homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.198.224.121
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 118 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 118 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >     
Google versus Bing - from someone who watches very closely
tedster




msg:3973109
 11:41 pm on Aug 16, 2009 (gmt 0)

There's a very interesting blog article comparing Google results to Bing results. We normally don't link to blog articles here, but this isn't just any old blog. It belongs to Tom Costello, CEO and founder of the Cuill search engine -- and husband to former Google engineer Anna Lynn Paterson (she's the one on Google's phrase-based indexing patents).

So this is a knowledgeable commentary from someone who sees a lot more data that most of us can even dream about. I've extracted four observations out of many, many more.

  • Bing had 2.9% spam, Google had 2.56% spam, while Yahoo had 4.9%
  • Bing prefers URL matches more
  • Bing seems to prefer pages where the term occurs with its first letter capitalized
  • Bing does less term-rewriting than Google.

Tom's Blog [cuil.com]

It's that last observation above that caught my eye the most. If Google is going to lose ground to Bing/Yahoo it will be in this area -- too much giving you what they THINK you mean instead of what you actually typed. We see related comments [webmasterworld.com] here quite often in recent times.

 

tedster




msg:3974516
 10:20 pm on Aug 18, 2009 (gmt 0)

When Yahoo starts using Bing data, we'll see a lot more than 15% in one jump.

whitenight




msg:3974534
 10:41 pm on Aug 18, 2009 (gmt 0)

Steveb, Zoltan indeed ;)

In less than 6 months, Bing will have 30%-33% of Search traffic. Period.

That's not cheerleading.
That's a fact.
And no amount of hyperbole regarding how "ludicrous" Bing's results are, will change that.

You either adapt your BUSINESS model to that fact or you continue to grumble.

Nothing personal, strictly business Earthling.

[edited by: tedster at 12:06 am (utc) on Aug. 19, 2009]

CainIV




msg:3974644
 1:57 am on Aug 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

"Here on Earth people sampled Bing and then its markethsare went down. The idea it's results are comparable to google is lauaghable. "

It's entirely non-logical to assume that Bing will not take a considerable share of search - especially when compared to the domination in share Google has had for so long.

Personally, the change to me is refreshing, and I hope that it keeps up. Competition is always a good thing in business.

steveb




msg:3974696
 3:34 am on Aug 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

"That's a fact."

LOLOL

"It's entirely non-logical to assume that Bing will not take a considerable share of search"

That almost as illogical as the "fact" statement.

EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS got them .9 more market share. That is what is called a "fact". Thus far, this is a fail of epic proportions. they could do well in the future, but as of today they spent a fortune and 1) have lost traffic since their peak, and 2) grown by less than 1% of market share after an 80 million dollar ad buy.

And when Yahoo starts using Bing, that's a totally different issue. The thing to compare there is the end Yahoo numbers to the new Yahoo numbers.

fargo1999




msg:3974699
 3:47 am on Aug 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

Three new search engines started this year: Cuil, Wolfram, and bing. I tested them all and while I visit the first two once a month (maybe), I started visiting bing every day since it started.

On bing I just find the majority of results relevant and sometimes I find useful sites that I cannot find on Google (even though I've been searching the same terms for years now). Plus I can learn something about the world from the photographs that are posted as a background.

[edited by: fargo1999 at 3:59 am (utc) on Aug. 19, 2009]

tangor




msg:3974700
 3:47 am on Aug 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

Bing/Y! brings competition back to the fold (my opinion). I like the possibilities as presented so far. Overnight? Probably not... and most certainly not soon enough certain bucks for those who live and die by site advertising. But I do see Bing introducing a stronger presence than Y! in recent years.

My traffic from Bing keeps rising week on week...

Works for me!

IanKelley




msg:3974745
 5:13 am on Aug 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

According to Quantcast, Cuil maxed out around 87k visitors/month in the last 6 months. According to my records, they are seeing a lot LESS data than me... ;-)

Missed that earlier, good observation, in fact he's probably seeing less data than most of us.

Although that doesn't change the fact that he has a lot of experience with search.

