Has Bing Already Overtaken Yahoo? 319
nk497 writes "Microsoft's newly revamped search tool Bing has already overtaken Yahoo in the US and globally, according to StatsCounter. The net traffic watcher said Bing has topped Yahoo 16.28% to 10.22% in the US, and 5.62% to 5.13% globally. Though the firm noted Bing's popularity may drop off after the excitement wears off, the firm also said: 'Steve Ballmer is quoted as saying that he wanted Microsoft to become the second biggest search engine within five years. Following the breakdown in talks to acquire Yahoo at a cost of $40 billion it looks as if he may have just achieved that with Bing much sooner and a lot cheaper than anticipated.' Google, of course, still leads by a considerable margin."
Not really (Score:5, Informative)
It's hard to see how someone wrote this post today - when the same site shows that Bing surpassing Yahoo! only lasted for a day. TechCrunch already pointed this out yesterday. [techcrunch.com] Bing may or may not have a big impact - but I think it will take some more time before we know whether it will or not. There is certainly a very long way to go before it even begins to approach google.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
>>There is certainly a very long way to go before it even begins to approach google.
Not only that, but people's search habits are not at all easy to change. I suspect Bing will take a while even to approach Yahoo.
Does "IT Pro" run paid ads as articles? (Score:5, Informative)
Can Microsoft make a success out of Silverlight? [itpro.co.uk] Quote: "... Microsoft's Silverlight weighs in at just a four-megabyte download, and apparently takes just 10 seconds to install." Another quote: "So how has Silverlight fared, and can it really topple Flash?" Silverlight is far, far behind Flash.
Can Google or Microsoft get any bigger? [slashdot.org] Quote: "... Google, along with Microsoft, is so large and so dominant in its sectors, that both firms are hitting a point where their potential for profitable growth is limited." Another quote: "Certainly the pair of them own their key markets,
This is the article, published today, to which this Slashdot story linked: Has Bing already overtaken yahoo? [itpro.co.uk] But that article no longer exists, apparently. Now that link takes visitors to another article: UPDATED: Bing and Yahoo battle it out for second in search [itpro.co.uk]. Quote: "One stats firm has said Microsoft's Bing has already caught up to rival Yahoo, just a week after launch - but it's since slipped back to third." Bing hasn't "slipped back to third", Bing has dived in the ratings, and is now far behind Yahoo.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
There's merit to what you're saying but you're failing to take into account the scale of the difference.
Internet penetration in the altavista/lycos (remember them lol) days was far less than now. The internet and google are intertwined in people's heads. Was altavista ever a verb?
Now the first thing people do when they want to find something online is google. That's ordinary people, the kind who keep clicking on the blue E icon because it stands for interweb and that's how they've been wired. Google are forunate in that they've achieved overwhelming dominance at the 'critical mass' point of internet usage.
I agree that if something is better then it may displace google. However the odds are now magnitudes larger than back in 1999.
On a side note, I cannot believe how much money they make off advertising.... does anyone actually click on internet ads? (answer is obviously yes but personally I can't even recall more than half a dozen times in the last 10 years lol).
Re:Not really (Score:5, Informative)
I've submitted stories before to only have them accepted up to four days later. That's probably what happened here. Shame the editors didn't catch it.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Funny)
Oh wait...!!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's really not that hard. Click the little drop down beside the search box, and pick "Find More Search Providers". Two clicks, really. Google even features prominently on the (Microsoft-hosted) search engine page that appears.
Ignore the retards that will appear to say "get firefox" with some witty 4 item list (often including "???. Profit!" while clapping the bottom of their hands together in short bus glee.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Informative)
It's not what happened in this case - tfa is dated today.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Interesting)
Not TFS. TFA. TFA is dated TODAY. Go click the link. It really doesn't hurt.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)
When I saw this story on Slashdot just now I thought - is this a story or a paid commercial promotion? It is clearly way to soon to be evaluating the impact of bling (or whatever it is called - I am not paid to help establish brand recognition so I won't repeat it). It should also be obvious that there will be a lot who will click it out of curiosity alone and never go back again, as I did. Since Microsoft has made it clear that they intend to spend a fortune to promote bling, all articles become suspect since we are all well aware of how Microsoft routinely buys journalists and bloggers, and that in fact this is their preferred method these days. In the end, I arrived at the decision that this is simply a timley story like any other to the Slashdot editors who know that we are interested in all things Microsoft. Obviously this site wouldn't enjoy the success it does if they pass off paid commercial promotions as subject matter, but there are so many others doing this that if I were an editor I would take pains to avoid even the appearance of such a thing.
