Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Launches Trends

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the what's-hip-with-the-kids-these-days dept.

168

An anonymous reader writes "Google started to offer a new Trends service that allows viewing search term request statistics split up by geographical locations and languages. In short one can use Google trends to figure out what's hot and what's not and perhaps even find cyclic patterns to pick best time to advertise. From my poking around Google trends I have noticed that there appears to be a general declining bias for most search terms that either has to do with the declining popularity of Google (i.e. less folks were using Google for the past two years) or with the declining amount of searches in general (which is highly unlikely)."

cancel ×

168 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Dumb Pagerank spam. (4, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985019)

I have noticed that there appears to be a general declining bias for most search terms that either has to do with the declining popularity of Google....

Dumb. Maybe he's correct, that google popularity is declining, but the examples he gives do not back up his hypothesis.

There's less searches for Ultramax, Trance music, Madonna and Britney Spears than two years ago. Thats because those items are less popular than two years ago.

Oh, and doing a quick search for the author of this 'blog' (which is starting to look suspiciously like a pagerank pusher), I see he has an ecommerce site called ultramax music, that features trance). [ultramax-music.com]

So - two of his search items are related to what he's selling! An interesting way to get your name, music & company linked from a high profile website.

Re:Dumb Pagerank spam. (3, Informative)

Cinnimod (997991) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985048)

I'm going to have to agree with WMF above, the examples that the journalist provided in that article are not general search terms for target audiences. He also didn't provide statistics. The reader has no way of knowing whether the journalist put in 10 search terms of his choosing and all ten showed a decline, or whether he sat there for days and put in a thousand different search terms (which I highly doubt).

For example, in a search for trends on searches for "porn", the trend is UP. Searches for "video games" have held pretty steady since 2004. I think he may not have been using general search terms. Maybe he just doesn't want to believe his wonderful trance music could possibly be on the decline. ;P

Re:Dumb Pagerank spam. (1)

roskakori (447739) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985132)

There's less searches for Ultramax, Trance music, Madonna and Britney Spears than two years ago. Thats because those items are less popular than two years ago.
There are also less searches for Linux [google.com] . Amiga [google.com] has been been increasing recently. Look Mum, I can see a trend! Well, maybe not [google.com] .

Re:Dumb Pagerank spam. (2, Interesting)

kabz (770151) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985227)

Yikes !!!

Check out the searches for C++, SQL, Perl and get a load of that decline, though the main source of queries for all three is Bangalore. Ouch !! Incidentally Dallas and Houston make an appearance in the lower ranks.

On a happier note, I predict news soon, from Peru, of a resurgence in the fortunes of the Amiga. AmigaOS forever !!!

Re:Dumb Pagerank spam. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985348)

I am in complete agreement with the parent post. The article link is nothing more than blatant self promotion for some guy's weird taste in music, of which he conveniently sells via his online store. Gee, smells an awful lot like SPAM. if I wanted to read spam, I'd sooner read through my e-mail junk folder than some linkjacked story on Slashdot. ON TOP OF THAT, the supposed topic of the story is three month old news!!! -- c'mon editors, get a clue. Sadly, I can only see these types of 'articles' growing (hear me Digg, Reddit, etc?), and will be one of the biggest negatives of the much-hyped Web 2.0.

Re:Dumb Pagerank spam. (1)

QuantumFTL (197300) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985532)

I've been "spamming" slashdot with a link in my sig for a while now... I wonder how much more effective the pagerank spamming in this article would be - does google have some way to filter out sigs from a site?

Also, I emailed the Ultramax guy a while back (I happen to rather like the music and purchased an album of theirs) and he seems to have good intentions with things. I'd prefer this type of spam to Roland P's any day.

Google LAUNCHED Trends (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985021)

Google launched trends in May [slashdot.org] , so this is old news and a dupe. Nonetheless, here's an interesting trend [google.com] .

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (4, Interesting)

JanneM (7445) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985065)

Try this search [google.com] , just to put that into perspective.

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985070)

And to put THAT into perspective, try this tend [google.com] .

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (2, Interesting)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985085)

And to put that INTO perspective - try this search [google.com]

(This can go on all day!)

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (2, Funny)

Clazzy (958719) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985202)

Even better, put THIS [google.com] into perspective.

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1)

kerecsen (807268) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985327)

And to put sex into perspective (umm.. I guess perspective is the only get you get on slashdot relating to sex), look at this [google.com] . Coincidence? I think not!

