Yandex and Google home page widgets
In order to attract additional traffic for one of its projects, I created a widget on the main and competing Russian Internet platforms.
In this topic, widgets are simple HTML and Javascript applications that are embedded on the main pages of Google and Yandex, respectively. Each vendor provides a fairly simple API for writing such applications.
I would like to dwell on the differences in approaches that I noticed in the course of my work.
For Google, I limited myself to two files. One file in xml format contains information with the description of the widget, title, customizable options and client code in javascript. This code using API calls and taking into account client parameters takes xml, which is generated on my server, and displays it already in the assigned iframe. The second file deals with the formation of this very xml.
With Yandex almost the same. But since the “autonomous” approach for my case did not fit, then the displayed html is formed completely on my server. And accordingly, the client code remains on my side, and only meta-descriptions of the widget are uploaded to Yandex.
By default, when using the Google API, it doesn’t call my server for data every time. Instead, my server's xml response is cached and pushed to the widget at runtime. This greatly increases the speed and reliability of the widget, because it relieves unnecessary dns rezolving, reduces the load on my server and saves me from unnecessary hiccups during the shutdown of my server. Yandex does not provide this.
The Google API allows you to implement a widget for different language locales by using text substitutions. I, however, had problems with the internationalization of the settings page. Yandex works exclusively in a single language environment.
Once the widget is ready, it should be placed in the appropriate directories and made available to users. Any developer can add to the Google directory. I will say that removing from the directory turned out to be more difficult than adding. The previous version is so in the catalog and dangles, although it surely gives 404 error. :)
The Yandex catalog is formally taken only if your widget has more than 150 users, but my widget (initiated by the catalog moderators) was taken without this bar. Yandex also has a regional program, that is, if you have a widget that provides access to any geographically significant information, then you can indicate this and gain some advantage for the target audience.
And after that, it would be nice for us to get feedback from our users. And here, too, the conditions are different. On the widget page in the Google directory, the user has the opportunity to rate the widget on a five-star system, leave a review and even contact the author. Here we can observe the estimated number of users of the widget. However, in my case, this estimate is very concise - it is written just <100 users.
Yandex does not provide any feedback options. But the information about the number of users gives up to the user.
And Google allows webmasters to embed widgets on third-party pages, that is, the scope of the widgets is not limited to Google personal page. Yandex and yet does not allow to be developed.
The conclusion is simple: while Google provides more opportunities for widget-writers, but, as it seems to me, the audience for widgets on Yandex (Russian-speaking) is more extensive. And the prospects will be envious solely on how they evaluate this trend in Google and Yandex, respectively, because doping and combing are still required here.
That's all I wanted to tell you about widgets. I hope this information will be useful to someone. Successes in promoting your projects using widgets.
Ps. Estimated traffic from the widgets have not yet conducted.
In this topic, widgets are simple HTML and Javascript applications that are embedded on the main pages of Google and Yandex, respectively. Each vendor provides a fairly simple API for writing such applications.
I would like to dwell on the differences in approaches that I noticed in the course of my work.
Minimum file set
For Google, I limited myself to two files. One file in xml format contains information with the description of the widget, title, customizable options and client code in javascript. This code using API calls and taking into account client parameters takes xml, which is generated on my server, and displays it already in the assigned iframe. The second file deals with the formation of this very xml.
With Yandex almost the same. But since the “autonomous” approach for my case did not fit, then the displayed html is formed completely on my server. And accordingly, the client code remains on my side, and only meta-descriptions of the widget are uploaded to Yandex.
Caching
By default, when using the Google API, it doesn’t call my server for data every time. Instead, my server's xml response is cached and pushed to the widget at runtime. This greatly increases the speed and reliability of the widget, because it relieves unnecessary dns rezolving, reduces the load on my server and saves me from unnecessary hiccups during the shutdown of my server. Yandex does not provide this.
Internationalization
The Google API allows you to implement a widget for different language locales by using text substitutions. I, however, had problems with the internationalization of the settings page. Yandex works exclusively in a single language environment.
After the widget is ready
Once the widget is ready, it should be placed in the appropriate directories and made available to users. Any developer can add to the Google directory. I will say that removing from the directory turned out to be more difficult than adding. The previous version is so in the catalog and dangles, although it surely gives 404 error. :)
The Yandex catalog is formally taken only if your widget has more than 150 users, but my widget (initiated by the catalog moderators) was taken without this bar. Yandex also has a regional program, that is, if you have a widget that provides access to any geographically significant information, then you can indicate this and gain some advantage for the target audience.
And after that, it would be nice for us to get feedback from our users. And here, too, the conditions are different. On the widget page in the Google directory, the user has the opportunity to rate the widget on a five-star system, leave a review and even contact the author. Here we can observe the estimated number of users of the widget. However, in my case, this estimate is very concise - it is written just <100 users.
Yandex does not provide any feedback options. But the information about the number of users gives up to the user.
And more?
And Google allows webmasters to embed widgets on third-party pages, that is, the scope of the widgets is not limited to Google personal page. Yandex and yet does not allow to be developed.
The conclusion is simple: while Google provides more opportunities for widget-writers, but, as it seems to me, the audience for widgets on Yandex (Russian-speaking) is more extensive. And the prospects will be envious solely on how they evaluate this trend in Google and Yandex, respectively, because doping and combing are still required here.
That's all I wanted to tell you about widgets. I hope this information will be useful to someone. Successes in promoting your projects using widgets.
Ps. Estimated traffic from the widgets have not yet conducted.
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/85581/
All Articles