Uh, evidence? (Score:5, Informative)
Summarized [groklaw.net] PDF [groklaw.net]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's an internal manual for the evangelists (which is actually a job title at MS) not any evidence whatsoever in response to the GPs question.
Also, when discussing Microsoft, anything from Groklaw should be dismissed out of hand due to incredible bias. Groklaw makes Fox News look fair and balanced (and accurate for that matter)
Re:Uh, evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that is some evidence. I combined that with my own observations. Your observations may be different than mine.
Yes, Groklaw is biased - towards those in favour of upholding the rule of law whether it's against convicted monopolies or scam artists trying to destroy Linux. However, they do supply a link to just about every little detail backing up whatever is the subject of the day. This permits the reader to follow the evidence and come to their own conclusions, as you have just done.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? Who says? Courts convict on circumstancial evidence all the time. When formulating my own opinions, I frequently find I need draw conclusions based on imprecise or sparse data. I think we all do, at some point or another. I don't think one can navigate through life if they are unable to make a decision without hard evidence. As indicated, I believe I have seen enough to come to my own conclusion on this issue. When we
Re: (Score:2)
I've submitted stories before to only have them accepted up to four days later. That's probably what happened here. Shame the editors didn't catch it.
Lucky you. I've got a submission over a year old. I'm guessing it's like emails at the bottom of the pile, they just get lost in the layers of time.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Redirects (Score:5, Insightful)
How long before M.S. sends out an update that automatically redirects URL typos to Bing?
Re:Redirects (Score:5, Funny)
Tuesday. That's when all the patches come out. ;)
Re:Redirects (Score:5, Insightful)
Fair's fair. Yahoo only gets traffic via of all the browser-hijacking toolbars it's managed to sneak onto people's machines.
(Or is it because Yahoo's adverts create more of an emotional connection with people...?)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't find that fair. I have always loathed the "search from toolbar" hijack they built into IE. Then I found I had to turn off Domain Guessing AND Internet Keywords in Firefox, and the options weren't even visible in the UI. This bullshit has gone on too long. If the computer illiterate need this feature, at least give it a checkbox:
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/domain-guessing.html [mozilla.org]
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/internet-keywords.html [mozilla.org]
Now if you really are in favor of a free-for-all in this a
Re: (Score:2)
They get redirected to live search at the moment, and live search gets redirected to Bing.
Re:Redirects (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
At work on Friday I mistyped a URL and it brought me to Bing. I didn't know what it was and assumed it was a re-routed parked domain or something - I didn't bother looking at it since I didn't recognize it. So my first impression of the site, thanks to the redirect, was that it was an annoying ad site.
Same happened to me -- I was after bong.com, my finger slipped when typing the first 'o' and I get mysteriously redirected to this Microsoft search engine. I think it's a scam.
Re:Redirects (Score:5, Interesting)
The only reason I even knew bing existed was from reading slashdot. I'm a bit of a luddite so I don't catch onto the latest fads (e.g. I had texting is banned from my cell phone) but I think that it's right that the only people who know about bing are the ones who were looking for it, or are interested in computing in general. Therein lies the problem for MS. They could pour billions into advertising but I think most people tune out commercials nowadays, don't they?
I don't have cable, so I searched for the bing commerical on youtube. I watched it, it seemed like useless fluff that's not going to convince anyone to try anything because they never actually said what their search engine did differently from google, except that it was better (better at what? finding restaurants? searching for back pain? wtf?).
Indeed not really! (Score:5, Funny)
Bing may or may not have a big impact
Well a quick straw poll in my building suggests Bing hasn't even surpassed yelling down the corridor so it's got a looong way to go!
