-
2008.07.28 13:01 "[Fwd: Re: [Tiff] CVS access]", by Edward Lam
- 2008.07.28 14:02 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Mateusz Loskot
-
2008.08.11 20:55 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2008.08.11 19:35 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
- 2008.08.11 17:57 "[Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
- 2008.08.11 20:03 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
- 2008.08.11 20:51 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2008.08.11 19:35 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
2008.07.29 21:01 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Bob Friesenhahn
> From what I know about google, I highly doubt that there is any intentional ranking manipulation. However, it seems plausible that a fair number of websites for "important" development projects may reference the incorrect website due to old information, causing google to rank the old site very highly due to lots of referencing sites. This is one important measure google uses to ascertain the importance of a website.
Google may also know which site is oldest.
This what the new Cuil search engine thinks:
http://www.cuil.com/search?q=libtiff
Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/