They made this decision awhile ago and have stuck to it. Whether it's good or bad will ultimately be decided by their financials over the years. My guess is that being stale certainly helps the Adwords revenue and there isn't a rush to get it fixed. You have to wonder why sites like Yahoo! or MSN haven't gone after this facet and built some gimmicky thing where they get your pages crawled almost immediately. Great way to market against a competitor by targeting the fact that you really can't find any sites made in the last year in their results.

Sadly I've been using Yahoo! a lot more for new stuff. Google is still second-to-none for any and all research, but Yahoo! actually has new sites showing up.

By MrTurner at Sep 27 2006 - 01:30

Almanac

Maybe they should call it Google Almanac. Search for any current sporting event - World Cup, Opympics etc and you are presented with 2004, 2003 2001 etc. but not this years event. Unless you know its called Turino2005 you don't find it! The hosts of the next olympics better get their website up soon or they won't get in the index in time. LOL.

By DaveW at Sep 28 2006 - 08:28

Not sure about all this

I finally got my chosen domain back from a squatter after 18 months at the end of August and moved my site there. I listed it with Google and got ONE OR TWO of my industry friends to link to it also. I was indexed within a week (Yahoo took about 10 days, MSN is no competition) and they update their cache of my site every 2-3 days. Perhaps this is because I've used some decent sitemaps with their Google Sitemaps system, I'm not 100% sure, but one thing I do know is that any related searches that I'm now visible for are certainly not stale!

By systemlays at Oct 1 2006 - 22:46