Google added icons to search results and now I think it's all spam


Recommended Posts

SNAG-0001.png

 

I guess I am used to see the top results with icons that represent a sponsored or ad listing, and now all results have a sort of favicon in front of them and I am looking twice to see if it's a sponsored result Lol.

I noticed yesterday Google had started displaying the sites favicon in search results, in addition to moving the URL above the page title.

 

Search results now look a total mess in my opinion, I do find it very distracting quickly glancing though the results page to now see a page of random coloured icons:

 

google-favicon.thumb.jpg.44a48f1d23b219dc4940f8db3def96a8.jpg

 

Coincidentally I had just installed the stable version of Edge, which defaulted to Bing as the search engine. The results returned by Bing are actually seem pretty good these days, i'm pretty tempted to switch over to Bing and see how that goes.

Every once in awhile they change things around and test out new layouts like this. If I'm not mistaken, I'm pretty sure I remember them testing out this exact layout before. No idea if they're actually going to make it permanent this time though... :iiam:

It's not the favicons that bother me or the murking of ads vs actual results. It's the demotion of the good old URL that I'm angry about. Some extremely bad design decisions which should addressed by Google:

1. Bring back FULL URL, NOT some ridiculous breadcrumbs style. This is the open web, not Windows File Explorer. URLs are around since forever. No need to pervert them. Just present them as they are. Web browsers show URLs in the address bar and people aren't scared of them. We don't see breadcrumbs in browser address bar.
2. Bring back URL in green or prominent color
3. Move URL to 2nd row and blue page title to top row as it was.

All reasonable requests. It’s devious of them to remove the URL as it exists and present it in the perverted breadcrumbs style

 

Current design is AWFUL and it's not just a question of getting used to change. They are needlessly perverting the URL

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
16 hours ago, Microsoft BOB™ 10 said:

It's not the favicons that bother me or the murking of ads vs actual results. It's the demotion of the good old URL that I'm angry about. Some extremely bad design decisions which should addressed by Google:

1. Bring back FULL URL, NOT some ridiculous breadcrumbs style. This is the open web, not Windows File Explorer. URLs are around since forever. No need to pervert them. Just present them as they are. Web browsers show URLs in the address bar and people aren't scared of them. We don't see breadcrumbs in browser address bar.
2. Bring back URL in green or prominent color
3. Move URL to 2nd row and blue page title to top row as it was.

All reasonable requests. It’s devious of them to remove the URL as it exists and present it in the perverted breadcrumbs style

 

Current design is AWFUL and it's not just a question of getting used to change. They are needlessly perverting the URL

when i see favicons in search results now i always think i am seeing ads

I actually installed a Chrome plugin that put favicons in search results.  I like the way it looks.

 

It's easy for me to quickly see, visually, if a result is from Wikipedia or IMDB, etc.  

 

So for me... I'm already accustomed to seeing favicons.  😛

  • 11 months later...

This topic was automatically locked because it did not receive any replies for a year. If you want to have this topic reopened

  • please contact any staff moderator or
  • report the first post of the topic with the reason why it should be reopened.

Thank you.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Bluesky COO warns social media regulations could destroy competition from small startups by Paul Hill Fears that increasing government control of social media risks regulatory capture by the biggest social media firms were raised again recently. Bluesky’s chief operating officer said in an interview that social media bans for children and tighter regulations for social media firms risk creating a world where there are only a few social media platforms run by companies with the deepest pockets. Regulations on social media firms have been very lax since they appeared for mainstream users in the 2000’s. This gave Meta, Snapchat, and Google time to build up their user bases and get entrenched, with Meta being the most successful. Now that Meta has succeeded, it has been attempting regulatory capture. By pushing for more regulations of social media, Meta hopes to make it more difficult for rivals to challenge it. For its part, it doesn’t need to worry about the cost of regulation because it has a lot of money to spend, whereas startups do not. Speaking to CNBC, Rose Wang, Bluesky’s chief operating officer, said: “I support the protection and the safety of youth, the question that we have then is at what cost, because essentially what I’m scared of is in the long term, we’re headed to a world where there’s about three to five platforms, and extreme heavy regulation of those platforms, and basically the whole compliance teams of these platforms are 10 times the size of our entire team. So, basically, we’re living in a world where it’s almost impossible for smaller entrants to come in and build healthier spaces. These platforms have led to a place where the bottom line is the thing that drives what they do... so I understand why governments have to step in and regulate, because the platforms have done nothing right.” She said that while she is not against regulation, there needs to be more channels between the small to mid-sized players and regulators to help protect them. She says that big tech players, on the other hand, “who we know are circumventing regulation,” need to be regulated. Essentially, the Bluesky position is one of nuance, rather than absolutes. While Bluesky’s proposal may preserve competition in the social media space, it still doesn’t address the massive privacy implications these age verification measures introduce, such as handing over sensitive identity documents to access age-gated content. Source: CNBC
    • it dosnt support onprem exchange. it dosnt support mapi-calls. the views are all worse/limited. its slower. it cant see public folder calendars. we already have webmail. the list of other missing features is pretty huge but i only see it when customers call to say their email isnt working, and 9/10 times its cause they accidentality changed to outlooknew(new). Hold the line everyone!
    • yeah, this looks beautiful. Damn this winter's going to be great.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      249
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      71
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      70
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!