Slashdot Mirror


MSN Search Engine Favors IIS

Scud writes "It appears that if you want to rise up in the rankings over at the MSN search engine you would do well to host your page on IIS. Ivor Hewitt has done a study and it appears that by using IIS, you are likely to increase your odds of a higher listing by several percent."

10 of 565 comments (clear)

  1. Silly, silly boys (and girls) by Blitzenn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And who is the silly person who would expect it to be otherwise? Have you actually been listening to the news at all over the past decade? Have you learned nothing? The real story would be if the ranking did not rise if it were housed on an IIS server. Otherwise it's a nothing, I would have assumed that.

  2. Absolutely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My page is titled "San Andreas Radio" and if you Google it, comes out #1 or #2 every time.

    MSN it and it comes out about #7. Either they're being paid to reduce its rank (it's a bit subversive), or they don't like the fact I'm hosted on Linux, or they simply don't have a very good search engine.

    If I put the exact unique title of a page into an engine, I expect that page to be #1.

  3. This is irrelevant for most websites by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The control over what webserver you will use is typically limited by your hosting provider. While many provide the choice between Unix-based servers and Windows-based servers, many do not.

    For those who use hosts that do not provide these services, I don't think it appropriate to think that they are simple SOL. Rather, the better quality your website provides, the more relevant it is to the topic you discuss, the better it will fare in any search engine. The type of webserver you are using becomes nothing more than the tiniest fraction of your search ranking.

  4. MSN is out of beta by alienfluid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The link to MSN search on the main story links to beta.search.msn.com. It should be noted that MSN Search is out of beta for a while now - the correct links should be http://search.msn.com. It's not like it's Google or something - trying to keep everything in beta for years to escape criticism.

  5. nearly first in google not even listed in mssearch by incuso · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My site is first or nearly first in google using relevant search terms. But in MSN it never shows (even if listed). Maybe also the use of PHP is harmful for MSN ranking? M.

  6. Just have your Apache report that it is IIS ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For years now, the company where I work has had all it's Apache systems reporting that they are IIS 5.0 systems. Just a quick change in a single file before compiling and there you go!

  7. A possible explanation by rabtech · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most of those useless keyword, domain parking/hijacking, and spam sites out there run on Linux+Apache because the owner can host thousands of those domains fairly inexpensively, and that's the key to all spam: minimization of operating expenses so you only need 1 out of 100,000 users to click/buy to turn a profit.

    These sites don't have any real content, they just point to other sites and/or exist to spam you with advertisements. Some of them have googlebombed their way higher into the rankings.

    My guess is that MSN does a slightly better job of filtering those useless sites out of the index at the present time, OR the "googlebombing" techniques they use aren't as effective with MSN's indexing. Since they almost exclusively use Apache that would have the false appearance of favoring IIS.

    This is just a guess, but it seems plausable.

    --
    Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
  8. Re:I laugh at Microsoft. by drsquare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually, what made Google successful was its simplicity and the recognisability of its name and website. Its results are as crap as anywhere else. Remember, quantity != quality.

    Google makes money by prioritising quality.

    Google seem to make a lot of money from click-fraud and advertising, hardly noble ways to make money. At least Microsoft are honest about their profit-seeking, you don't get any of that sanctimonious "we're not evil" crap.

  9. IIS/Apache - No diff by christoofar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only difference in the HTTP response is just that IIS adds headers and that IIS has that stupid HTTP Continue on handling SOAP via ASPNET.

    Just telnet to almost any Apache web server and type GET / and then to an IIS server and do the same thing. Look at the top. Almost all non-IIS web servers return no default headers.

    Microsoft.com:

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK
    Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:56:20 GMT
    Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
    P3P: CP="ALL IND DSP COR ADM CONo CUR CUSo IVAo IVDo PSA PSD TAI TELo OUR SAMo C
    NT COM INT NAV ONL PHY PRE PUR UNI"
    X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
    X-AspNet-Version: 1.1.4322
    Cache-Control: private
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
    Content-Length: 23027

    redhat.com

    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
    .... blah blah
  10. Experimental protocol. by learn+fast · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You could just change the HTTP Server header that Apache sends out. Someone should try it for a few weeks and see if it really makes any difference.

    If you have mod_header installed, just add the below line to httpd.conf:

    Header set Server "Microsoft-IIS/6.0"