Yeah he was pretty harsh.

I still think it's a bit silly that it's been a year and what was supposed to be a temporary workaround hasn't been removed

I support! I know that the google search was supposed to be temporary, but I think we passed “temporary” a long time ago. Besides, the google custom search shows the studio pages, (like scratch.mit.edu/projects/proejct1/studios), even though I really want to see the project page. Sometimes, it even causes projects to show up twice (example: at first it'll show scratch.mit.edu/projects/project1, and then later I'll find scratch.mit.edu/projects/project1/studios). Plus, you can't sort by loves or different project tags with the google search. I really miss the “sort by loves” function…

Besides, Scratch already has a self-hosted search function. The ST just needs to re-enable it.

FalconGunner99 wrote:

I still think it's a bit silly that it's been a year and what was supposed to be a temporary workaround hasn't been removed

Go ahead - say it big. Own what you say

We aren't happy with it either. However, we are still scrambling to meet the processing needs of the community without taking on the extra load of the search functionality.

Paddle2See wrote:

FalconGunner99 wrote:

I still think it's a bit silly that it's been a year and what was supposed to be a temporary workaround hasn't been removed

Go ahead - say it big. Own what you say

We aren't happy with it either. However, we are still scrambling to meet the processing needs of the community without taking on the extra load of the search functionality.

Hey Paddle, if you don't want to re-enable the google custom search, could you at least remove the pages from the search that show-
What studios a project/user is in/following
A project's remixes
Users that a scratcher is following/is being followed by
Projects that a user has created
etc.

And perhaps re-instate the “sort by loves” function?

Hmmm. Perhaps outsource the search function, just not to google? I'm sure there's one out there that would fit the needs of scratch.

Regardless, I understand that it must be a huge responsibility for the team to take on, I just hope it gets dealt with sooner rather than later, as search is a big part of discovering new and old projects on scratch, it's a fantastic learning tool.

Support! Google search doesn't work in countries like china too!

ctyce wrote:

Support! Google search doesn't work in countries like china too!

Use vyprvpn and chameleon mode.

Support.

Ok, I agree that I was pretty harsh, but I feel like this needs to be prioritized. A search functionality is an important aspect of a site, and if it's not that good, then…

When you search something, sometimes bad words come up Even though when you click it it bring you to a 404, this is bad.

TheHockeyist wrote:

1. Support.
2. Sometimes people click on “show page number 99999”. Should that be gone?

1. Support.
2. Yes.

Penguin9090_new wrote:

When you search something, sometimes bad words come up Even though when you click it it bring you to a 404, this is bad.

Yeah, the google search displays results that are deleted/unshared. Another reason to remove it.

Paddle2See wrote:

Dude - that's not cool.

Woah hello there!
=================================
Anyway, yes. The old search engine is probably the reason I behaved on Scratch. It made the website so much better, and when they changed it to the 1990's style search engine that is more inaccurate than a ruler without numbers on it, I almost jumped off a cliff. But that's okay. I'm slowly becoming used to it.

Well, a simple edit of their HTML files would fix it?

Flow- wrote:

Paddle2See wrote:

Dude - that's not cool.

Woah hello there!
=================================
Anyway, yes. The old search engine is probably the reason I behaved on Scratch. It made the website so much better, and when they changed it to the 1990's style search engine that is more inaccurate than a ruler without numbers on it, I almost jumped off a cliff. But that's okay. I'm slowly becoming used to it.

Well, a simple edit of their HTML files would fix it?

It's not a problem of the coding for the search engine, it's that their servers would need to do all the work instead of google's.

FalconGunner99 wrote:

It's not a problem of the coding for the search engine, it's that their servers would need to do all the work instead of google's.

Well, I never said I was an expert in web coding etcctct

Flow- wrote:

FalconGunner99 wrote:

It's not a problem of the coding for the search engine, it's that their servers would need to do all the work instead of google's.

Well, I never said I was an expert in web coding etcctct

Nono, it's fine, I was just pointing it out.

__init__ wrote:

Ok, I agree that I was pretty harsh, but I feel like this needs to be prioritized. A search functionality is an important aspect of a site, and if it's not that good, then…

Yeah, it's certainly got flaws. But that's no excuse to put down our developers. They work extremely hard to keep Scratch up and running. They don't even set the priorities

My understanding is that our current plan is to re-implement our own search backend. We aren't going to spend any time on Google Custom Search, which isn't supported well at all by Google any more.

I do not know the timing though.

Paddle2See wrote:

We aren't going to spend any time on Google Custom Search, which isn't supported well at all by Google any more.

Well, you are using the very outdated version…

Support.