document.f.q.focus(); The Billion Dollar Line of JavaScript | Hacker News Reader

document.f.q.focus(); The Billion Dollar Line of JavaScript

blogstorm.co.uk

21 pointsjkush13 comments

The author confuses correlation and causation. Google has been setting the cursor to the textfield since they were in beta and long before AdWords. I've done the same.

It's funny the author neglected to consider that Google could have eliminated the I'm Feeling Lucky Button (try it) if they really wanted to give users a chance to make the "mistake."

Actually, it's just a side-effect of making life easy for users.

I totally agree with you vlad. I've always attributed the cursor focus as being just good user interaction and not some ploy for more ad clicks.

Yeah! However, it is one of those great moments where one goes out of their way to make life simple for their customers, and then notices a pattern they couldn't have possibly deduced had they not implemented their idea.

The "I'm feeling lucky" button is far more useful than it first appears, I find it invaluable (well, the backend function that supports the button, at least)

I use it to quickly get to the [usually] most relevant Wikipedia page using the custom search bars in Safari (via Inquisitor) and Firefox: http://tlrobinson.net/blog/?p=3

There are actually a number of legitimate reasons for typing URLs into Google instead of the address bar. For example, public computers in foreign countries are often configured to redirect .com requests to the national TLD. So it's much faster to type amazon.com into Google than it is to figure out how to make Amazon.com stop resolving to Amazon.cn or whatever.

"At an average cost of $5 per click this adds up to maybe $500 per day in revenue for Google just for this one search. Multiply across 365 days and taking a very conservative guess that this happens across 10,000 different domains gives over $1.8 billion in yearly revenue for Google."

clearly!

Google's revenues are largely dependent on the behaviors of inexperienced users, especially ones who can't tell the difference between text ads and actual content? No way!

Basically. Although, for what it's worth, some users do understand the concept of a Sponsored Link and prefer to click them over organic (aka 'computerized') results. Something about trusting someone more if they're willing to put money into the advertisement.

When I want to immediately engage in a financial transaction, I always click on the Google ads because I know there I will find someone selling me something rather than useful pure information

Google's results for things often result in places to buy that thing rather than information about it, so I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not.

I was being serious, sometimes I do find the Google ads useful. I probably should have phrased it in a way that sounded less sarcastic. :)

Since Google makes a point of marking the link as "sponsored" and having a different background color I doubt most users click on it thinking it's a search result.

On the other hand I have witnessed with my parents that they don't differentiate between the URL bar and the google search box and most often type the URLs directly into Google. But I've never seen them click on an add as a result of this.

Genius.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com