24% Internet Users Can Not Find Google


Recommended Posts

24% Can?t Find Google -- Jordan McCollum

This week, usability guru Jakob Nielsen asks: ?How difficult is it to perform a search on Google??

No, really. How hard is it? We know the search box in the upper right hand corner of your screen can get there. We know that Google.com in the address bar can get there. But, sadly, Nielsen?s study indicated that at least 24% of Internet users don?t know that. It hurts me just to type it.

A quarter of Internet users said they wanted to search Google for something, but when placed in front of a computer, couldn?t figure it out. ?Instead, they either completely failed to get to any search engine or ended up running their query on a different search engine ? usually whatever type-in field happened to be at hand.?

Nielsen breaks this mind-boggling stat down for us:

On the one hand, 76% is a high success rate. On the other hand, getting to Google is a very simple task. It?s not even a true task ? that is, it?s not something users want to accomplish for its own sake or something we?d pose as an assignment in user testing. Getting a Google search box is the first step in searching the Web, which is only the first step in doing something real (such as, in one of our test tasks, to find ?a strong vacuum cleaner that is easy to use, can pick up pet hair, and costs under $300″).

Also, for this round of research we?re deliberately recruiting above-average users, so the success rate across all Internet users is probably lower than our finding.

Suddenly, The Onion?s article a few months back about ?TheGoogle.com? doesn?t look quite so funny:

All you have to do to turn the website on is put the little blinking line thing in the cyberspace window at the top of the screen, type ?thegoogle.com,? and press ?return??although it will also recognize http.wwwthegoogle.com, google.aol, and ?THEGOOGLE? typed into a Word document.?

Maybe there?s a real need for remedial Internet?

Nielsen?s overall point was to remind us all that our average user, and the web audience at large, doesn?t understand the Internet the way we do. Unfortunately, I think the net effect of his findings will be lowered self-esteem among SEMs and a generalized funk to last over the next several days. (Exacerbated, of course, by your alma mater losing in the first round of the NCAAs. Again. Come on, I know I?m not the only one. I know you Drake fans are mad, too.)

http:For people claiming that this test was performed with idiots they describe how the users were chosen here:ed with idiots they describe how the users were chosen here:

Plus here is the original test page:[/b]r-skills.html

Plus here is the original test page:

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designer-user-differences.html

Edited by Suren
Also, for this round of research we?re deliberately recruiting above-average users, so the success rate across all Internet users is probably lower than our finding.
Ah I just love stats with no context at all, 64% of them turn out to be inaccurate.

If you had actually read the article, you would have seen that sentence. Context: the test subjects were chosen from a group of above-average internet users. Now you may ask what is defined by "above-average" and that is certainly a question to be taken into consideration, but the general consensus appears to be that an above-average user is one who uses the Internet more than once a week. There's your context. Next time, read the article and, as always, Google it with any questions.

My mother has to type www.google.pt in the address/location bar.

I've only heard one person say "the google" that's my networking teacher, she's Chinese and doesn't speak English very well but I have seen lots of people type google into their browser's start page (AOL, Yahoo, Altavista).

In Portuguese: a Google | o Google.

"A Google" is feminine, coming from "A (companhia/empresa[company/enterprise]) Google".

"O Google" is masculine, coming from "O (s?tio web[website]) Google".

I definitely believe many people cannot find Google. Look at this:

My dad bought our first computer back in the mid 90's and ever since then I've used it and he's used it. Almost 15 years. And to THIS day he still cannot work around basic functions. He knows what Google is (he doesn't know how to use it very well) and he can type (though very slow, one letter at a time) and he can save files (I set it up for him so it saves to the desktop because he doesn't know what folders are, or what the desktop is, etc..)

And after these 15 years, he still asks me almost every time he gets on on how to perform these actions. Is he ever going to learn? I don't think so. I think just because he's one of those people.

I definitely believe many people cannot find Google. Look at this:

My dad bought our first computer back in the mid 90's and ever since then I've used it and he's used it. Almost 15 years. And to THIS day he still cannot work around basic functions. He knows what Google is (he doesn't know how to use it very well) and he can type (though very slow, one letter at a time) and he can save files (I set it up for him so it saves to the desktop because he doesn't know what folders are, or what the desktop is, etc..)

And after these 15 years, he still asks me almost every time he gets on on how to perform these actions. Is he ever going to learn? I don't think so. I think just because he's one of those people.

Oh no, hes's one of them! -zombie points and screams-

If you had actually read the article, you would have seen that sentence. Context: the test subjects were chosen from a group of above-average internet users. Now you may ask what is defined by "above-average" and that is certainly a question to be taken into consideration, but the general consensus appears to be that an above-average user is one who uses the Internet more than once a week. There's your context. Next time, read the article and, as always, Google it with any questions.

No I saw that. Simply saying "Above average users" doesn't cut it. Above what average? Time spent on-line, difficulty of tasks performed, etc. Also how is this average defined. I couldn't give a monkeys what the "consensus" of this is. It isn't defined in that article.

