Testing the OOP Part II

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Read my top posts or learn more about Michael Gray. Want more frequent updates follow me on Twitter. Thanks for visiting!

Well that didn’t take long [serps]

8 Responses to “Testing the OOP Part II”

1. Matt Cutts Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 5:32 pm

   I say enjoy your time in the sun. Just for fun, I clicked to find the number of unique results from each search engine:
   Google: 64
   Yahoo: 55
   MSN: 28
   Ask: 1

   Sounds about right to me. I didn’t realize that was a real word..

2. Michael Gray Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
   see who says i’m not educational?

   If there are only 64 results why does the estimate show 2,200-ish?

3. Todd Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 6:36 pm

   Because google thinks it’s cool to lie about stuff:)

4. Lea Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 8:49 pm

   Oh, wouldn’t we all like the answer to that one!

5. Todd Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 8:53 pm

   Okay lie was a strong word (I’m not that fickle) - G doesn’t MIND when misinformation is spread sometimes:)

6. Michael Gray Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
   It’s an estimate I think we all get that, If google told me anywhere from 50 to 100 I’d be cool with that, but to be off by a factor of 35?

   What if you went to have your car repaired and they told you it was $64 but when you went to pay it was $2200? What if the library told you they had 2200 hundred magazines but when you got there they really only had 64?

7. tony rocks Says:
   August 30th, 2006 at 9:13 pm

   Hey, watch yourself…Matt Cutts is in here He may be on to us

8. Gilad Says:
   August 31st, 2006 at 11:37 am

   64, 2200 what’s the difference… as long as the [link:] operator is reliable we can’t really complain…