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985486)

Perhaps the most important trend [google.com] of all.

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1, Funny)

kabz (770151) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985256)

Web-pages!! Pah!!

Most people are much more interested in the Soft Fruit Rankings [google.com]

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985096)

And to put THAT into perspective, try this trend [google.com] . (The top regions bars are interesting, too.)

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985139)

Here's a term that dwarfs even sex (how's that for popularity?): It's Ultitrend! [google.com]

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1, Interesting)

Bruitist (987735) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985252)

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1)

LihTox (754597) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985163)

Oddly enough, yahoo and sex [google.com] are on par with each other.

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985068)

The reason that digg gets more searches than slashdot would be from non-geeks wondering wtf the "digg this" links at the bottom of some blog items are for.

Well, at least look on the bright side... (1)

Xenographic (557057) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985239)

Try this search [google.com] to see that Slashdot still maintains its high quality standards :-)

Slashdot Moderators need to be replaced (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985337)

You guys are slacking these days. Follow BillG and make space for youngsters.

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985364)

dupes are up [google.com]

Re:Google LAUNCHED Trends (1)

RedWizzard (192002) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985389)

Nonetheless, here's an interesting trend.
Not as interesting as this one [google.com] . More people are using Google to search for Google than ever before!

New trends? (1)

ShecoDu (447850) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985023)

I've used google trends before, is this a new version or just a formal release?

Re:New trends? (4, Funny)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985084)

This is a service of Slashdot Dupes, which periodically "reminds" you of news stories that happened days, weeks, or months ago.

Next on Slashdot: "Microsoft announces Windows ME"...

general declining bias? (4, Informative)

dmoen (88623) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985045)

From my poking around Google trends I have noticed that there appears to be a general declining bias for most search terms that either has to do with the declining popularity of Google (i.e. less folks were using Google for the past two years) or with the declining amount of searches in general (which is highly unlikely)."


I ran my own tests, and I think that the "search volume" axis is relative to the total number of searches on each day, rather than an absolute number. Most of my tests didn't show a declining bias, although I saw that in a few cases. I think the "declining bias" you saw might be caused by an increase in the diversity of search terms. Old search terms never go away, but new search terms are constantly being created as new names and catch phrases enter popular culture.


Doug Moen

Re:general declining bias? (3, Informative)

All Your Name Are Be (931301) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985195)

Exactly. from the About Google Trends page (the first question, no less):
1. How does Google Trends work?

Google Trends analyzes a portion of Google web searches to compute how many searches have been done for the terms you enter relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time. We then show you a graph with the results -- our search-volume graph -- plotted on a linear scale.
All this means is that people are using a wider range of search terms. (either from new terms entering general culture or perhaps people are just searching for more than they used to.)

Re:general declining bias? (1)

zerobeat (628744) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985311)

Observe the results for the following search...

http://www.google.com/trends?q=blog%2C+html&ctab=0 &geo=all&date=all [google.com]

Clearly the results follow the trends of popular culture (at least in this computer tech. based example). It is not clear that HTML is searched less often given the results in the url above. All that is shown is that HTML composed a lower proportion of searches requested in mid 2006 than in the beginning of 2004. See http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html#1 [google.com] for an explanation of how the graph is constructed.

I think Doug is right, any apparent decline in searches may simply reflect an increase in diversity of search requests. Any one search term is apparently searched less, that is "appears less" because it has a lower proportion as 1) More searches in general are requested and 2) these searches with time will tend to be more diverse as more users use google.

Ironically, as more people use google, any one search term as displayed by Google Trends will appear to be searched less frequently.

Zerobeat

Re:general declining bias? (1)

denoir (960304) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985336)

Google describes the values as:

"Google Trends analyzes a portion of Google web searches to compute how many searches have been done for the terms you enter relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time."

The diversification and especially the decline of technical stuff is a rather obvious consequence of a still exponentially increasing number of Internet users. Average people, to be precise - i.e not computer enthusiasts, engineers and scientists. Hence while in absolute terms a technical keyword is probably also increasing exponentially, in relative terms it is losing ground to the non-technical stuff. Slashdotters and similar creatures are becoming rare as the Internet demographics gets more and more similar to real-world demographics.

