Slashdot Mirror


New and Improved Google Cheat Sheet

Nancy Blachman writes "Recently, Matt Vance suggested that I distill the essence of my Google Guide Advanced Operators page into a single page, similar to the Google Cheat Sheet and I came up with a two page Google Advanced Operators Cheat Sheet."

13 comments

  1. Re:news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called a slow news for nerds day.

  2. Re:news? by Refrozen · · Score: 1

    Thus, there are no good comments on this article, because there is nothing to discuss, tis is just some lame attempt at promoting "GoogleGuide" that seemed to work. In the future, I hope the Slashdot editors will try to kill self-promotion unless it has something interesting or related. I mean, the Google-Functions are pretty easy to figure out for us nerds, I mean the odd one like "rphonebook" or whatever it was is interesting, and I didn't know it was a feature, but.

  3. Re:news? by Refrozen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll take the bait, assuming you were:

    A. Talking to me.
    B. The owner of GoogleGuide.

    I have my own s i t e s - many of them, I make money from my own sites and I am willing to post on Slashdot under a name, that has my email address and website URLs available for anyone to read (unlike you, who goes around calling people sniveling little fag's under an anonymous coward title). If anyone has a problem with something I say (which, has happened), they are free to contact me by various means, my websites, my email, etc. You will also notice that I have not once posted a story clearly in an attempt to self-promote my sites, although some of my sites do have quality Slashdot-style information I will not try to promote my self. This site is not here to promote your sites, it's here to provide news to those who want news.

    Think before you post, anonymous coward.

  4. Re:news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Thus, there are no good comments on this article

    That's not good enough. It's imperative that one post an AC whine like some cock obsessed miscreant.

  5. Still, It's Useful by rueger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Despite the whining and complaining this post has generated, I will say that it's a pretty darned useful little cheatsheet, better than Google's own attempt

    I've used most of these functions on occasion, but not often enough that I remember each of them. So it helps me greatly to be able to look up quickly some of the query structures.

    Really, given how much I use Google in the average day (whether searches, maps, gmail, groups, news) it's good to have concise resources like this.

    1. Re:Still, It's Useful by ForrestWhite · · Score: 1

      I'll agree with that. Who really cares whether or not this qualifies as "news"? If you don't feel that it's relevant enough to be "news", then you should simply ignore it. Anyways, I finally have some decent and concise cheatsheets.

  6. Re:news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    assuming you were: A. Talking to me.

    There's this thing at the top called "Threshold." You might want to set the second menu to "Threaded" so you don't have to go around ASSuming whether or not a comment is addressed to you.

  7. Re:news? by Refrozen · · Score: 1

    There's also this thing at the top called "Sign-up" or, if you've already done that, there is a thing called "Login". You might want to do that so we can tell whether you are the same Anon. as the other one. I am in Threaded mode, however, I figure you were too dumb to reply to the appropriate comment. I am (and was) well aware that the parent of your comment was the other guy, however, the comment made little sense in that notion.

    Thanks, have a good life.

  8. New and Improved Google Cheat Sheet by 9tanks · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Has someone seen soople.com, You dont need google cheat code there.

    Njoy....

  9. In case you haven't figured this out yet... by Big+Sean+O · · Score: 1

    "YHBT YHL HAND"

    --
    My father is a blogger.
  10. Re:news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, typical. If there's one day Google does not speak to the public, someone desperately needs to advertise his site -about Google- of course.

    I wonder: did the editors buy GOOG stocks, by any chance? When actually was this article submitted? Did it have to wait for a slow-news date before a decision could be taken?