Earn 100% instant commission on my new IM product (app)

Sam, I only received one pm from you of which I have replied. There aren't any bugs within the tool. I have explained the reasons for those results in the pm to you.

Regards

Andy

Yes there are some bugs in this one even after latest update with all of the false results being returned. I hope this gets fixed cause it could be a pretty awesome time saver!

From the backlink booster thread,so as not to further dilute seans thread.
I am still confused about what this means really.The cache vs actual search results?What does this mean bottom line for the results we see in the checker?
That makes sense about the timing out on big lists of links,ive found putting in a boatload of links,as it gets further down its just all red.
What is the max amt of links one can check at one time to prevent this and is there a way to add some sort of timer,or proxy or something so that we can just dump a ton of them in and let it do its thing without this problem happening?
Looking forward to todays update to see whats up,but hope u will comment on your thread here.
thanks

"With some of the urls the app will check Google cache. Others it will parse the results from the actual search results. Not all cached pages show within the search results using a more standard criteria. This is so it does not over-use the Google cache function. Some people are manually checking the urls by using site:theirurl.com/page.html

If the app checked that particular url using the cache function then the result that they have seen in the index may have been recently crawled and indexed but NOT yet cached. When a page is cached the backlinks will count. It can take a short while for a page to be fully cached after it has been crawled and indexed.

This is the main issues that people have been emailing me with. I have checked their results on both my server and theirs and the app was 100% correct for both. After explaining this those users are now happy and understand how it works. The app does give correct results.

Google can temporarily block the app if you put a large list through several times in a row. Users do NOT need to check the same identical list more than one time within any few days. It's about using common sense here. Google makes the rules, not me... unfortunately for me."

thanks for the response bro but that is very subjective and relative.need a number please. 20 ? 30 at a time?

lookin forward to the new update/manual.watched for it today as you said but still no go

will watch tomorrow

Nah, I ain't Rawson.

I commend you for putting in the effort to get it to work properly. And, I won't dispute that you have in fact put forth the efforts that you say you have.

I did email you several times...since procuring the app, and didn't receive any responses, but I'm not gonna dwell on that any more than I already have.

Believe me, I understand that this is not some easy work-around problem.
I just take issue with the attempt to put the onus on the users, in the other thread - As oppose to just admitting that...yes, if one wants to check a 'liberal' amount of urls in a given time frame...then one should expect that the data returned may not necessarily be accurate.

That's all I was looking for. Just a - "Ya, this is not an easily resolved issue, but I'm working on it."

Instead, it was - "The app was 100% correct"

But, now, you are kind-of conceding that....yes, is it is problematic, and yes, the data could be skewed.

Which is great...because, like you...I just want the app to work properly and return data that I can trust. That's all.

So, I'll just leave it alone, and hope that sometime in the near future...we will have a reliable index checker.

Thanks

Hi,

That would actually probably be the easier part. It is the next stage to be honest, ie - click a button and it will parse content from those pages and submit to a number of sites. I am however still working on the Index Checker app so that is why I wasn't sent out yesterday. I don't want to keep on tweaking and sending out updates willy nilly so want to get it operating in such a way that works for all.

I have got the app working 100% right with regards to results...(from mychecks) but Google can blocks certain URLs temporarily. I think this is where the problem was before. The app now parses specific data from the results pages so if it shows a certain icon it is because it has match that data. As in it may block one url but the next it can access and check with no problems. The app now displays a 'block' symbol so you know that the url has not been checked. However, those with either ticks or crosses are now correct.

I will be doing further testing today for various lists. ie - profiles urls, article urls and website sitemaps.

I will have a better idea within the next couple of working days of how many you can put through the app at any one time.

I know it is not ideal, but worse case the app will tell you the status of a large percent of the urls. Those urls, (after your initial verification and checks of the update...) will never need to be checked. The only ones that would need to be checked either by the app at a later time, or manually are the ones that show a 'block' symbol.

