February 12th, 2008

Oh, the horror! Google hijacks 404 pages!

The reality is that the new Google beta toolbar doesn't hijack the 404 page if the site provides a 404 page or other form of web error handling. I tried the toolbar out this morning, and the only case I found where the Google toolbar provided a search page is the site matching the screenshots below, and the site given in the original post on this topic. The latter site provided a lame looking redirect back to the main page. However, other sites that redirected back to the home page for 404 errors did not have this problem, so the problem seems to be unique to this site.

If you've ever seen default 404 error handling, you know it's basically useless.

404 Not Found
Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

Compare that with a page managed by the toolbar.

the404
Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

I would expect a search engine toolbar to provide useful, alternative methods of finding the content if the web site uses default error handling. However, according to Codswallop, Google steals your visitors.

Why is this “helpful” behavior bad? As well as a link to the domain root they provide a prominent search box pre-filled with search terms. The temptation is going to be to hit that search button, effectively taking away your visitor.

I would say any webmaster that doesn't provide effective error handling pages for 404 errors doesn't really care about losing visitors, do they?

update Matt Cutts from Google explained that the toolbar looks for a result larger than 512 bytes. The example page is nothing more a broken HTML page, with a meta refresh and a link, all of which is less than 512 bytes. Those sites that do a direct redirect don't, of course, return 404 to trigger the toolbar. End of story.end update

What really surprised me about this story, though, is that if people are so quick to accuse Google of 'evil' behavior in an innocuous situations like this, why was the idea of Google helping to bail out Yahoo to keep the latter out of the hands of Microsoft seen as a "good" thing? I would think a search engine monopoly in the hands of Google would be potentially more evil than Google providing useful features for default 404 error handling.

This environment is confusingly inconsistent at times.

Comments
1
Bud Gibson - 1:05 pm February 12, 2008

We need another search provider, or search needs to become a regulated monopoly. With 10's of billions of web pages, algorithmic indexing such as that provided by Google is the only effective solution for navigation.

2
Doug Alder - 4:18 pm February 12, 2008

This environment is confusingly inconsistent at times.

What you expect logic on the interwebs… LOL [snicker]

3
James - 7:46 pm February 12, 2008

IE 5 and later also replace error pages shorter than 512 bytes (256 bytes for 403,405,410), so there's nothing new going on here.

4
Shelley - 10:30 pm February 12, 2008

Bud, I was actually for the Microsoft takeover of Yahoo (gasp!)

Doug, I'm a woman. Of course I demand consistency and logic.

James, that makes sense and that's probably where Google got it's size limitation.

5
Dave - 3:35 am February 13, 2008

Many people can't quite seem to make up their minds if Google are evil or not. I think it's inevitable with any large company that "some things they do aren't very nice", even if they allegedly have a "do no evil" ethic. (cf. Google in China). I supposed it's because at least Microsoft are obviously evil, whereas people are still a bit uncertain about Google.

The reality is, most companies care about the bottom line. If they can make their money ethically, great! That's good for PR! If they can't, well, that's too bad.

6
Bud Gibson - 6:00 am February 13, 2008

Shelley, generally speaking I'm not for the MS takeover of anything. I just think there needs to be viable competition in the search space. MS has failed so miserably at all things web that it's hard to imagine their management improving Yahoo.

BTW, I'm not fully convinced the Microsoft/Yahoo deal is a dead letter

7
Bud Gibson - 8:26 am February 13, 2008

Dave, indeed, companies are at somewhat equivocal morally to say the least. If there's competition, that forces them to give passing thought to what the customer wants. Of course, what the customer wants frequently has little to do with what may be in the customer's best interest.

Thanks to all those who have contributed to the discussion. Comments are now closed, but you can contact the author of the post directly.