Douchebag's blog (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985052)

Let's keep score:

1 link to some douchebag's blog
0 links to Google trends

Re:Douchebag's blog (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985078)

I hear you man.

fucking douchebag. lets get some mints and shove them in his eyes!

man, dane cook kills me.

hyperlinked 'trends service' (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985053)

seems like only 3 years ago I was saying links of /. should be norel.

then maybe submitter would be mor pleasant with his choice of hyperlink text.

Here is a nice link Google Trends [google.com]

have a nice day.

Oh oh oh. almost forgot, this is about 9 ice ages old. oh ohoh

do a search for

lemon, lime [google.com]

it is by far the best search you can do on trends! awesome!!

rel=nofollow (1)

tod_miller (792541) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985059)

sorry. I am tired.

Holy Nation of Pervs, Batman ... (5, Funny)

mstroeck (411799) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985055)

... living in the perpetual darkness of Finlands arctic winter for a few months a year sure can make you lonely, but that lonely [google.com] ?

Re:Holy Nation of Pervs, Batman ... (1)

dabbaking (843108) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985231)

Um...Helsinki? Isn't that where Torvalds lives...naughty kernel hacker!

/. Groupthink Trends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985056)

An Upward Trend for Google (1)

telchine (719345) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985061)

Hmm, I can see an upward trend here [google.com] . However the data they have here [google.com] is very suprising!

Firefox, Opera, ie (5, Insightful)

trip11 (160832) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985072)

I tried out "Firefox, Opera, IE" and was hoping google would be cool enough that I would get a comparison of trafic from each of the browsers. No such luck. Come on all of you Google employies. One of you needs a 20% time project I'm sure. Put in a fun set of 'easter eggs' that catch browser traffic comparisons or platform traffic comparisons, or other specific comparisons for an appropriate search. I'm sure there are more interesting trends than just 'how many times did you search for x'.

Windows vs. Linux (1)

phatvw (996438) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985081)

Aparently folks in Berlin and Montreal like to search [google.com] about Windows a LOT more than about Linux. But that could mean a window on a house. Whats odd is that if I include the keyword Microsoft, the results change dramatically [google.com]

Perhaps I'm not using this tool properly...

Re:Windows vs. Linux (1)

phatvw (996438) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985101)

Oh and I'm moving to Elmhurst [google.com] Whether there is actually a lot of sex there, or the majority of guys are losers looking it up on the Internet, that means better odds for me :)

Re:Windows vs. Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985105)

Microsoft windows is filed under "Broken Windows"

Snowboarding vs hiking (1)

phatvw (996438) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985118)

Wow this does work. You can see the cyclical patterns emerge quite clearly, well for obvious stuff at least.

Snowboarding vs hiking: http://www.google.com/trends?q=snowboarding%2C+hik ing&ctab=0&geo=US&date=all [google.com]

Heating vs air conditioning: http://www.google.com/trends?q=air+conditioning%2C +heating&ctab=0&geo=US&date=all [google.com]

Re:Snowboarding vs hiking (2, Interesting)

shawb (16347) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985317)

Exactly [google.com] . Looking at holiday [google.com] related terms is very telling [google.com] Wow... that last one is odd. There's a very telling lack of a peak there... Since july 4th was almost 2 months ago, one would assume that there should be a peak. Either people did not celebrate Independance Day in the US this year, they celebrated in a different way, or google trend's data is at least two months out of date, and therefore useless for trendspotting.

Re:Snowboarding vs hiking (1)

fireduck (197000) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985374)

Of course it isn't updated with data from yesterday. A cursory glance at the scale of the graph shows that the minor tick marks represent quarters, and there's only 1 tick mark in 2006 showing. Thus, we've got reliable 2006 data through a bit after the first quarter (likely through May and maybe into June). You can clearly see that it's starting to rise at the end, and if we had the data, we'd certainly see the July peak.

And just because it doesn't have the latest data, doesn't invalidate it's use for trendspotting. It merely won't tell you what the latest fad is.

CowboyNeal's been hoaxed by a marketer (3, Informative)

E-Sabbath (42104) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985117)

Indeed, this isn't a new feature, and it certainly looks like someone has an agenda here. Where are people going, if not to google? And the expected trend of any specific query is to decrease over time as popularity wanes.

One Solid Trend (2, Informative)

xoip (920266) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985129)

There is no escaping this one...http://www.google.com/trends?q=porn&ctab=0&g eo=all&date=all [google.com]

Re:One Solid Trend (1)

idonthack (883680) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985279)

Interesting.

