| 11:59 pm on Jul 8, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Finally, someone who is not a Google fanboy gave it the review it deserves.
More people need to tell more people and so on and so forth and before you know it, Google will no longer be the 800lb Gorilla.
| 2:08 am on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I just wish it worked better with Opera. Also I'm always getting mixed results because of the geotargeting. I'm in Japan and if I search for an English term I always get Japanese pages first.
Regardless, I'm giving Bing a long hard look. I have it set as default browser on several PCs. I still have to jump to Google occasionally, unfortunately.
Nice to see the NYT article pointing out some of these areas where Bing does better.
| 3:40 am on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Just to quote from that article, as a reminder call, "who started the fight"
|For the last 15 years, Microsoft's master business plan seems to have been: |
"Wait until somebody else has a hit. Then copy it" ...
ó the list of commercial hits/Microsoft knockoffs is as long as your arm. PalmPilot/PocketPC.
Netscape Navigator/Internet Explorer. Mac OS X/Windows Vista. Apple iPod/Microsoft Zune.
I don't think MSN/Search/Live/Bing will win this time.
If it would've been a third party, I would at least hope they give Google a shake.
| 7:40 am on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Once you hit Enter, however, you canít help noticing Bingís more concerted effort to get you answers faster. To minimize the clicking, the hunting, the dead ends.
Bingo! or did I mean to say Bing!?
Microsoft if your reading this which I presume you are, please extend the sub-listings/choices/attributes (or whatever you may call them) for things like brand, categories, price, etc to the SERP's and not just cashback! This is a powerful feature that would truly set Bing apart and would further enhance your "decision engine" analogy!
[edited by: MLHmptn at 7:53 am (utc) on July 9, 2009]
| 5:35 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I give it a try and it's nice that I can get the image i needed easily than in google.
but i turn back to google again and again. My toolbar, which has a gmail notifier so important to me, is set with google. The current features of Bing is just not revolutionary to make us move.
It's nice to see there's a great alternative to google, but it's an alternative.
| 6:17 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
BING! Go Microsoft! I hated MSFT for a long time and Vista was a nightmare when it first came out, but Windows7, Office 2007, and now Bing - are great products. I hear the Zune and XBox360 are also great products, I personally don't use them (I don't play video games and I have an ipod shuffle from 2004 which I got because it was the smallest cheap mp3 player on the market at the time).
I was ready to switch my office over to Mac OS when Leopard came out, but the high hardware costs and the fact any problem would force me to rely on Apple backed me off that. Now with Windows 7 coming out, I'm not missing out.
I was NEVER a fan of Google. I reluctantly used it I loved the simple, no image ad interface along with super fast page load and for the longest time, the best results. Google is still best for most - but I know those guys at Google. it's a young company, they need to grow up and learn a few things. MSFT has been around the block, they're using the Japanese model of development - let someone else innovate, then test, modify, and improve. I think they may finally get it!
P.S. I want a third viable search engine... Ask.com and Yahoo.com suck very badly... hopefully they will wake up!
| 6:28 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
As much as I'd love Google to have some real competition, Google results were still significantly better last time I checked (today).
| 6:52 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I been using Bing a lot more lately, I have to say that so far I am impressed!
| 7:05 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Taking a good idea and trying to improve on it. Isn't that how good things become better?
| 7:09 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
arizonadude, so youa re saying that people who prefer Bing are unbiased, people who prefer Google are fanboys? That sounds like .... a biased point of view.
I used Blind search as my default search engine for a few days (so even my sub-concious biases could have no effect). Google was better, because there were lots of searches they both produced similar results for, but Google was more likely to produce good results with Bing produced bad than vice-versa.
IMO people on webmaster world are frightened of Google, and want to belive that Bing is better. Beware of what you wish for - MS would make a worse dominant serach engine than Google. Personally I hope MS and Yahoo increase search share, while Google Chrome OS gets significant OS market share. We (webmasters and consumers) win when no-one wins outright.
| 7:15 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I have been using Google for quite some time now. But , for a while now I haven't been getting the results I used to expect from the search giant. They have been pretty much the same sites popping up (Wiki, Youtube, etc.) on top of a maybe a couple good results and mixed with a whole lot of sites that are of very little value (just web page shells). Really there isn't much for me to continue to use in the way of search to keep me at Google.
So far Bing has given me a good mix. Yes, some junk is in there but pretty up to par with Google. I love the image search on bing, the interface, and how the results are presented. I love the little side bar that open up. As a webmaster I thought that wouldn't be a wise thing to do. After seeing and using it, I love it. So yes I am switching to bing for a while and using Google as a secondary. A bit of change for me after Google this, Google that, Google it, etc.