Re: (Score:2)
How many of the Bing searches for the term "sex" with the setting changed to India, with the user originating from slashdot? With the sparsity of non-google searches, a slashdotting could be almost significant.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Advertising? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it may have been less "advertising" and more leveraging Windows Live Search redirections and newly-installed IE8 defaults.
Good for one day's bragging rights, I guess.
Time was, that would have resulted in a new monopoly. Guess you can't go back again.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny, because my related searches for "the dark knight" are:
* The Joker
* Heath Ledger And The Joker
* The Batman
* The Dark Knight 2008
* Superman The Man Of Steel
* The Punisher
* The Incredible Hulk
Seems pretty relevant to me.
You also get this nice little sidebar which assumes you're looking for a movie:
Re:Not really (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently it is the same search engine they had when it was MSN
It's not. You might have missed the story, but Microsoft had actually bought out PowerSet [wikipedia.org] to replace the old search engine, and that's what powering Bing.
Re:Not really (Score:4, Interesting)
My search queries typically consist of Google, and not-Google, just in-case Google isn't getting what I'm looking for. My not-Google used to be Yahoo, but when Cuil was new I tried it for a while, the results out of Bing are much more impressive than Cuil, it might permanently replace Yahoo as my not-Google search engine, but when not-Google isn't the new thing to try out, it only gets about 2-5% of my search traffic, as compared to 30-50% when trying something new.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
23 words to tell me I shouldn't have used 5. Funniest part of my day so far.
Not so fast! Has bing bung? (Score:5, Informative)
TechCrunch: Bing was #2 for a day then Yahoo regained its place as Bing fell. [techcrunch.com]
"As Matt Cutts [mattcutts.com] (who yes, works for Google) points out in the comments, StatCounter updates every few hours, so there is also data for today already. And itâ(TM)s more bad news for Bing. Itâ(TM)s now down to 5.65% in the U.S. â" yes, thatâ(TM)s less than what Live.com was at last month."
Clearly Bing is dying (Score:3, Funny)
StatCounter confirms it.
It's the apps stupid! (Score:3, Insightful)
Around a decade ago, it was enough to have a better search engine to get people to switch. But in the meantime, google has me hooked on mail, sites, and documents. Other people use other apps, but just like Microsoft snagged the desktop OS market based on it being the default on commodity hardware and then maintaining it with applications later, I believe Google will keep it's top spot on the same idea.
Migrating from a search engine simply is a lot of hassle now especially since it's diminishing returns,
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Migrating from a search engine simply is a lot of hassle now especially since it's diminishing returns
Huh? Migrating to a different search engine is trivial; just set a different home page in your browser, or tell it to default to a different one for the search box if it has one. The results from Google are increasingly bad. Most of the time now the top hit is wrong, and fairly often it's completely irrelevant. Relevant results are getting further and further from the top and I'm having to go to the second or third page to get a useful result more and more often. If someone produces a search engine tha
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? Migrating to a different search engine is trivial; just set a different home page in your browser, or tell it to default to a different one for the search box if it has one.
Not if you have your documents, code, mail, etc. With one search provider.
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yahoo is the market leader in webmail, and Hotmail is a close second. Those people still use Google for search.
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:4, Informative)
Have you tried the "special searches". They have searches aimed at code for the major OSs - Linux, BSD, Microsoft and when I just tried it with "generic.h" in the Linux special search I got a bunch of hits on header files.
But there are also some specialized code search engines around - though I don't have pointers to them, I've used a couple and they can be quite good (and, of course, sometimes quite bad).
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:5, Interesting)
Lexical processing is Google's Achilles heal. It's a royal pain when search results come back which silently discard odd-duck search terms. Try searching for "SAMe". Interesting, today for the first time, Google actually has a correct lexical match as the top result. The other day I had a search term where a punctuation mark was a critical disambiguator. That didn't work too good.
