WHY? I have no clue really. I have had this installed for some time and loved it whenever I used it. I just recently tried to use it a boom, it is dead.

It is just a shame, just simply because of the expansive use of mobile devices. Companies shouldn't be retreating from services like this, but expanding them... Just a shame.

http://toolbar.google.com/send/sms/index.php

http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2006/09/ google-send-to-phone-free-sms-in-us.html?showComment=1219426320000#c1789496352149615211

There has been an update to the Google Webmaster Blog about the whole Flash Search index issue. I still have 2 issues.

1) There is no way to predict what Google will see. What would be ideal would be a tool or SDK from Google that would allow Flash developers to see what Google sees before it puts a flash file online.

2) It is unproven technology. There just aren't enough examples online to show how this new search feature is being used. Until more Flash files start showing up properly in the index I am going to keep doing what I have been doing to serve searchable content up to Google.

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/

Update: Everyone, thanks for your great questions and feedback. Our focus is to improve search quality for all users, and with better Flash indexing we create more meaningful search results. Listed below, we've also answered some of the most prevalent questions. Thanks again!

Flash site in search results before improvements


Flash site after improved indexing, querying [nasa deep impact animation]


Helping us access and index your Flash files

@fintan: We verified with Adobe that the textual content from legacy sites, such as those scripted with AS1 and AS2, can be indexed by our new algorithm.

@andrew, jonny m, erichazann, mike, ledge, stu, rex, blog, dis: For our July 1st launch, we didn't enable Flash indexing for Flash files embedded via SWFObject. We're now rolling out an update that enables support for common JavaScript techniques for embedding Flash, including SWFObject and SWFObject2.

@mike: At this time, content loaded dynamically from resource files is not indexed. We've noted this feature request from several webmasters -- look for this in a near future update.

@captain cuisine: The text found in Flash files is treated similarly to text found in other files, such as HTML, PDFs, etc. If the Flash file is embedded in HTML (as many of the Flash files we find are), its content is associated with the parent URL and indexed as single entity.

@jeroen: Serving the same content in Flash and an alternate HTML version could cause us to find duplicate content. This won't cause a penalty -- we don't lower a site in ranking because of duplicate content. Be aware, though, that search results will most likely only show one version, not both.

@All: We're trying to serve users the most relevant results possible regardless of the file type. This means that standalone Flash, HTML with embedded Flash, HTML only, PDFs, etc., can all have the potential to be returned in search results.

@dsfdgsg: We've heard requests for deep linking (linking to specific content inside file) not just for Flash results, but also for other large documents and presentations. In the case of Flash, the ability to deep link will require additional functionality in Flash with which we integrate.

@All: The majority of the existing Flash files on the web are fine in regard to filesize. It shouldn't be too much of a concern.

@brian, marcos, bharath: Regarding ActionScript, we're able to find new links loaded through ActionScript. We explore Flash like a website visitor does, we do not decompile the SWF file. Unless you're making ActionScript visible to users, Google will not expose ActionScript code.

@dlocks: We respect rel="nofollow" wherever we encounter it in HTML.

After reading more about the whole Adobe announcement, they really seem to be pushing SwfObject 2.0. Why? Simply because it not only makes use of Javascript, but uses the older embed tags that we used to make use of before the whole IE "Click to Activate" issue.

This may also seem familiar if you publish an HTML file directly from Flash. It not only uses JavaScript, but has a no-script area that uses the older embed tags. To my knowledge Flash has already been doing this since Flash 8.

The problem with doing this is that it doesn't allow you the opportunity to make a search engine friendly version of your site. I know that this is the purpose of the Adobe announcement, but it is unproven technology. Additionally there is no way for a developer to test it or program Flash to have things show up properly in Google or Yahoo.

Currently creating an search engine friendly version of your flash site affords you the ability to have control over the way search engines will see your content. It also affords you the ability to create a non-flash version of the site for users that don't have Flash at all. So in theory you are creating a highly accessible version of your site by using .NET or something similar to transform the XML and assets that are used by the Flash into an XHTML version of your Flash.

It isn't all about search, it is also about making your content accessible to everyone, even those that don't have Flash.

Ever since Adobe has made its recent announcement about the improved ability to index Flash I have had a question. Where is the SDK for developers? Late last year when Google announced that they were using the Adobe Search SDK to begin to index flash files it was great because it was an SDK that developers could download.

What is the benefit of this you may ask? If Adobe was to release a new SDK based on the new tech that they are providing to Google & Yahoo developers could use this to build a Flash file that would be indexed properly. If they expect developers to simply hope that their file would be indexed properly they are mistaken. Files need to be built to optimize it for SEO, much in the same way that we optimize html files for SEO.

If the search engines were able to index most of the current flash sites, us as developers have no idea what will show up in Google? Do we have to wait for the file to be indexed before we can fix issues? How do we test it locally before deployment? The older flash SDK at least allowed you test and see what would be indexed from the file.

Adobe, we need a new SDK based on this "headless" flash player.

After exploring the adobe flash search sdk, it does leave something to be desired. First it appears that with using the sdk only your main swf will be indexed, which fails to take into account the current state of flash being used as a dynamic application development tool. This means your text that comes from xml wont show up in Google. This also means secondary swfs that have text in them will also not be indexed.

What does this mean for us? If you want some text/links to be indexed by Google you will need to have that content in your main flash and it can't come from xml. A good way to use this might be to make on on sitemap of your flash that Google would index along with the keywords/description of your flash.

The other problem for Google indexing flash is that most developers now use javascript to embed their flash because of problems with IE. This means that your flash will still not show up due to the fact that Google will skip right over the flash.

I think that Adobe should do their best to get on the ball and make an SDK that lets dynamic content be seen. Otherwise it is just going to be indexing badly organized flash that dosen't make use of xml or text from other external sources.

I just got done reading a series of articles about Google indexing text that is contained in a compiled swf. Pretty cool stuff. It is done with the use of the Adobe Search Engine SDK. It is a good read and it is good information to start building your Flash apps so that they can be indexed by Google.

Google reads Flash text, so optimize it
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13530_1-9844989-28.html

Matt Cutts on how you can help Googlebot "see" your Flash content.
http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13530_1-9834708-28.html

Search Engine SDK FAQ
http://www.adobe.com/licensing/developer/search/faq/

Be careful what you do for SEO, you may end up in Google Hell. How many times have you used a cheat to get your site higher up in Google? Have you thought about the consequences of your actions, like being de-listed or being pushed to the bottom?

[More]

Looks like Yahoo is trying to beat Google to the finish line by giving their users Unlimited Email storage. This is great news only if my Yahoo account wasn't constantly hit with spam. Google's filtering seems to be much more comprehensive. Yahoo does offer some filtering in addition to their own spam filters, but I have already filled up the rules that you can apply (I think that there were only 10 or 12 spots for rules you can set).

What Yahoo and Google need to do is remove the restriction on the file attachments. I would love to use both Google and Yahoo for more file storage, but with the limits it is kind of hard to do. They could warn you if you were sending it to a user outside of Gmail or Yahoo, but you should have the ability to attach a 100mb file. They either need to do that or offer some kind of file storage area for files.

http://yodel.yahoo.com/2007/03/27/yahoo-mail-goes-to-infinity-and-beyond/