Someone I was talking to told me to "Google it." Me a webmaster being told to Google something. I think they forgot the fact. Anyway, I said "Google it? Man you are behind times" Bing is the new search craze. Try it and you will like it. Talked to him a few days ago and asked him if he liked it. He said pretty much the same thing I said above. He liked the results, the interface, the side window that opens, image search, etc.
This is just my thoughts and experience.
| 7:16 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Results aren't fantastic for my industry in the UK. A search for "widget installation" returns lots of sites for "widget installers" covering small areas of the UK - e.g. Cornwall Widget Installer, Norfolk Wiget Installer. Google results are better giving larger widget installers with national coverage and articles on "widget installation."
| 7:40 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Does anyone else think that NY Times is partial to anything non-Google considering all the hell they raised about Google displaying their precious news snippets?
I would trust a review from them on other topics. But they are known G haters. Enough said.
| 8:05 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Search results are ok, not as good as Google, but good. Bing Image is WAY better then Google image search, im not talking design here, Google just dont know how to filter the images SO many images are filtered out for no reason, on Bing image I get what I want, there filter is Perfect.
My whole Family is Using Bing now, they like it and what I think is interesting, is they say they trust the Company Microsoft more then Google, Im not kidding when I say some are getting scared of google and the Big Brother attitude, so now Microsoft is the Nice Company.
| 8:12 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I finally figured out how to get Bing a default search provider on Firefox - there is a small addon found on firefox.com.
| 8:38 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'm all for some alternatives to Google but going from Google being dominant in searches to MSFT wouldn't be an improvement for the industry. Bing is good mostly because it learned from the success of Google, but if it reall was only up to MSFT, Bing would only work on IE which would only work with ActiveX which would only work with Windows, etc. Not exactly a company with a good track record of openness and following standards. A locked-in nightmare.
| 9:01 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
No more of a nightmare than Google trying to take over the OS market, then you would be locked into Google who we all know are real advocates of privacy. Wait until they index your hard drive and post it online.
Sorry, Google needs a competitor be it Bing, Yahoo or somebody else and right now Bing is the only one that has a chance.
| 9:07 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'd be very hesitant with bing, even if it were better (which I didn't find for myself -not at all actually-).
First, bing is made by Microsoft and their track record of abusing their other de-facto monopolies to break into other markets (and get hit with record breaking fines for breaking the competition rules in the EU) makes me very hesitant for all their products.
Aside of that, I doubt Microsoft has ever put the customer first in any of their products, and with a search engine that's exactly what needs to be done. I've seen many search engine come and go, but bing: now, I'll pass on it.
I'm not going to say Google is perfect, by far not, there are quite a few things where I'd hope google had a button "no commercial sites" and/or "no affiliates", but choosing between Google search and Microsoft's bing: it's easy: I do not want the server geotargeting bing uses, it's a broken idea and simply doesn't work for what I do either is serving the web as well as in searching the web. I'm a global user, not a local user.
| 9:34 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
We are a long way off from Bing being a dominant search engine - but I wouldn't mind seeing them picking up a few % points
| 10:17 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I think it is funny when people claim Google acts as Big Brother, although they have no evidence, just spread FUD.
Then they claim Microsoft products are better as if Microsoft does not sniff information from Windows users machines without telling you in big letters.
zeus, do you use Windows Update? Did you know that it sniffs all information about the installed applications in your Windows machines and sends it to the Microsoft server?
You may think that sending that information to the Microsoft server is necessary to determine which applications need to be updated. But the fact is that equivalent update applications on Linux do not require the sending information about installed applications. It just downloads new updates lists and downloads only what is new.
This is a fact about Microsoft practices, not a suspicion about possible Google Big brother activities for which I have yet to see real evidence.
Claiming you prefer Bing for Google Search because of suspicion of Google doing something that Microsoft has done for many years makes you seem biased.
| 10:19 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Whether or not Bing produces better results really boils down to what your searching for. For myself, I find the results just fine and in most cased better than Google lately. Other people I know say the same thing.
But, there are also people I know who don't find what they want with Bing, so they use Google or even Yahoo.
At least now for me there is a choice. Before, there wasnt because even Googles worst was better than the others best. That's simply not the case anymore.