One that I beat my head against all the time is electronic component part numbers. The full, full, full part number using ends in six alphabetic digits which describes the production variant, right down to what the production engineer ate for breakfast that morning. It's kind of like net, net net, and net net net in real estate. (Interestingly, today Google returns pages titled "triple-net" for a search on "net net net". Another small improvement behind the scenes.) You'll often get the net net part name in distributor's catalogues, but if you want the data sheet, you often need to search on the just the root of the part, if you can guess which prefix stem that might be.
Of course, what you really want is to search on AT91SAM7* or AT91* depending on whether the programming technique in question applies to one part or the extended family.
And please, for the love of God, when I type in the part number which I know in advance is correct for the datasheet I'm seeking, return at least *one* authoritative hit in the top ten from the actual company that makes the part in question (by the billions, in some cases). Argh!!!! Argh!!!!!! Argh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Some vendors manage to place themselves in the top ten for their own parts, most don't. What's the problem? Is serving up your own data sheet too much like support and not enough like sales? Are these companies deliberately detuning their search results? The situation baffles me.
It's my daily sports fix hitting that little "vaporize into the cloud" button on top scoring results from alldatasheets.com which teases but doesn't deliver.
I suspect its not zero cost to extend Google to fully handle the long, long, long tail of variously truncated designator strings.
Another one: when I type "R" I mean the R language. Always. Get over it. If Google is going to gather my click trail, there's the one main thing they need to digest on my behalf. Thousands of queries over on r-seek and they still don't get it, usually discarding the term "R" entirely if it doesn't fit their prebuilt result for the companion search terms. +R doesn't work well either, as it forces Google to return every document index with an "R" subsection.
This is something that no software application has yet achieved. It's the baby Turing test. Identify three to ten personal-style hot buttons of the particular user, and then *don't do them*.
Instead, we've invented the world's shortest short bus: the software watches me replace with the original text the auto-correct garbage just inserted by Word (if I'm in for a bout of self-flagellation) or some other high-function IDE, and then auto-correct restores the thing I just manually deleted. Several times in a row, in a pique of futility. Isn't that the technical definition of a failed marriage?
If the Unabomber says to you "don't do that", while making eye contact for the first time in a decade, does it register? For Microsoft products, hardly ever. For Google, not quite enough.
I'm not taking any other version of the Turing test seriously until this one is dispatched.
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:4, Informative)
For searching code, use Code Search: http://google.com/codesearch [google.com]
It's a lot more relevant.
But I agree that the new Google is irritating, with its pitiful attempts to correct spelling.
This is what you get when you dumb down the interface.
Re:Unlearn (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if we're just getting older.
You see, back in the day, we had to learn assembler to write programs. Then they made C and other higher-level languages. And then interpreted languages. but even when writing VB.NET or C#, in my head I'm doing the equivalent of the original C++ to C translator, adding C to ASM on one side and OOP to C++ on the other side.
I sometimes wonder that, back when search sucked (right around the time of Northern lights / AltaVista) I could find anything. It wasn't persistenc
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The small database is probably what makes Clusty more useful, that and the fact it's not a target for spammers looking to get their malware laden sites higher up the search results.
Many such spammers only target google, and don't even bother attacking yahoo or msn...
Re:-1 HopeDashing (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry.
They'd just game them separately with twinned sites & such.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bing does have that "see bits of videos straight from the search page by hovering over the image" feature. I'm sure they'll remove it as soon as publishers and porn sites complain.
Re: (Score:2)
Bing is not better yet.
> A far cry from the horrendous "portal"idea that Yahoo, MSN, comcast.net, AOL, and others are still attached too.
I would suggest that the "porn search" public argument works.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Odd how I used to use google as the better search engine, but Yahoo! for maps, tv listings, movie listings, weather, etc.
They blew it.
When I gave mom a new computer, I really *wanted* to just give her a yahoo account instead of gmail. But they won't allow imap without paying them for it? wtf? Then there's what they did to the tv and movie listings, and the general fuckuppery of the entire site so they could be 'cool' with that 'web 2.0' stuff.
Yeah. They had a good thing, and an edge. And pissed it all
Re:It's the apps stupid! (Score:4, Informative)
Yahoo mail is free because of advertising on their web-mail portal.
Which is no longer the cheapest option around.