Who are these people? What nationality, age, sex, etc. These things make a big difference.

This whole thing is just to generate a statistic to gain publicity. 100% of people with "above average" intelligence know that.

24% Can?t Find Google -- Jordan McCollum

This week, usability guru Jakob Nielsen asks: ?How difficult is it to perform a search on Google??

No, really. How hard is it? We know the search box in the upper right hand corner of your screen can get there. We know that Google.com in the address bar can get there. But, sadly, Nielsen?s study indicated that at least 24% of Internet users don?t know that. It hurts me just to type it.

A quarter of Internet users said they wanted to search Google for something, but when placed in front of a computer, couldn?t figure it out. ?Instead, they either completely failed to get to any search engine or ended up running their query on a different search engine ? usually whatever type-in field happened to be at hand.?

Nielsen breaks this mind-boggling stat down for us:

On the one hand, 76% is a high success rate. On the other hand, getting to Google is a very simple task. It?s not even a true task ? that is, it?s not something users want to accomplish for its own sake or something we?d pose as an assignment in user testing. Getting a Google search box is the first step in searching the Web, which is only the first step in doing something real (such as, in one of our test tasks, to find ?a strong vacuum cleaner that is easy to use, can pick up pet hair, and costs under $300″).

Also, for this round of research we?re deliberately recruiting above-average users, so the success rate across all Internet users is probably lower than our finding.

Suddenly, The Onion?s article a few months back about ?TheGoogle.com? doesn?t look quite so funny:

All you have to do to turn the website on is put the little blinking line thing in the cyberspace window at the top of the screen, type ?thegoogle.com,? and press ?return??although it will also recognize http.wwwthegoogle.com, google.aol, and ?THEGOOGLE? typed into a Word document.?

Maybe there?s a real need for remedial Internet?

Nielsen?s overall point was to remind us all that our average user, and the web audience at large, doesn?t understand the Internet the way we do. Unfortunately, I think the net effect of his findings will be lowered self-esteem among SEMs and a generalized funk to last over the next several days. (Exacerbated, of course, by your alma mater losing in the first round of the NCAAs. Again. Come on, I know I?m not the only one. I know you Drake fans are mad, too.)

http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2008/03/24...ind-google.html

that 24% of the people need to sell there pc and move back in to the cave imho they will be the majority of people that get bashed with a virus and effect others

A lot of people don't see the difference between Google, the internet, the web, a web browser, their home page, and the address bar, even after using the internet for years. It's troubling.

For instance, if you give them the address of a site, they'll type the address in Google, and of course Google will return a link to the site which they will happily click on. But all clicking on the link does is type the address in the address bar and hit enter...

Next, they will be completely lost if you change their home page to something other than what they used to have, often Google.com or MSN.

A lot of people don't see the difference between Google, the internet, the web, a web browser, and the address bar, even after using the internet for years. It's troubling.