I personally have no problem with MSN making money. I never did understand the people who got all bent out of shape because Gates didn't want to give away his programming time for free. I charge clients for time spent programming anything for them and under the old programming and sofware should be free crowd, I'd have to work a day job, then come home and program all night for free becuase it's what I love to do. Not happening.
Google is no different now and anybody who thinks other wise is fooling themselves. Google needs to make money to keep the shareholders happy just like MSN does.
I don't use Google for much anymore, removed their stupid spybar and never did use any of their apps. I do however use plenty of MSN stuff on a daily basis to run my business.
I've seen a trend on some of the sites I moniter where Bing traffic has actually overtaken Google. Now, it's certainly not that way for all of them, but it is for some.
Is Bing perfect, nope....... But it is finally a step in the right direction for MSN. They have floundered so long and let Google grab the market, it's about time they got it together.
| 10:42 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I've been giving Bing a fling per the NYT article today and am generally impressed.
Anyone have any technical opinions or info yet?
I was surprised to see what was coming up as a snippet for some of my sites and I expect there's plenty of new technical things going on here that I'd like to be learning more about.
| 11:35 pm on Jul 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Google has been such a mess lately with their last update, I switched to Bing. Their results are cleaner and more relevant right now.
| 1:24 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Bing is not even close to being as good as Google as a search engine. Bing gives info for all their places on images on the home page that will sure keep many people on their Bing home page longer for people like the (corrupt)NY Times and the rest of the Google haters.
Check many niches and you will see that Bing is not so different from Live Search or Yahoo Search.
You can create keyword domains and get inter-networked sites owned by the same owners to get on top of the results.
Google is creating more of a variety of reasons why sites make it to the top of natural results and stay there. Sure they shuffle results but those are sites on the edge of even worthy to stay on top.
Just what I think and I get top results on all 3 engines. My top keyword phrases on natural search on Google still
get many more clicks than Bing or Yahoo search.
Play around with niche search and I bet you will agree with me.
Final comment... Why are you searching for images on the top search engines? I would think Webster's do to check their image search stats but those images come from someone else's site so either create your own site images as another SEO technique or use legal image sites to find images you can't create yourself.
| 1:30 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I've done the Blind Search exercise and I kept picking Bing results most often.
I think Microsoft has lifted their game with this one. I am now consciously using Bing rather than Google when conducting searches. I like their infinite scroll feature on Image Search and the ability to preview video clips or further sort images on the fly on the SERP.
I was also impressed with Project Natal - The next gaming rig in the XBox series...Looking forward to seeing it come out of concept.
The rotating daily images on the home page are pretty interesting too.
Although Microsoft hasn't released all the Bing features here in Australia, I'm impressed so far...
| 2:08 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
If MS programmers are reading this - what you MUST do (and what is a piece of cake to do) is to make the "Next" and "Prev" link on the pagination pages bigger (maybe combine it with graphics like Google did) because it is a distraction and waste of time to try to point the mouse pointer over these small links.
| 2:16 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'm preparing for a little construction project next week. I know how to do about 90% of the project but I wanted help for the other 10%. So today I did a Google search and opened every link on the first page of results.
Every site was an "articles" site with AdSense on the pages. As I read the articles seeking the information I needed, I kept thinking how the person who wrote the article was basically clueless and had obviously never done the task.
If you go to elance or somewhere similar you'll find lots of people wanting freelancers to churn out articles for a few bucks each so they can be put on sites alongside AdSense ads.
The problem is, these sites have made it to the top of the Google search results for a lot of terms.
Let's see how effective Microsoft is in keeping these sites out of their search results. From where I sit, that will be a huge factor in whether or not Bing is better.
| 5:40 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Here is a fact.
A loyal Google fanboy will never like Bing or any other search engine no matter what the results.
Many people who are not Google fanboys are liking what they are seeing and that is the crowd that MSN is going after.
The Google fanboys will end up running the new google operating system and will soon be saying how great that is even though it won't run existing software.
Just the same way they all said Chrome was the IE killer. Chrome never took hold becaue it's an inferior product.
Google's main product was search and they used to be pretty good at it, that is until the beginning of this summer.
You can do searches on different things and get better results on Bing and vice versa on Google, just depends on what you're searching for.
To say, Bing produces horrible results across all searches is just plain not true and shows just how much of a Google fanboy a person is.
| 7:57 am on Jul 10, 2009 (gmt 0)|
"The Google fanboys will end up running the new google operating system and will soon be saying how great that is even though it won't run existing software."
It's called Stockholm Syndrome.
| This 79 message thread spans 3 pages: 79 (  2 3 ) > > |