Top ten cities searching for porn:
  1. Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
  2. Birmingham, United Kingdom
  3. Auckland, New Zealand
  4. Brisbane, Australia
  5. Manchester, United Kingdom
  6. Sydney, Australia
  7. Melbourne, Australia
  8. Irvine, CA, USA
  9. Brentford, United Kingdom
  10. Miami, FL, USA

Top ten regions:
  1. South Africa
  2. New Zealand
  3. Australia
  4. United Kingdom
  5. Canada
  6. United States
  7. India
  8. Finland
  9. Turkey
  10. Denmark
Of course these will be a little skewed due to language differences. But interesting nonetheless.
         

Re:One Solid Trend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985296)

I'm gutted; Birmingham has lost its place as the world leader. I'd better get searching.

Re:One Solid Trend (1)

AnFraX (809909) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985326)

Even more surprising is this trend [google.com] . It seems the UK tops out as the most perverted English-Speaking nation, aswell.

This is very revealing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985135)

Goatse rankings [google.com]

Programming is popular in India (1)

Erectile Dysfunction (994340) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985141)

Some [google.com]
common [google.com]
industry languages [google.com] are quite popular.

Except for interest in Rails [google.com] .

Re:Programming is popular in India (1)

Pulse_Instance (698417) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985270)

Here you go, this [google.com] is much more intresting and easier to compare.

Re:Programming is popular in India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985310)

Most of those are coming from India... Damn outsourcing.

Google confirms it (1)

Erectile Dysfunction (994340) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985164)

BSD is dying [google.com] .

Old news (4, Informative)

nascarguy27 (984493) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985167)

According to this Press Release [google.com] , Google released Trends on May 10, 2006 along with Google Co-op, Google Desktop 4, and Google Notebook. It appears that the guy who wrote the article just happened to come across Google Trends, put his own website words into it, and IMO he doesn't understand how it works.

Another Scary Trend (1)

Derosian (943622) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985172)

An even Scarier Trend (1)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985247)

http://www.google.com/trends?q=france%2C+england%2 C+germany%2C+Canada&ctab=1&geo=all&date=all [google.com]
It's truly scary when you realize why the parent trend looks that way.

s/nouns/adjectives and Scary Trend dissappears (1)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985446)

If you swap adjectives for nouns ( use 'canadian' and 'japanese' etc, instead of 'canada' and 'japan' etc ) then the trend is not there. There is not a trace of it. I think that the trend for the word 'Canada' is a bizarre artifact. If we knew why it was there then we might know a lot more about how google trends relly works - or fails.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=Japanese%2C+Europea n%2C+American%2C+Chinese%2C+Canadian&ctab=1&geo=al l&date=all [google.com]

Someone call Maslow (2, Interesting)

eko33 (982179) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985176)

Modern culture's hierarchy has changed!

New Maslow [google.com]

/idle speculation

Top searches (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985177)

After comparing the top searches in Google Trends with AOL's leaked searches I think Google have doctored the top searches a little bit. There's likely to be "www.google.com", "google" or a "www.myspace" in the real results.

Does not compute (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985183)

From my poking around Google trends I have noticed that there appears to be a general declining bias for most search terms that either has to do with the declining popularity of Google (i.e. less folks were using Google for the past two years) or with the declining amount of searches in general (which is highly unlikely)

It would have to mean that less people are searching, because what else would these mysterious people be using to search with if not google? The browserbar that some spammer hijacked onto their copy of IE? Google is search; so it's reasonable to assume that if less people are using it, it means that less people are searching.

Re:Does not compute (1)

traveller.ct (958378) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985287)

Or people were using something other than Google to search. Perhaps Yahoo or MSN?

It did mention "declining popularity of Google" as a possibility.

Re:Does not compute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985339)

Or that less people are searching for the terms he used. Trance music just isn't popular anymore. The author just refuses to admit that it was a passing fad, and so extrapolates that EVERYTHING is being searched for less because his pet interest is being searched for less. Max is totally missing the point of Google Trends. Check out the name of the support contact on the bottom of this page [ultramax-music.com] and all should be clear.

BlogScope (2, Interesting)

lailla123 (998009) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985198)

There exist many better trendspotting tools, e.g. try BlogScope [blogscope.net] . For example, compare YouTube and Google Video [blogscope.net] .