I will report back with an update shortly of how it is all coming along. I'll also be making a blog post about this too.

Andy

Ya, I see the andy@ email address in my incoming, so I likely may have sent to that, but lets just say I emailed you at support@ and call it a day And, really...it is possible, so lets just assume that that is what happened.

Ya, as long as we know the X's or check marks are correct...that would be hungely significant for me. Like I said...I can switch my IP to run more urls, so we'll see how she goes

Thanks,

Doug

Cool, glad to hear your making progress. I like the idea of having the different windows for the different status'.

If you ever need any urls....just give me a shout. I've got Like 800 just on one of my spreadsheets, and every one of them is color-coded to indicate cached or not. Also, 76% of them are cached....so its pretty easy to grab a bundle of 50 cached urls.

Oh, also...FYI- I have been closely checking cache on my backlinks, index driver sites etc., and on rare a occassion...a url that has been previously cached with the time/date stamp and all, will all of a sudden show no-cache....like G. has never even found it - zilch, nada, nothing. It is very rare...but I've seen it happen.

Ok, cool, glad to hear we're making progress.

Ya, no prob man. I'll send you 100 just in case you end up wanting more for your testing. And, if you ever need more, just shout me...I've got an endless supply, and they are recently confirmed, and they are color coded for easy identification of status.

On the urls that I track regularly....typically if it was showing cache and now it isn't, it will usually come back at some point and show a cache stamp again. Of course, these are usually urls that I am taking action on (sending some kind of backlinks too), so I couldn't say for sure...if that would happen to a url that was not being 'worked'.

I have even observed a change in the cached time/date stamp....to one that is older than previous one I last observed.
Example:
I check the cache date/time stamp today and it shows me the cached url with todays date 1/9/10. Then, tomorrow I check and it shows me an old cached url with a date stamp of say...12/28/09. This is very rare...but I have seen it happen, and I just thought it was interesting.

Anyway, I'll put together an Excel sheet for ya now, and get it off to you via email.

Doug

Ya, for me...I keep everything organized in spreadsheets. Mainly because I was testing some different methods for getting my stuff cached, and I wanted to closely monitor everything...so I would know with 99% certainty...how my methods were performing. I probably wouldn't use the server side text file, but some peeps might like it.

Frankly, I'm thrilled with the features it has now, and the couple you mentioned earlier (like the different windows).

I think you took the right direction with the whole - If the app can't confirm a url cached or not cached, then it will be able to extrapolate that data out...with a high degree of certainty, thing. - That to me is key. If we can just rely on the X's and checks that it does return....then like I said...I'm cool with switching to one of my other ip's.

And at the same time...I'm cognizant of the fact that we can get a little different results based on the data centers that we are pulling from. My experience is....we should be able to get approx. 95% consistent info...even if we are pulling from 2 different data centers.

So, a 5% disparity in the data returned...between index checker app, and a manual check...would be acceptable. Of course, you being more tech savvy than I...you could probably make it a point to query G. from the same ip...both with the app, and with a manual check - In which case...the data should be virtually 100% identical.

Alright man, cool, I'm looking forward to trying the next update. If you nail it...then I take back everything everybody else said about you (cause I only said nice things) LOL

Just messing with you, Andy. I just can't help myself.

Doug

It means the app will allow you to save and retrieve your urls with the click of the button, directly from your server. So you can store and maintain a list of non indexed urls, indexed urls etc. It's just an idea at the minute.

You mean you can subscribe to your own threads?? :-|

Thanks Doug for the comments. Yeah the app should perform well now. If it needs an update I'll update it.

I'll probably be looking at creating a pro version of the app where it pings / bookmarks urls too with an additional click.

I'm just glad I managed to sort it out. It was getting "hairy" there for a moment :-)

Thanks again.

Andy

well,hostgators a bitch and says the wont adjust the max for me and i was getting loads of blocked urls.and im only loading 30-60 urls at a time.and alot of the blocks are starting right at the top,not just at the bottom

so i installed it on another host that i used and started running it.same things,tons of blocked urls right away. there is not a section for me to mess with the max so i emailed them,hopefully they will adjust or ill just find another host that does as it seems to be making a difference. unless u can think of why else im getting loads of blocked urls?