For $19.99 a YEAR you get IMAP access and no ads in your emails.
For 0$ a year you get IMAP and no ads in your emails with Google.
I wasn't aware gmail even had IMAP access let alone for gratis but I would be curious to know how they can do that unless they are injecting adwords into your emails.
It's simple. They use GMail to better target ads. A robot looks through your e-mail messages content and when Google serves ads to you when looking at Web pages, they use that data to better target ads. This means you're more likely to be interested in the ads they present and more people click on them, making Google money from advertisers. It sure beats paying for e-mail and I prefer ads to actually be something that might interest me.
StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (Score:5, Informative)
I'm from StatCounter and I would just like to address your concern. The detection for baidu was added on the 5th March 2009 at 21.00 GMT. When a new detection is added it is noted on the visual graph (but not in the csv download).
Also if you look at the stats just for China you can easily see Baidu's dominance there [statcounter.com].
Re: (Score:2)
I'm South American, and I see the stats in your site for South America shows Google at 99%.. but I think that both Yahoo and MSN have a better presence (maybe I'm wrong about search, but both Hotmail and Yahoo mail are very strong in Uruguay and Argentina)... could you clarify your method? Is it from URL redirects or similar? Does your network have strong presence in South America? Maybe the results are skewed due to the methodology (that is, people that are savvy enough to us
Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (Score:5, Informative)
Our stats are based on aggregate data collected by StatCounter on a sample exceeding 4 billion pageviews per month collected from across the StatCounter network of more than 3 million websites. From this sample we analyze the sources of the referring traffic to compile our search engine reports.
Bada (Score:3, Funny)
Bing Is Not Google
Prime Time Commercial (Score:2)
Yahoo might be worried, but I don't think Google cares... at this point it's a race for second place.
Re: (Score:2)
MS is pouring a ton of money into advertising bing. I was watching a few episodes of the new Full Metal Alchemist on hulu yesterday and every episode had nothing but adds for a big bing promotional that is going to be live on hulu. They are calling it Bingathon [webpronews.com]
Re:Prime Time Commercial (Score:4, Funny)
I saw a Bing commercial. It makes me want to choke someone to death with my bare hands.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Bill wiggle his butt again, or have they realized that it's not really a selling point?
Re: (Score:2)
If Bing's meant to be an advertising platform, but it's so unpopular that they have to advertise, why should they even bother? What's next, ads in google?
Or maybe Bing isn't meant to sell any ads ... but then what's their business model? To f*cking kill google?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yahoo might be worried, but I don't think Google cares... at this point it's a race for second place.
I wouldn't be so sure.
I tried Bing and it is quite good. It beats Google in many of my "usual" searches.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I second this. If you check my posts, I don't think I ever written something positive about MS, but for the last few days I've been playing with Bing side by side with Google.
My findings so far:
- Bing's index is noticeably smaller than Google's; searching for very specific keywords simply do not show some results (I wasn't searching for porn)
- In 90% of the cases, Bing's results were similar to Google's, basically same results with small differences in ordering (#4 becomes #2, #3 is #6, etc.)
- The remaining
as much as it pains me to do this... (Score:3, Insightful)
They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (Score:5, Insightful)
I did a little experiment. I loaded up IE, hit the search button, typed something in, and ran the search. Whaddayaknow, Bing comes up with the search results. So every idiot that has the same Windows installed as the day they brought it home from Walmart with IE as the default browser and the little search button as their only gateway to the world is going to use Bing whether they know it or not. Apparently there are quite a few such idiots. Are we surprised?
People like you are why IT people get a bad rap.
Why is someone an "idiot" who does not care what search engine or browser they use? You are into (or do it professionally) IT, so this sort of thing is important to YOU. I bet in other fields, maybe for example sake investing, people could say "Wow, you're an idiot for not performing a split. Moron!"
Fact is different things are important to different people. It doesn't make them an idiot.
Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (Score:4, Interesting)
No, the real reason IT people get bad raps is because they are cranky from dealing with idiots all day. We don't call people idiots or morons because we think they are generally stupid. Idiot is easier to say than "inexperienced or complacent user". I refer to inexperienced or complacent users as idiots (or other equally derogatory word) when talking to other "IT people" (professionaly or not) all the time for simplicity (and probably as a vent for frustration).
