a monkey and begins typing in Google- "Monkey.." with the intention of typing "Monkey leasing in Anothertown". Google suggests (and loads the results page for) "Monkey hire". User thinks 'okay' and uses the results page for "Monkey hire" to select a result or ad to click on. Repeat this process across X users. The result is that the proportion of users who 'search' for popular keyword combinations increases, as many will settle for whatever Google has suggested. The total number of ad clicks will stay roughly the same, as there will be the same number of people searching. The bid price per ad click will increase, as unpopular keywords become even less popular and users are nudged towards the most common variations. Google profits.

Re:I find it annoying

[mldi]

Exactly. I ABHORE this new feature with a fiery passion. The fact that it's on by default is annoying, and the fact that you actually have to start typing in the search box in order to even turn it off is more annoying... but the fact that once you turn it off, you lose your query and start over from scratch just tops it off. I rage every time.

One of the reasons I used Google over other search engines before was it's simplicity. There was no huge annoying banner ads or other distractions. Now there is.

It may be time to venture out and try some others once again.

Re:Profit!

[stewbacca]

Advertising is not just an "arm" of Google. It IS Google.

Re:What ads?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it isn't. Boxes is the plural of box. Boxen is a quick way of saying that you are the sort of person who gives elitism a bad name.

Re:Wrong

[Maxo-Texas]

Doesn't work that way.

You type

big

and you get a list of "big" sites and "big" ads

you continue to type

horse

and the results and ads change to "big horse" sites

you finish typing

breeding

and you get results and ads for "big horse breeding" which is the same as you had before.

---

Looks like google is hoping some users notice and click on the "big" and "big horse" ads.

The same as the awesomebar

[vivaoporto]

My reaction to it was the same as with the AwesomeBar:

First I loathed it. It makes the input box to jump while the text is being typed. It also makes it very hard to focus on typing while a multitude of information is flashing on the screen at the same time. That effect increases if you are a fast touch typist.

But I was too lazy to disable it, so I didn't. I then started (without even noticing) to adapt the way I use it and it proved itself to be much easier: I start typing whatever I'm searching and pause for just a second to inspect the suggestions google makes. More often than not, I can simply stop typing because the search result is already what I'm looking for.

In the few cases it is not, I finish typing and use it "the old way", pressing enter to retrieve the search results.

Re:I find it annoying

[jbengt]

Speaking of muscle memory, I know this sounds lame, but, in addition to the distracting visual jitter, one of the things that annoy me about this "instant search" is that when I'm done typing and hit enter - nothing happens.