Can you pm me your youtube username or post it in here for me to check. I've entered various names with no problems so let me know what it is so I can investigate.

With regards to the RSS feed question I'll take a look and see what you are talking about then get back to you.

I recommend not running the same lists through too often because there is no reason for you to do this. Run a list, see which ones aren't indexed and do your wizardry to get those pages indexed. Why run then again the next day? Even run them a week later. Give Google chance to do it's thing and find these links.

Index Checker is a tool to make things easier for you and to save you a LOT of time, but it's all down to how you use it.

Here's the thing chief,

If you want to check 'frequency of cache' for something like your money site, or a few 'index drivers' - Then, you need to be looking at the actual cached page which has the date and time stamp on it. (In case you were wondering...G. uses Greenwich time, which never adjusts, and is the most widely used standard. I know for example...that G. Greenwich time is 6 hrs. ahead of me) I'm in Chicago.

If you are doing the above...then something like Aaron's seo toolbar...is a fast way to check those cached urls.

If you aren't interested in monitoring the above, and are simply trying to see what indexing method is working best for you, then I suggest you grab as large a sampling of urls as possible, and then set up a spreadsheet as follows:

* First off - You shouldn't even bother trying to ascertain 'quickest method', instead you should be trying to determine what method is the most efective. It's very simple. Just do the following.....

Say you have 300 profile urls to work with.

Say you have 3 different methods that you want to try as 'index drivers'.

1. Take the 300 urls and use Andy's index checker to culm out all the non-indexed urls.

2. Take those non-indexed urls and divide them equally into the 3 index driver groups.

3. Use your index driver method for their respective group of urls. Do nothing else to them except what you have predefined for that index driver.

4. Wait 48 to 72hrs, and then recheck the urls in each group. Take the cache urls vs the non-cached, and assign a "% cached" to each group.

5. Continue to test and refine your index drivers. After a lot of urls, and a lot of testing, you should be able to improve your cache% for your profile backlinks.

Forget the whole 'time' thing. I put 100's of urls through my index drivers every week. I have studied G.'s caching patterns. I can do 10 urls....1 every minute for 10 minutes, and I can actually see the fresh time stamp on the cached url...change like every minute, or every time I refresh it.

That does not guarantee me that G. bot will follow every link on that page.
And just so you know.....*typically* the bot that caches your url where your profile backlinks are located....is not the same bot that follows those links and caches the profile urls. The first bot sends a request for a secondary bot to come and follow those links.

Even though my page where a bunch of my profile urls reside...may be cached 100 times in a day....it will still typically take 24 to 48 hrs for those profile urls to show a cached page.

I've spent quite a bit of time working on this....and my last group of around 800 profile urls, I was able to obtain a 75% cache rate within 72hrs of using my index drivers. I'm still refining my system, and I would like to get to 90% - ish, but time will tell.

No, I'm not going in to it here in the forum, but you should be able to obtain similar results with common sense and thorough testing.

Also, there will always be a certain attrition rate with any backlinks. So, even though I may achieved X amount of urls cached within 72 hrs, if I was to go back to each url today....we know that a certain % of them will be no good, for one reason or another.

I hope your out-tasking your profile urls.

Ya, well, you gotta understand...once you start getting the blocks...you are going to continue to get them, until you leave it alone for 12 to 24 hrs., and then come back to it. It's just like a manual ban. The period of time...is not consistent. I have still experienced it 20 hrs later. So, best to just stop, and try again in 24hrs.

Thanks

What confuses me is that if your checker says it is indexed should it not
show up when you enter the url in the google search box ?

For the example I am talking about I see the cached copy but not when entering
the url in the searchbox

Also if you do info:url it shows up. What does that indicate ?


Thanks

Si

OK Thanks Andy