> The article is already the 4th google result if you look for "best micro controllers under a dollar".
That worked because you're mentioning the "$1" from the article's title. Google is not interpreting "under a dollar" as "cheap". As proof, I searched for "best microcontrollers under £1", "best microcontrollers under 50 cents", and "best microcontrollers under $2". Jay Carlson's article wasn't found in any of those cases.
A more commonsense search of "best cheap microcontrollers" doesn't find the article even in the top 100 results.
> "The Amazing $1 Microcontroller" is a very poor description of the content and noone is going to google that.
I thought the title intriguing and pithy. You don't want a web where every title is SEO-optimzed, do you?
There are thousands upon thousands of micro controllers. The space is crowded. I'm not surprised that google doesn't rank an article that is poorly worded.
I find the title intriguing too... but on HN and with 100 upvotes already. It's pretty terrible in a search context. If I am looking for a comparison, I'm not clicking on something called "the amazing microcontroller".
That worked because you're mentioning the "$1" from the article's title. Google is not interpreting "under a dollar" as "cheap". As proof, I searched for "best microcontrollers under £1", "best microcontrollers under 50 cents", and "best microcontrollers under $2". Jay Carlson's article wasn't found in any of those cases.
A more commonsense search of "best cheap microcontrollers" doesn't find the article even in the top 100 results.
> "The Amazing $1 Microcontroller" is a very poor description of the content and noone is going to google that.
I thought the title intriguing and pithy. You don't want a web where every title is SEO-optimzed, do you?