CainIV




msg:3975427
 5:55 am on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS got them .9 more market share. That is what is called a "fact". Thus far, this is a fail of epic proportions. they could do well in the future, but as of today they spent a fortune and 1) have lost traffic since their peak, and 2) grown by less than 1% of market share after an 80 million dollar ad buy.

No one is debating whether the move is 'cost effective' or not. Nor is anyone debating their effective use of marketing $$.

The question here really is - does Bing provide as good, or on par results for the average user as Google does. It does seem as though this is up for debate, depending on which camp you access, but some items which are glaring here are the fact that Bing does appear to be providing better results in some areas, does appear to have their marketing game in order (and a large budget behind it), and will be partnering with Yahoo.

If I were a betting man, (which I am), I would look at those three criteria as pretty valid myself.

Winning the belt is easy. Keeping it is the tough part.

Only time will tell.

graeme_p




msg:3975447
 7:56 am on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Three new search engines started this year: Cuil

Cuil is utterly useless

Wolfram

Is not a search engine. It does not crawl the web. it does not return links.

It is an interface to some useful databases, and it is very useful if used appropriately. I use to occasionally. If you expected it to be a search engine, it is not surprising that you have been disappointed - just as someone who buys a sports car for carrying cargo will be disappointed.

and bing

I have not found it to be much better than Yahoo. It is an improvement over the old Live Search, and is much better presented and marketed. So far my audience do not seem to use it (I rank better than in Google and get hardly any traffic from them).

Competition is search is good, but it could hardly come from a worse source.

nomis5




msg:3975540
 11:59 am on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

"In less than 6 months, Bing will have 30%-33% of Search traffic. Period.

That's not cheerleading.
That's a fact.
And no amount of hyperbole regarding how "ludicrous" Bing's results are, will change that."

! I'm book marking this page whiteknight and we'll see in six months time how good that prediction is!

And, by the way, it certainly is not a fact. Look up the definition of fact.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:3975597
 2:00 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Why is that when a new contender comes along it arouses such passion? ;)

atlrus




msg:3975713
 3:55 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

As much as I would love a good competitor to Google, I have to agree - Bing lost before it even joined the race. An increase of half a percentage could be great for some, but it's far from a success. If my traffic increased by 0.5% tomorrow, I doubt that I would even spot it.

There are plenty good reasons why Bing will not become a good competitor. The major one - People are NOT looking for an alternative. People are just fine with the results Google returns and they are not looking for an alternative. Webmasters, yes, we are looking for an alternative, but this doesn't matter in this case.

Another one - Bing's interface is too complicated for a quick search. Things are always poping up, unnecessary information is displayed, it's too "crowded", etc. Obviously Bing doesn't get it - the job of a SE is to send people to websites, not keep them at the SE for as long as possible. And with the introduction of the pay-per-click model, the longer you keep the visitor on your search page the longer you don't get paid :)

Number 3 - Microsoft sux at marketing. They should sell Bing to Apple and let them beat the crap out of Google in advertising :) I am willing to wager that Apple will get 30% share of the search market in one year with the iBing :)

And as far as Bing returning good results - I don't know about that, it's all relative. What I know is that Bing's results make the Google everflux look like tectonic movement...

signor_john




msg:3975741
 4:31 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

In less than 6 months, Bing will have 30%-33% of Search traffic....That's a fact.

What? No more "Google is a monopoly" threads? :-)

Why is that when a new contender comes along it arouses such passion? ;)

Maybe because not everyone can rank #1 in Google?

chrisv1963




msg:3975783
 5:13 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

My boys discovered Bing and they love it! They think Google is boring ...

StoutFiles




msg:3975785
 5:20 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I do enjoy Bing's picture of the day. It adds a little more flavor to the search page.

whitenight




msg:3975941
 8:17 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

! I'm book marking this page whiteknight and we'll see in six months time how good that prediction is!

And, by the way, it certainly is not a fact. Look up the definition of fact.

I'm seriously starting to think some people here are from different planets.

My prediction isn't even controversial.

Basic Math. Shall we?

Bing has 9% marketshare.
Yahoo has 21% marketshare.

21% + 9% = ......wait for it..... 30%!

And basic math is always FACT.
In a world of hyperbole and opinion on boards, 21 + 9 always equals 30.