I would tend to agree with you; this is the same cross-section of people who think that their operating system is Word, Microsoft Office is the same as Windows (Windows contains the program Word, or they are simply the same thing). They also refer to their desktop background still as their screensaver. Explorer is what they surf the Web with, and the Internet has no connection with E-mail.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm still on Windows 10 22H2 because I didn't want to deal with all the issues in Windows 11, so I waited almost a week before installing the latest Patch Tuesday update (KB5094127), I went ahead and did it, and it was a huge mistake—ever since then, my File Explorer has seen a performance drop of about 30% when transferring large files... Once again, Microsoft has outdone itself! This update cannot be uninstalled, either through the Control Panel (via Settings) or by accessing Advanced Startup Options. The only possible alternative would be to use system restore points, but I’d have to reinstall all app and driver updates (and there’s no guarantee it would work). Or there’s the “nuclear option” of a in-place repair without losing files or apps, but even then, all my customizations would be lost! Microsoft just can’t help but mess everything up! Way to go, Microsoft! But I still don’t want your c****y Windows 11!
    • Microsoft: Windows 11 could finally solve a major issue across AMD, Nvidia, and Intel GPUs by Sayan Sen While Microsoft has been trying to improve it, Windows 11 is definitely not flawless, as even today some issues are taking a year to publicly acknowledge. However, one area of trouble that may finally see much better results soon is graphics driver crashes. Work on graphics driver timeouts, also called Timeout and Detection Recovery (TDR), is not new as the latest WDDM 3.2 also has specific improvements regarding it. Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) version 3.2 is supported on Windows 11 24H2 and 25H2. However, with the upcoming version 26H2, TDR crash diagnosis could go to the next level as Microsoft is introducing a new DirectX 12 API feature called "DirectX Dump Files". Similar to how system memory dump files work when a system crashes or freezes or encounters any such major issue, DirectX Dump Files (DDF) will essentially record a snapshot of the GPU execution right at the moment a graphics-related crash or hang or freeze occurs, so that developers can better understand and diagnoze these TDR and timeout detection errors. The dump will be available as a .dxdmp file for analysis and it will be a comprehensive dump file generated with detailed insights about the hardware, drivers, Windows, as well as the affected application. This should be another welcome change in this department. Earlier at GDC 2026, when the technology was first debuted, Microsoft had shared more details regarding it. The company had explained how DDF is designed to gather data from every layer of the graphics stack into a single file, eliminating the need for developers to manually correlate logs from multiple tools. As mentioned above, the dump can contain a lot of useful details like GPU hardware state information such as register values, shader program counters, page fault virtual addresses, shader memory data, and command buffers. Alongside that, it also captures DirectX runtime and kernel information, including D3D objects, pipeline state objects, device error data, adapter details, and CPU call stacks. Microsoft says the feature has been built around two primary use cases: retail device removals and local device removals. The former allows developers to collect crash information from end users' systems in the field, while the latter helps QA teams and developers investigate issues on test machines. Developers will also be able to include up to 2 MB of custom application data through new D3D12 APIs, providing additional context for troubleshooting. In addition, Microsoft is introducing three dump collection modes ranging from zero-overhead capture, which has no runtime performance impact on supported hardware, to higher-detail modes that collect more vendor-specific debugging data. On compatible Tier 2 hardware, zero-overhead dumps will be enabled by default, meaning developers may begin receiving useful crash diagnostics without making any code changes. The table below explains the three tiers: Tier Description NO_OVERHEAD Enables crash capture with no runtime cost and is suitable for broad deployment MEDIUM_OVERHEAD Provides a balance, capturing additional diagnostic data with moderate impact HIGH_OVERHEAD Collects the most detailed GPU and driver state available, enabling deeper investigation at the cost of higher runtime overhead In terms of availability, the company expects broader release to be around the fall of 2026, which should be right around the time when Windows 11 version 26H2 lands. Right now, DirectX Dump Files are available as a preview and currently, only AMD has the compatible AgilitySDK Developer Preview driver version 26.10.07.02. You can find the official announcement post here on Microsoft's website.
    • And with SO much better perf than the laggy mess that is Files.
    • BrowserOS 0.46.0 by Razvan Serea BrowserOS is a free, open-source Chromium-based browser that runs AI agents natively, offering a smarter, more productive browsing experience. It supports Chrome extensions and integrates AI agents to automate tasks, fill forms, and streamline workflows. Your data stays on your computer: you can use your own API keys or run local models via Ollama, making it a privacy-first alternative to tools like Perplexity, Comet, or Dia. With built-in productivity tools and app integrations, BrowserOS boosts efficiency while keeping control firmly in your hands. Being Chromium-based, BrowserOS lets you effortlessly import your bookmarks, passwords, and Chrome extensions in just a few clicks. BrowserOS works with OpenAI GPT models, Anthropic Claude, Google Gemini, and local AI models via Ollama or LMStudio. You can use your own API keys and effortlessly switch between providers. BrowserOS Agent Your AI productivity assistant that organizes and manages your browsing effortlessly Quickly list, group, or close tabs Save and resume browsing sessions Search your history and organize bookmarks Switch instantly to the tab you need BrowserOS Navigator – Automate web tasks with ease Navigate websites and search automatically Interact with pages without manual effort Handle repetitive tasks in seconds What makes BrowserOS special Feels like home - same familiar interface as Google Chrome, works with all your extensions AI agents that run on YOUR browser, not in the cloud Privacy first - bring your own keys or use local models with Ollama. Your browsing history stays on your computer Open source and community driven - see exactly what's happening under the hood MCP store to one-click install popular MCPs and use them directly in the browser bar (coming soon) Built-in AI ad blocker that works across more scenarios! BrowserOS 0.46.0 changelog: Run Claude Code & Codex right in your browser — We've extended the agent harness to bring full coding agents into BrowserOS. Claude Code and Codex now come bundled and plug straight into the assistant, so you can drive your browser with the agent — and the subscription — you already use. A brand new experience — A redesigned new tab, a calmer composer, and a rebuilt command center for switching between agents. The whole assistant is cleaner, faster to reach, and easier to live in. New MCP tools — We rebuilt the browser tool surface from the ground up — a tighter, more reliable set of tools for agents to drive the browser. Plus one-click install of BrowserOS as an MCP server into the agents you already run, with automatic URL sync. Chromium 148 — Updated to the latest Chromium base with all recent upstream fixes and security patches. Streamlined — We've pulled back a few features that weren't getting much use — Skills, Soul, and Memory — so we can focus and ship better versions of them soon. Download: BrowserOS 0.46.0 | 181.0 MB (Open Source) Download: BrowserOS for macOS | 485.0 MB Links: BrowserOS Homepage | Github | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      BizSAR earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Jordan Smith earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      598
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      190
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      80
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      76
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!