| 4:07 pm on Nov 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm guessing either CNET or Nielsen is listing the number of searches on Microsoft inaccurately. 89Million?
If they have Google with ~63% of the share and 4.83 billion searches - then Microsofts 8.5% would give it around 660Million searches, not 89Million.
| 4:28 pm on Nov 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Yeah, looks like Microsoft should be 885,567, or approx 885Million.
Marketwatch has a nice chart. [marketwatch.com]
| 4:31 pm on Nov 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Here are the numbers from Hitwise...
|This list features the top 4 leading search engines based on US Internet usage, ranked by volume of searches for the 4 weeks ending October 25, 2008. |
Hitwise US - Leading Search Engines - October, 2008
| 7:04 pm on Nov 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
that looks as sad as our stats and i wish, that someone will have the guts and brain to level that score.
Ballmer and Yang had all the money, but obviously no capable staff to tackle big G.
| 7:34 pm on Nov 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
That Google SearchWiki thing might help shift some people back to Y!, MSFT & others.
| 5:30 am on Nov 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
When I search now I find myself using meta SE's like Dogpile and Blingo.
Why? Good keyword research, and unpersonalized search.
Try it a few times on your keywords, don't click but note ads versus organic.
| 5:52 am on Nov 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Just ranting: search wiki, is doomed. It is another example of Goog trying to get noticed.
Yeah, they don't need any more attention.
Have you looked at the stock lately, every time they dump stupid projects, the stocks +go through the roof.
Chrome spelled the end of desktops and operating systems!
Maybe somewhere in the future but that schlocky crap Google has now is no threat to Office or Open Office.
Matt Cutts can keep wishing, but "techies" are not switching browsers in droves. Only on his idiotic blog.
Sorry Matt Cutts you are not a techie, you are a fool.
Edit: BTW Net Application stats are accurate your blog promoted Chrome in the first place.
You should be ashamed of yourself for promoting a web browser with an ancient rendering engine, was patched by Crapple last year.
Webkit give me a break!
You're a security expert for crying out loud!
Do you think "techies" are stupid? Keep your crapware to your anti-establishment self.
| 6:14 am on Nov 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
| 6:40 am on Nov 28, 2008 (gmt 0)|
With firefox being the browser of choice and with how hard it tries to have Google be the default search handler those numbers won't change.
If a new search engine was launched tommorrow and it managed to get packaged with firefox they'd be the default engine on over 50% of computers within a couple of years.
The numbers don't say much about any of the companies anymore really.
| 6:11 pm on Nov 29, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|With firefox being the browser of choice |
Not for my users. About 65 percent are using IE, followed by 23 percent for Firefox.
Chrome is at roughly 1 percent, but it's worth noting that:
1) Chrome is technically in beta, and...
2) Chrome isn't about browsing; it's about making "cloud" applications faster, more reliable, and free of unnecessary browser trim.
Anyway, what do Chrome, Google applications, and "crapware" have to do with Google's share of the U.S. search market? The key takeaway in this thread is pretty simple: Google increased its share of the U.S. search market, while Yahoo and Microsoft lost market share. You can rant all you want about Google's "shlocky crap" or rail against Matt Cutts, but that doesn't change the numbers or what those numbers tell us about the search market.
| 6:52 pm on Nov 30, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Interesting food for thought: If Microsoft bought Yahoo Search (a possibility that has been discussed in London's SUNDAY TIMES and here at Webmaster World), what effect would that have on Google's market share? Would the combination of two also-rans do better against Google than two independent also-rans? Or would the death of Yahoo as an independent search engine drive more users to Google?