Now, if people here want to spin one's opinions about how a bing(9%) and yahoo(21%) merger will NOT equal 30% of marketshare, feel free.

But those people are the one acting out of "cheerleading", fear, FUD, and denial, not me

What? No more "Google is a monopoly" threads? :-)

How many times do i have to repeat,
I have no intrinsic dislike of Goog.

Heck, most webmasters on this board would give their first born and left arm for my rankings for my terms on Goog.

I don't like ANY Search engine having more than 50% of all search traffic.

I know that's difficult for many to understand, but oh well, i guess it's "Zoltanic logic".
Far too complex for Earthlings.

--------
To reinterate, as I just know someone is going to get lost in the minutae of my argument

21 + 9 = 30

Got it?

tedster




msg:3975953
 8:26 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Perhaps the news about Yahoo's contract with Bing [webmasterworld.com] has not yet reached all corners of WebmasterWorld?

signor_john




msg:3975969
 8:51 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Now, if people here want to spin one's opinions about how a bing(9%) and yahoo(21%) merger will NOT equal 30% of marketshare, feel free.

It isn't a merger; it's an OEM agreement. Assuming that there isn't any change in searchers' habits, the U.S. market shares of the big three search brands, as measured by ComScore, will continue to be roughly 8.9 percent for Bing, 19.3 percent for Yahoo, and 64.7 percent for Google.

whitenight




msg:3975976
 8:58 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

It isn't a merger; it's an OEM agreement. Assuming that there isn't any change in searchers' habits, the U.S. market shares of the big three search brands, as measured by ComScore, will continue to be roughly 8.9 percent for Bing, 19.3 percent for Yahoo, and 64.7 percent for Google.

ah, and here comes the minutae.

merger... agreement... lol it's 10 years!

In latin, that's a DE FACTO merger of SEs. (there's that word "fact" again)

But keep spinning.

8.9 + 19.3 = 28.2.

Gawd, how did i come up with 30 from 28.2?!

Oh right, Bing RESULTS have currently grown by 10% every 2 months. So in 6 months, (at the current rate of growth), we come to 30-33% of market share.

But no, you're right. it's 28.2% ... how dare I round up.
or account for current rates of growth for future estimates.

My mistake.

Not sure how this prove any points.
Did you have one?
except for 1.8 difference?

[edited by: whitenight at 9:13 pm (utc) on Aug. 20, 2009]

ken_b




msg:3975987
 9:04 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I wasn't paying attention when Google arrived on the scene, did it's arrival cause this much angst, spin, confusion, strife, strident debate, whatever, etc?

whitenight




msg:3975989
 9:07 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I wasn't paying attention when Google arrived on the scene, did it's arrival cause this much angst, spin, confusion, strife, strident debate, whatever, etc?

indeed!

The simple observation that people are in such panic over Bing having 28.2% of marketshare shows that webmasters are ALREADY too addicted to Goog traffic.

Time to ween the addicts off of Googcaine.
My goodness.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:3975995
 9:14 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I wasn't paying attention when Google arrived on the scene, did it's arrival cause this much angst, spin, confusion, strife, strident debate, whatever, etc?

No it didn't because Google created Adwords/Adsense and hence more or less created the advertising monster that the WWW has become.

First we thought the PC was a calculator. Then we found out how to turn numbers into letters with ASCII and we thought it was a typewriter. Then we discovered graphics, and we thought it was a television. With the World Wide Web, weve realized its a brochure.

Douglas Adams (who wrote the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy).


nomis5




msg:3975998
 9:15 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Bing is Bing

Yahoo is Yahoo.

Don't mix up the two.

Bing 30% in six months time? We'll see.

Bing and Yahoo 30% in six months time, who knows. But if it does happen, it doesn't mean that webmasters need to alter they way they operate. Remember, that's almost the way it is now. So, no surprise, no great change, webmasters are not ignoring some inevitable event because the event is a complete nothing. It's business as usual.

whitenight




msg:3976007
 9:20 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

Bing is Bing

Yahoo is Yahoo.

Don't mix up the two.

Bing 30% in six months time? We'll see.