I know full well they are not stupid (most of them), heck I've called some of the smartest people I know idiots or morons because they couldn't handle a computer to save their life. We use terms like that as a reference to their computer skill, not overall intelligence. If some other IT guy refers to someone as an idiot, I immediately know their skill level with using a computer is limited to being able to check Facebook, or less.
Maybe you should just lighten up and take less offense? It's not like we call people idiots to their faces. Unless they really deserve it.
Re: (Score:2)
Fact is different things are important to different people. It doesn't make them an idiot.
Mhm. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1236397&cid=27995845 [slashdot.org]
Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not criticizing you for commenting, he's criticizing you for calling these people "idiots".
Having different interests/priorities than you doesn't make someone an idiot.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No one's disputing that. The issue was raised that you felt the need to call someone an idiot over the non-preference of a search engine. That's on par to a clothing store employee going up to an IT guy saying "Black shoes and a brown belt?! What a moron!"
Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (Score:4, Funny)
Good catch.
*ahem* It's like a mechanic going up to an IT guy picking out a car and saying "What do you mean you don't care if it's the two or four door model?! You're a fucking idiot!"
The sound of "found": Bob Hope (Score:3, Funny)
This morning, our dear leader Steve Ballmer is unveiling our completely new search service, unrelated to anything we at Microsoft have ever done before [today.com]: Bob Hope.
We spent lots of time listening to you, except when you told us how much MSN Search^W^W Live Search^W^W Kumo sucked 'cause you're just wrong about that, to learn which buzzwordy Web 2.0 thingies you use search for today. Finding a webpage that has anything to do with the search terms you entered is so passe, dahling.
So today we're introducing a new kind of search, that goes beyond traditional search engines that do tedious things like find stuff, to instead help you make faster, more informed decisions. (Windows 7 is peachy keen, by the way.) We think of Bob Hope as a Decision Engine. We've sued Stephen Wolfram into atomic dust using our patents on FAT and Mono, co-opted the Wolfram Alpha engine and swapped Mathematica for Visual Basic and Wolfram's brain for the exhumed corpse of Bob Hope.
So why did we pick Bob Hope as the new core of our search? We needed a brand that was as fresh and new as our approach. A name that was memorable, short, easy to spell, and that would function well as a URL around the world.
And just look at these results!
What do we want?
Braaains.
When do we want them?
Braaains.
What do I need to run Windows 7?
Braaains.
What's Bill Gates got that means you should buy everything you can from the company he founded?
Braaains.
What's the final proof of Steve Ballmer's equal genius to Steve Jobs?
Vistaaa.
This is something new, something improved! You need to try it! It'll give so much more betterer results than that other search engine we can't name because Steve will wedge another chair up our butts! Please, come and try our new and improved service! FOR GOD'S SAKE TRY THE DAMN SERVICE. OR THE PUPPY GETS IT. We're Microsoft. We're serious as a heart attack on this one.
Now I'm waiting for the new Bing ad onslaught... (Score:4, Funny)
You know the next onslaught of Bing ads will claim:
"More popular than Yahoo!"*
* For one day after weeks of massive advertising, Bing beat out Yahoo in website traffic. Results not typical.
Re:Now I'm waiting for the new Bing ad onslaught.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Amused by their general marketing.. (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Their marketing strategy seems to be to push the name 'Microsoft' as far away as possible. Interesting they view their own name as a liability in this space.
2. 'Bing is not google' abbreviation seems particularly weird. Suggesting that currently google has an oppressive, monopolistic grip on the search industry, leaving little choice but to have to go with them as they are the defacto standard. The company that wants to save a market from an oppressive, de-facto standard monopoly is.... Microsoft?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Allegedly it is at least internal to microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
Bing is seriously a backronym for "Bing is not google"? Wow. Here I thought it was just one of the cheapest 4 letter domains they could buy... then they went and decided to "GNU" their name...
