As we all already know, capital letters or using uppercase when typing URLs doesn't affect the pages rankings. This is what we were lucky to find out during the forums dedicated to the webmasters help in the end of the last year. At the same time, nor using capital letters, neither uppercase in the content of the websites can somehow impact rankings due to the impossibility of conveying emotions by using them.
However, we didn't know earlier whether capital letters in the tags of the title had any effect in regard to the ranking or any other matter. We were especially concerned about the negative influence. Caps always look like shouting and, of course, nobody would like to be shouted at. But now we know that capital letters in the title tags of the websites will not make Google want to punish you.
In fact, the reaction of users in regard to this news is different. Some were really happy to hear this because even if it didn't help them understand what was the reason for their ranking loss, it at least made clear what wasn't the reason, since now they know that it has nothing to do with the capital letters. The same thing concerns page descriptions and search results snippets. Meta descriptions don't influence rankings, which is why whether you make them written with caps or not doesn't really matter. Actually most people are not fond of reading caps, because it doesn't look good anyway.
Considering how many myths about using caps have been wide-spreading throughout Internet, it is really stress removing to finally find out the truth.
From now on, Google has featured snippets which are sourcing another image from the source of the content that it used. In other words, these snippets can use a different source of an image from the source of certain article content that it used for showing the answer. For instance, if you search for running shoes, you may find the featured website selling them, but Google will use an image from a totally different site at the same time.
It is actually a new thing which hadn't been used by Google earlier. No it seems to source images and content in terms of the same box of featured snippets in a different manner. We know that the image itself is a good way of ranking running shoes, but it's really not ranking any better that some other images. Many webmasters are not fond of this idea and some of them argue that they would be angry if their images were shown with the content of someone else. Well, it's really hard to say if this new technique makes sense, indeed.
However, a similar thing has been used for the Top Stories since long ago, when the content was shown from one website, while an image could be from a totally different website. But it's funny how some users facing this feature lately thought that was a bug, not an update.
Gary Illyes from Google's office commented the issue about bounce rate in his Twitter account. According to his words, using bounce rate in webpages ranking algorithms is not really the best way give Google a ranking signal.
It's not such a big news for us, because we heard something like that long ago in 2008. That time Matt Cutts called this kind of rate a noisy signal. He also said that it was spammable, which is why Google always avoided to use it. More than that, John Mueller also mentioned this question the same year when he said that the number of site visits and hitting the back button wouldn't make the website's ranking or indexing any better.
It is known, however, that the comment on bounce rate was related to the e.g. analytics and did't mean specifically that it had a little or no impact on the results. Anyways, this matter is getting more popular in the discussions among SEO specialists. Some of them argue that for some sites a high bounce rate may be a good thing, because it means that the user found what he wanted on the site and then he left satisfied. But for some other sites the same situation may only indicate that the user did't find anything worthy there.
The recent study on the preferences of customers who use smartphones shows that Siri is the most widely used search engine after Google. The experiment was conducted with the help of eight hundred smartphone users in the US.
It's not a surprise that Google appeared to be the winner in this experiment, showing over 80% of respondents using this kind of search engine. However, for the owners of iPhone the results show a little less number of Google users, which is 78%, while those who have smartphones with Android operational system use Google in 90% of cases.
Interestingly enough, the next most widely used search engine appeared to be Siri, which showed much better results that Yahoo or other search engine systems. For 13% of iPone owners Siri is actually the only one search engine they use. Although we can't say that this information is 100% reliable, because these are the personal responses of users, which may not match their true behavior in real life.
In general, the results show that for iPhone users the most preferable virtual assistant is Google, but with the appearance of voice search many of them changed their behaviors, especially the youngest users. It seems that in future voice search is going to be a serious competitor for traditional search and we are looking forward to seeing how Google is going to manage this situation.
New month starts with this top searches, please look