Google Trends comfirms it (1)

3dWarlord (862844) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985204)

NetBSD is dying. [google.com]

Re:Google Trends comfirms it (1)

Erectile Dysfunction (994340) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985226)

You might think that NetBSD and FreeBSD [google.com] are dying but then you see this [google.com] and decide they died alone long ago. Then you look at what is really important to people [google.com] and realize they never cared about any of it to begin with.

Brands such as (1)

Erectile Dysfunction (994340) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985206)

BMW and Mercedes do not fluctuate wildly, while Britney Spears has seen a mostly steady decline in popularity despite an increase in "scandals."

how did i guess (1)

dabbaking (843108) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985212)

Google is so predictable. On a hunch, I typed in trends.google.com...and what do you know. They should come up with more creative titles for their subdomains.

Someone please help me (1)

rbarreira (836272) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985222)

Someone please help me analyze this one [google.com] .

Re:Someone please help me (1)

daniil (775990) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985498)

You might also want to take a look at this [google.com] .

Singular v. plural (4, Interesting)

scooter.higher (874622) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985250)

Re:Singular v. plural (1)

coflow (519578) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985262)

This [google.com] is a complete surprise to me.....

Re:Singular v. plural (1)

shawb (16347) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985372)

Clicky [google.com] . This has to be the most interactive article I've seen. It's turned into a game in several threads.

Popularity is not popularity (1)

kirun (658684) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985264)

Take, for example, DS vs PSP [google.com] . Any look at sales charts will tell you that the DS is ahead, but PSP is ahead in searches. Unless there's a whole load of Paint Shop Pro fans skewing the results.

Re:Popularity is not popularity (1)

eipipuz (631495) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985540)

You may look at the News chart, just below the search one...

My research (2, Funny)

DrKyle (818035) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985299)

My hypothesis has finally been proven! While geeks [google.com] remain unpopular, pizza [google.com] and lesbians [google.com] are steadily gaining in popularity.

HAHA A pagerank scam ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985333)

The guy uses search terms related to what he's selling , and slashdot fell for it !! HAHA!

Old news, technically (1)

raalynthslair (759150) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985346)

While this is technically old news - the "beta" has been available to play with for some time now. I remember looking at it to prove a point about "porn searches" to my friend - that US was NOT #1 on the categories WE could think of (only about 4 so I KNOW we missed some)... and being surprised that we were further down than 10th... Arab nations almost empirically held the top places... But the point is, that this has been around now. But, it IS news that something Google has put out IS listed as 'complete' and not just "Beta" for once. That is a rare thing. It seems that all of Google stuff is "beta" forever. :o)

No units, what's the point (1)

Paul Carver (4555) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985386)

How can any x-y graph without units on the y axis be useful? Without units this entire thing is just mental masturbation. You can play around with it if that sort of thing makes you happy, but I can't see any actual value coming out of it because without numbers it's just meaningless pictures.

Telling stories with lies, damned lies and trends (1)

new500 (128819) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985419)

Hmm, okay, so can i prove something with this?

http://www.google.com/trends?q=sex%2C+politicians% 2C+internet%2C+internets%2C+email&ctab=1&geo=all&d ate=all [google.com]

i.e, everyone wants to know where sex can be found, a heck of a lot of people want to know where their email is, a elite minority are looking for that internet that was sent them but never arrived, "internets" clearly remain off the practical radar for now, and no-one cares at all where their politicians are?

I'm beginning to think this is a marketing / pr / scaremonger's wet dream

Look at results for Women, Woman (1)

PWNT (985141) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985537)

http://www.google.com/trends?q=woman&ctab=1&geo=al l&date=all [google.com]
http://www.google.com/trends?q=women&ctab=1&geo=al l&date=all [google.com]

Pretty crazy that Iran and india are the top searchers for those words.

I'm baffled, if they want porn, they should be searching that.

The google results for women/woman yield wikipedia and a bunch of informative sites about womens's health!

Very interesting, also looking at cross country skiing shows Canada has large interest in the sport, and ottawa is the capital of it!

Canada also wins the beer category!

Vietnam searches for sex the most? Notice how "backwards" or theological countries have more of these searches??? Crazy

Top searches for 'Google Trends' (1)

groovelator (994174) | more than 7 years ago | (#15985578)

Apparently Turkey, New Zealand and Denmark have the highest number of searches for 'Google Trends'.

So what's that all about?

http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22google+trends%22 &ctab=1&geo=all&date=all/ [google.com]

Happy Holidays (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15985605)

and a happy new year [google.com]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>