Bing and Yahoo 30% in six months time, who knows. But if it does happen, it doesn't mean that webmasters need to alter they way they operate. Remember, that's almost the way it is now. So, no surprise, no great change, webmasters are not ignoring some inevitable event because the event is a complete nothing. It's business as usual.

Nope, you were quick to pounce.
No backtracking now.

This is the SE forums. Not corporate forums.

Bing is Bing.
Yahoo is now Bing

There's no 'time will tell' about this.
The agreement is done.

Yahoo will be using BING's SE for 10 years!

But please, continue to tell us about how you "bookmarked" my insane prediction and how i make up FACTS about PUBLIC agreements you were obviously unaware of...

MrSavage




msg:3976038
 10:03 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

I love to hear other webmasters saying they aren't changing their strategies to consider how Bing ranks. Terrific news for me. Just keep on with your one dimensional ways, and I'll do even better on Bing. Having said that, what if one day Google wakes up and says, you know what? All those message board and blog backlinks shouldn't count for anything. You might just wake up finding yourself on page 10. Go ahead, put all your eggs in one basket. One little philosophy change from Google in terms of rankings/value and you could be on the outside looking in. Just pray if that day comes, that their market share isn't 90% like here in Canada.

signor_john




msg:3976072
 11:07 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

The simple observation that people are in such panic over Bing having 28.2% of marketshare shows that webmasters are ALREADY too addicted to Goog traffic.

But Bing doesn't have a market share of 28.2 percent, because there's no such thing as a "de facto" merger. (For all I know, Carnation may package private-label evaporated milk for Safeway, but if that's the case, it doesn't mean Carnation Evaporated Milk's market share includes that of the Safeway brand, or that Carnation has merged with Safeway.)

It's also worth noting that, even if you do combinee Yahoo search traffic with Bing's because of the announced OEM agreement, Bing still doesn't have a 28.2-percent market share. Bing's market share--like Yahoo's--drops dramatically in the much bigger world outside the U.S. Come to think of it, your focus on U.S. market share--as opposed to real market share--reflects the same nationalism and shortsightedness that have hamstrung Yahoo and Microsoft's search and advertising businesses.

Finally, the one incontrovertible "fact" in this discussion is that, according to ComScore, Google has more than twice the U.S. market share of Yahoo and Bing combined whether you treat Yahoo and Bing as one entity or two. The OEM agreement between Bing and Yahoo may bring more search traffic (both retail and OEM) to Microsoft's servers, but that search traffic will come at Yahoo's expense, not Google's.

StoutFiles




msg:3976081
 11:25 pm on Aug 20, 2009 (gmt 0)

In a world of hyperbole and opinion on boards, 21 + 9 always equals 30.

Actually, 21+9 would be around 29.999 due to energy loss.

They should sell Bing to Apple and let them beat the crap out of Google in advertising :) I am willing to wager that Apple will get 30% share of the search market in one year with the iBing :)

Honestly, if Apple did make a search engine, especially one that worked well their handheld products, they would probably do quite well. People love Apple right now even more then they love Google.

tedster




msg:3976104
 12:05 am on Aug 21, 2009 (gmt 0)

Actually, 21+9 would be around 29.999 due to energy loss.

Ah yes, that would be the damping factor, right?

whitenight




msg:3976120
 12:43 am on Aug 21, 2009 (gmt 0)

Signor, you've made a lot of contradictory statements and again have changed your original "logic" in the face of what MY original point was.

So if you want, let's debate the minutae, since focusing on the big point is way too "Zoltanic" for the 3 or 4 people who usually like to debate me about:

FACTS that generally only I have personal access to,
and
now instead want to debate FACTS everyone has access to

It's also worth noting that, even if you do combinee Yahoo search traffic with Bing's because of the announced OEM agreement, Bing still doesn't have a 28.2-percent market share. Bing's market share--like Yahoo's--drops dramatically in the much bigger world outside the U.S.

When did i EVER imply i was speaking of outside US search properties?

In fact, by THAT argument, then yes, Google is a monopoly

Make up your mind on which debate "logic" you're using in this thread.

"Google is not a monopoly?"
or
"Yahoo's use of Bing Search doesn't equal around 30%."

Which one is it?
I can't keep up with your circular arguments.