They didn't decide to do anything. A backronym can be constructed for anything.
A backronym is a reverse acronym, a phrase constructed after the fact to make an existing word or words into an acronym. Backronyms may be invented with serious or humorous intent, or may be a type of false or folk etymology.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursive_acronym [wikipedia.org]
Reminds me of Groundhog's Day (Score:5, Funny)
Man, I've seen that movie so many times.
Return traffic or it didn't count. (Score:2)
With a multimillion dollar ad campaign in full swing, of course people are going to visit Bing. I haven't seen a yahoo ad in months (print, web, or broadcast media)... but I'm going to bet Yahoo has more return visitors.
The only good thing about Bing... (Score:2)
Looks like they're trying to kill off Redtube, not Google
give it time (Score:2)
"Microsoft+Antitrust" (Score:5, Informative)
google returned these three first:
So I compared that to Yahoo:
Bing returned these three first:
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. - Joseph Goebbels
Also Interesting: (Score:3, Interesting)
-metric
FYI (Score:5, Funny)
Not acid3 compliant? (Score:3, Informative)
I just installed Opera-10 beta bc Opera says it is 100% acid3 compliant, and went over to Bing and chose to search for an image. When I tried to modify the search filter settings from the default (moderate) to no filter, the popup that had the checkboxes appeared UNDER the image windows, making a selection impossible.
As usual MS seems to be ignoring standards.
Forced (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course Bing has overtaken Yahoo. They just flipped the Live search over to Bing, and the media hype machine filled in the rest.
At work, where our security settings prevent changing the homepage or default search engine, any mistyped URL automatically rolls over to Bing now, without any prompting from our IT staff.
mo magic with marketshare numbers (Score:3, Insightful)
So "Bing" is another name for MS search but we are supposed to believe they jumped Yahoo by changing the name? That would mean not only would have all the previous MS search lemmings basically stayed put and people jumped from Google and/or Yahoo. That's just dumb and I have no doubt this is just another Microsoft marketing gimmick so more lemmings might get a warm and fuzzy feeling thinking there weren't the only ones using MS Bing. But, knowing Microsoft, maybe they did an OS patch which "fixed" the default search field for everyone using Windows and now they all use Bing. Or they only did that to the ones naive enough to still be using MS Vista. IMO.
What made me laugh when I tried MS Bing was when the search returned something like 6 pages but from page 3 onward all it did was reshowed the same last page of search results.
LoB
People still use Yahoo? (Score:4, Funny)
Didn't even know they were still around.
It's Yahoo (Score:3, Funny)
It'll return... (Score:3, Funny)
Good, Bad, Ugly (Score:4, Insightful)
Good - Easy to use, decent results, refreshing look.
Bad - Poor related links.
Ugly - Can't try out everything because I don't have silverlight on my laptop and cell phone.
I'm wondering if bing is more about Silverlight than it is about being better than MSN Search or Live.
bing sucks: (Score:3, Insightful)
I tried it out a couple of times, and it insists on offering me Finland-related search results. This made it completely useless for me. I guess it does the same for users from other countries - gives search results specific to the searcher's geographic location. Well, that's bullshit.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Try this for a general Google search, don't know about the Lucky one
Go to about:config (in the Firefox url bar), search for keyword.URL (in the filter input) and double-click the result to change the value there to http://www.google.com/search?btnG=Google+Search&q= [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That's how they've done it--by hijacking the browser whenever you enter an unknown website in the address bar. What I had to do is edit my hosts file, setting 127.0.0.1 bing.com
127.0.0.1 www.bing.com
If you do that, test it out because there are a few other hikack websites that may show up. Just add those sites to your hosts file as well and test until you get a real "unable to access website" error message.
BTM
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it's not a hijack, it's a fuck up. Microsoft's search people seem to have forgotten about "auto.search.msn.com" (which is the URL hit when you type random garbage into the address bar) and forwarded that to Bing. Now with the old MSN Search, it'd catch that "&PROV=GOOG" on the end of the URL and establish that meant you wanted to use Google. Bing doesn't yet recognise "&PROV" (stands for Provider) query strings, which they intend to fix.