Google's regression toward mediocrity

I have found that the user experience with Google has deteriorated over the past two years. In the past couple of months, it has worsened considerably.

First, Google started introducing more and more aggressive spell-checking and correction in the queries. Often, especially with obscure languages like Finnish, Google decides to correct the query, even if the correct spelling would yield numerous results. I remember either Brin or Page (or maybe it was Marissa?) saying that the ideal use case of Google would be that it only returned one result - the one that answers the user's query exactly. What happened to that notion? The "Did you mean"-function has been very useful and moreso with the advent of two panes of results, one for corrected spellings and one for sic - as it was spelled. Forcing repeated corrections, especially when it broadens the results set, can lead to regression towards the mean. With search results, can lead to mediocrity.

The more worrying new feature has in fact lead to a completely new use behaviour on Google. In the past, one could be fairly confident that the best possible results served to meet the query would be the top results, and rarely had to scroll to the bottom of the page. The new feature of omitting words from the query leads to the user having to scroll to the bottom of the page to make sure no words have been omitted. If there have been, they will discover a line of text: "Tip: These results do not include the word..." There the user is offered a link which leads to the query the user originally wanted to make. Here is an example, where the word "among" has been omitted by Google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=aggression+among+diabetics (odd example, but relevant to research I was conducting recently).

This is incredibly contrived behaviour and arrogate development from Google. I completely understand that the feature has been extensively tested and proven to improve various problematic use cases, but it has also lead to an unforeseen difficulty in using Google. The strength of the search engine that I remember got me using it, was that it included all the typed words in the query, without having to resort to operators like '+' to force a word to appear. In fact, Google even told you that the '+' operator was unnecessary, since all the words were included by default.

There is very little difference in terms of actual experienced quality between the results of major search engines. Studies are divided as to whether there is perceived difference in quality (i.e. where the user knows the results have been generated by Yahoo! or Google), (Bailey, Thomas 2008).

I think Google has more to lose, and while it will be marginal, there are early abandoners as well as early adopters, and the margins will go first. Sheryl Sandberg had us read the Tipping Point as the first Google Book Club (yeah, we had one) book, and the simplistic learnings from there would be good to bear in mind when considering the importance of marginal users' marginal search results.

EDIT: just got a really good example where Google corrects my query making it useless:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=atlas.ti+variable+playback+speed&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=