Come to think of it, your focus on U.S. market share--as opposed to real market share--reflects the same nationalism and shortsightedness that have hamstrung Yahoo and Microsoft's search and advertising businesses.

I'll be sure to tell my Fortune 500 clients and competition about the lack of focus on our continuing dominance of Goog outside of our major markets.
Even if we already do.

But, thanks for the heads up.

Finally, the one incontrovertible "fact" in this discussion is that... The OEM agreement between Bing and Yahoo may bring more search traffic (both retail and OEM) to Microsoft's servers, but that search traffic will come at Yahoo's expense, not Google's

Here, again you spout OPINION as fact.
Please cite your sources that it will come at Yahoo's expense.

Even if you're right,
My goodness, this still doesn't even make logical sense...

Yahoo's traffic WILL BE Bing's. We're talking about BING...BING...BING,
so at worst it's still not a LOSS for BING.
And any gains will come from Goog/AOL or ASK.

Psst. Btw since May, Goog has LOST .3% marketshare.

Where did they go?!

Obviously not to Yahoo or Bing as only illogical Zoltans would use those SE's, eh?

It doesn't matter if ALL of Yahoo's visitors switch to BING.
It's STILL Bing SE.

It doesn't matter if ALL of Bing's visitors switch to Yahoo.
It's STILL Bing SE.

At this point, if you want to still debate how I come to around 30%
or
1 in 3.5 eyeballs seeing BING SERPS,
then you'll have to argue with someone less logical.

steveb




msg:3976132
 1:23 am on Aug 21, 2009 (gmt 0)

"Bing is Bing
Yahoo is Yahoo.
Don't mix up the two."

That's for sure. Combining the two is normally a bad way to look at things. Clearly Microsoft will not be happy if 28% use yahoo and 2% use Bing, and Yahoo won't be happy if 3% uses yahoo and 27% uses Bing.

Whiteknight's "fact" is nonsense of course, since some reports say Yahoo won't make the change for two years, and also because on Earth six months is a long time. Bing could gain or lose share between then because of a lot of reasons, including advertising. (In other words, whiteknight is saying that even with an additional $200 million in advertising over the next six months Bing can not possobly gain more than 3% marketshare!)

So let's try to keep the focus on Earthly facts, and rationally speculate on what we can.

One aspect of considering marketshare is whether Yahoo's share will go up or down when they start with Bing. Likewise, will Bing go up or down after yahoo starts using the results. The idea that you can just add the two current numbers is illogical. To some degree Yahoo users will either like Bing more than they like current Yahoo, or like it less. They will go to Google (or Bing.com) more or less than they do now. In general, if people don't use Google to search, a high percentage do so because they don't want to use Google, which means if they sometimes use Bing and sometimes use yahoo, in the future they will learn they get the same results from both so they won't use both for the same query the same minute. So there is bound to be some less usage of the two put together as the two separately. Put another way, anyone who currently chooses Yahoo, but likes Google better than Bing, is a person likely to be lost.

whitenight




msg:3976134
 1:38 am on Aug 21, 2009 (gmt 0)

absolutely hilarious.

and also because on Earth six months is a long time.

You mean like... in 6 months..
Goog could have slapped your sites (you DO actually have sites, don't you?) into -950 oblivion.

Yes, indeed, 6 months is a long time. ;)

(In other words, whiteknight is saying that even with an additional $200 million in advertising over the next six months Bing can not possobly gain more than 3% marketshare!)

Yay! More circular arguments.

Which one is it?

Now you're saying i'm UNDERESTIMATING Bing's growth, right?

So what you are telling us is that it's LOGICAL we could expect MORE THAN 3% growth?!

OK, since you've revised your opinion.

Let's see
28.2% + 3+% = 31.2%
(just making sure we all agree on the numbers here)

Cause, 31.2% certainly SOUNDS like
it falls between 30% and 33%
that a few of you insisted on debating for the past 20 posts.

lol, thanks for making MY point by arguing with me for argument's sake.

Brilliant!

Put another way, anyone who currently chooses Yahoo, but likes Google better than Bing, is a person likely to be lost.

So explain to me steveb,
why has Google LOST marketshare since May?

Please, oh please, i want to hear this.

This 118 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 118 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved