Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Has Bing Already Overtaken Yahoo?

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the very-good-name dept.

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."

cancel ×

319 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not really (4, Informative)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249795)

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:Not really (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28249841)

Exactly. Delayed news is okay. Old news which has not remained current is false news.

>>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.

FRAUD ALERT: Slashvertisement? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250113)

To me, that looks like an ad paid by Microsoft. Do Slashdot editors accept money to run articles that are actually advertisements?

Re:FRAUD ALERT: Slashvertisement? (3, Funny)

TheP4st (1164315) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250217)

Yes, they are also famous for heavily discrediting open source and providing Steve Ballmer with free chairs.

Does "IT Pro" run paid ads as articles? (5, Informative)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250521)

Some of the articles in "IT Pro" magazine seem to me to be ads. Here are other articles:

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, ..." Google and Microsoft are not a "pair".

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:Not really (4, Informative)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249867)

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 (4, Funny)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249893)

Only if they keep themselves up to date by reading tech-centric sites such as slashdot.

Oh wait...!!

Re:Not really (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250593)

Frankly i find bing a bit annoying. Mainly because i couldn't "not" use the stupid thing,at least in IE8(sister's comp got upgraded over the weekend). I couldn't figure out how to turn it off and other novices are probably in the same boat. At least i know a little about computers,someone who just surfs the web and does email hasn't a chance. That's probably why they have the numbers they do, but thats just a guess.
luck.

Re:Not really (4, Informative)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249909)

It's not what happened in this case - tfa is dated today.

Re:Not really (4, Insightful)

TropicalCoder (898500) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250311)

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.

Re:Not really (0, Redundant)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250559)

we are all well aware of how Microsoft routinely buys journalists and bloggers

Uh, evidence? (and no, 'person X used to work for company Y, who once did business with Microsoft' is not evidence)

The Slashdot story is completely misleading. (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250607)

"... In the end, I arrived at the decision that this is simply a timley [timely] story..."

It is not a "timely story". The Slashdot story is completely misleading.

Re:Not really (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250345)

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.

Redirects (4, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249883)

How long before M.S. sends out an update that automatically redirects URL typos to Bing?

Re:Redirects (5, Funny)

nschubach (922175) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250423)

Tuesday. That's when all the patches come out. ;)

Re:Redirects (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250427)

They get redirected to live search at the moment, and live search gets redirected to Bing.

Re:Redirects (5, Interesting)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250621)

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.

Indeed not really! (4, Funny)

siloko (1133863) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250057)

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:Not really (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250211)

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:Not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250289)

I'm giving it a try for a week as my default search engine. So far I'm satisfied with the search results and I really like the look and feel. Google seems a little plain now (yes I'm aware of google.com/ig)

Re:Not really (2, Funny)

noundi (1044080) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250449)

You know what's hard to see? Someone using Yahoo. (badumpish)

Re:Not really (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250573)

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.

Be green; eliminate unnecessary words: "Bing may have a big impact - but I think it will take some more time before we know."

MS doing something good? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28249807)

Quick, form the freetard army and attack!

Re:MS doing something good? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28249897)

Time to get ready for work, Redmond.

Not so fast! Has bing bung? (5, Informative)

peterdaly (123554) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249811)

Not so fast. Same source indicates the bing has already fallen back down to (less than) live.com levels.

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 (2, Funny)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250019)

StatCounter confirms it.
 

It's the apps stupid! (3, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250053)

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, I have a feeling that "perfect" results and google and maybe even bing won't be that far apart from each other. Also, a decade ago, the internet was more of a wild west in terms of searching for information about some topics far and wide. You just didn't know what sites had relevant information. These days, a great majority of my searches start as "X Y wikipedia" because now there is a centralized spot for info.

I applaud Microsoft's effort though. Competition is always a good thing and might bring something unexpected or at least keep google honest and on its toes. Also, the bing page has learn/copied the good part of google, and that is the minimalization. A far cry from the horrendous "portal"idea that Yahoo, MSN, comcast.net, AOL, and others are still attached too.

Re:It's the apps stupid! (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250203)

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 that gives better results, I'd switch instantly. So far, the only one I've seen that sorts the results better is Clusty, and their database is too small to be useful.

Re:It's the apps stupid! (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250339)

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! (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250407)

How is this related at all? You can still store your documents, code, and mail with one provider and use a different one for search.

Re:It's the apps stupid! (2, Interesting)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250505)

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! (5, Insightful)

noidentity (188756) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250633)

Agreed; Google is getting more on my nerves every day, partly because it doesn't do as told. I search for "foo bar" and it shows pages without any mention of "bar". OK, so search for "+foo +bar", and get my hits. Then try searching for "generic.h" and it returns pages with the string "generic" (no .h). Even adding a + doesn't avoid this. And then it regularly "corrects" my "misspellings", causing the wrong search. Once I finally get it searching for what I asked it to, it puts lots of irrelevant hits first.

Re:It's the apps stupid! (2, Insightful)

Zerth (26112) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250251)

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:It's the apps stupid! (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250393)

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:It's the apps stupid! (2, Interesting)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250669)

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 away.

Re:Not so fast! Has bing bung? (1)

neonsignal (890658) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250583)

And now that bing has been slashdotted, it'll be back to throwing chairs around...

StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249827)

I'm skeptical of this data--at least worldwide. When I click the gs.statcounter.com link and go to Statistic:Search Engine and Country/Region:Asia I see Baidu at an alarmingly low rate. Barely even recognizable. The CSV sheet shows it at zero until 03/05/2009 which is hilarious and then it bumps up to 1%. Yeah, I think they have some problems with their data collection methods or who is reporting this data anyhow. Maybe their software's only in English? I don't know but that data alarms me and I would take their stats in other realms lightly as that's a vote of no confidence from me--something is skewed horribly and I don't like it. They might be right about Yahoo! compared to Bing but this is certainly not reassuring.

Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (0)

Acer500 (846698) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249961)

I'm skeptical of this data--at least worldwide.

Me too. An unofficial survey (by me :) * ) shows that 0% of the population of my country (Uruguay) knows Bing exists.

OTOH, someone mentioned that the default MS search is now Bing, so those numbers might be explained due to that.

*see: sig

Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (5, Informative)

aodhan (1080405) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250225)

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:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (1)

Acer500 (846698) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250463)

Thanks for bringing that up.

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 use StatCounter get visitors savvy enough to use Google)?.

Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (5, Informative)

aodhan (1080405) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250587)

We talk about our methodology here. [statcounter.com]
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.

Re:StatCounter's Baidu Stats is Alarming (1)

Ninjaesque One (902204) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250459)

Most of the internet users in Asia are in Japan and South Korea, probably. And Baidu and Google cannot compete there. How's the percentages for Naver?

Bada (3, Funny)

Mana Mana (16072) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249853)

Bing Is Not Google

Re:Bada (1)

sys.stdout.write (1551563) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250009)

Yeah, but how many amazing puns like yours can you make off of "Google"?

And to make a serious point for a second: whatever marketing personnel came up with the name "bing" should be promoted. It's absolutely genius.

It's just a shame the actual product is so mediocre.

Re:Bada (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250091)

Hahah, very nice. Not to mention: passed Yahoo! up? Dude, that's not even an achievement. That's like passing up the retarded kid next door sprinting when you're trying to catch an Olympic class athlete. It's not even worth mentioning.

Prime Time Commercial (1)

iamhigh (1252742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249855)

They had a prime time commercial where I live. I saw it, and I could tell it was going to be a bing advert so I paid attention. So my wife paid attention too, and the first thing she said after the commercials was... "Biiiiing". So it was catchy and probably stuck in her head (buy my years of "just use google" still remains).

Yahoo might be worried, but I don't think Google cares... at this point it's a race for second place.

Re:Prime Time Commercial (1)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249891)

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 (4, Funny)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249917)

I saw a Bing commercial. It makes me want to choke someone to death with my bare hands.

Re:Prime Time Commercial (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250147)

Careful, that might be illegal in your country

Re:Prime Time Commercial (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250255)

Did Bill wiggle his butt again, or have they realized that it's not really a selling point?

Re:Prime Time Commercial (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250245)

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:Prime Time Commercial (2, Interesting)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250273)

I think the fact there's new episodes of Fullmetal Alchemist is more interesting than this news story.

Re:Prime Time Commercial (0, Redundant)

getto man d (619850) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249901)

Sadly, you're right. It is a race for second place. That is all it seems Microsoft is good for; releasing products that emulate others (especially if you believe the fanboys)*.

I just don't understand why M$ needs or even wants to have a great search engine. I just want a freakin' better OS.

*Sidenote: I do like the Zune even with all of the bashing here on /. .

Re:Prime Time Commercial (2, Interesting)

SolitaryMan (538416) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250293)

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:Prime Time Commercial (2, Interesting)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250661)

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 10% - sometimes Bing produces a very good result in the first 1-2 results, some other times it "thinks" you were looking for something else.
- Like Google, it favors results from Wikipedia.

as much as it pains me to do this... (3, Insightful)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249861)

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?

They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (5, Insightful)

blahbooboo (839709) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249999)

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 (0)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250101)

You are into (or do it professionally) IT, so this sort of thing is important to YOU.

Yes, it is important to me. That's why I comment on it. I'm sure it's pretty important to most of the other people on /. otherwise we wouldn't have TFA posted here to comment on.

Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250309)

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:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (2, Funny)

Atriqus (826899) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250371)

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 (1)

FesterDaFelcher (651853) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250539)

Could you please phrase that in the form of a car analogy?

Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (1)

Locklin (1074657) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250557)

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!"

It's the employee that is the moron. He should count his lucky stars the IT guy is EVEN WEARING shoes or a belt! *ducks*

Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (3, Interesting)

Kamokazi (1080091) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250239)

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:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250471)

So you're an idiot because I know more about accounting than you do? Sure, my degree is in accounting and I may do accounting related activities as part of my job, but you're an idiot for asking me that question about your taxes. You must be one of those people who uses TURBOTAX....

Do you see the absurdity? You are an IT professional so it's your job to know more about computers and if you don't know more than your end user, you should look for a new profession. If everyone knew as much as you, with your attitude you probably would have problems finding a job because there would be millions of others willing to take it.

Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (1)

quadrox (1174915) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250323)

While I agree with your main point, I believe it is "fair" to call people idiots if they are ignorant about something and then complain that it does not work for them.

But as long as it truly does not matter to them, I agree that calling them idiots is wrong. I suppose that GP was thinking mostly about the "deliberate idiots" due to his personal experiences and that he forgot about the others who truly don't care. Not that that is an excuse to go about and call people names.

Re:They are not idiots, stop with the snobbery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250509)

People like you are why IT people get a bad rap.

No, it's Microsoft [youtube.com] .

Re:as much as it pains me to do this... (1)

Kamokazi (1080091) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250617)

It's been like that with Live or MSN search for years now...IE's default address bar search has always been their own search engine. The reason for the spike is probably all of those abasolutely stupid commercials on TV advertising Bing.

The sound of "found": Bob Hope (3, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249877)

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... (3, Funny)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249879)

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.. (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250235)

Not going to happen. Yahoo! is at around 5% of the total market. We all know about it, because we remember when it was at the top, but for most people if you say 'better than Yahoo!' they say 'huh? Better than what? Is Yahoo a thing you Google with?'. All that kind of advert would do is draw people's attention to the existence of Yahoo.

Re:Now I'm waiting for the new Bing ad onslaught.. (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250473)

You also can still use Altavista [altavista.com] . I am sure it integrates better with your Vista PC.

Microsoft is the next AOL.

Amused by their general marketing.. (3, Insightful)

Junta (36770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249911)

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:Amused by their general marketing.. (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249975)

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...

Re:Amused by their general marketing.. (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250223)

Allegedly it is at least internal to microsoft.

Re:Amused by their general marketing.. (1)

Jamamala (983884) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250275)

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:Amused by their general marketing.. (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250625)

A backronym can be constructed for anything.

Anything Not Yet Taken Home Is Not Gained?

Re:Amused by their general marketing.. (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250415)

Yeah, I thought that was a joke. It seems strange to try to make it about not-being Google when people use Google because it works well and people like it. They may as well call it "Bing does not work well and you won't like it", but I guess "Bdnwwaywli" is a little harder to pronounce.

Indeed (1)

quall (1441799) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249935)

Over the weekend, I went to yahoo to search immigration information on pre-WWI Germany and the site kept timing out. Google was giving me nothing. I went to Bing and got a few good listings. Yahoo is just a poor search engine.

Re:Indeed (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250187)

What were your search terms? I could find plenty of information in all three engines. It all depends on how you structure your queries. For example, "Immigration in Germany" in quotes like that would almost certainly give you good results for something like this. I used

"Immigration in Germany" pre-ww1

as my query and got plenty of results.

Reminds me of Groundhog's Day (5, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28249963)

I dated your sister until you told me not to? BING! Needlenose Ned! BING!

Man, I've seen that movie so many times.

I'll tell you one thing... (1)

bbowers (596225) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250049)

The commercial that I saw for bing was the most horrible commercial ever. Made me feel like if I searched for something that I'd get everything back that I didn't want to see as a result and nothing I was actually looking for.

Help (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250097)

When I type something in the address bar of firefox, it searches for it using bing (previously live search). Is there a way I can change this to google I'm Feeling Lucky (Like it was on the ol gentoo box? (I'm on vista now)).

Re:Help (2, Informative)

ed (79221) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250175)

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:Help (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250303)

Ah, brilliant, thanks. I did a quick bodge with wireshark to figure out the URL for I'm Feeling Lucky searches, and swapped it out:
http://www.google.com/search?btnI=I'm Feeling Lucky&q=
(Firefox changes the punctuation just fine)

Cheers again :)

Re:Help (1)

Billy the Mountain (225541) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250265)

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

Slashdot Effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250111)

Stop posting them on Slashdot and see their traffic drop. When was Yahoo! in the headline for Slashdot?

Oh...right, this story.

Don't discount the power of Windows Update (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250129)

I'm just waiting for Microsoft to set Bing as the default search engine in IE and Firefox as part of an important security update.

What? (0, Troll)

Annorax (242484) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250157)

You mean Yahoo! does web search?

Oh.. right.. I guess it does...

Return traffic or it didn't count. (1)

binaryspiral (784263) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250159)

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.

apples and oranges... (1)

mugurel (1424497) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250319)

or *is* bing a search engine after all?

The only good thing about Bing... (1)

tjonnyc999 (1423763) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250337)

...is the integrated "porn theater" feature. Turn off SafeSearch (or w/e they call it, I care so little I forgot already), look up any porn search term - et voila! watch the videos right in the search results window.

Looks like they're trying to kill off Redtube, not Google :D

give it time (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250373)

wait until the "new" wears off and people will go back to their old favorites, google, yahoo, askJeevs' & etc... whatever, people are going to bing to see what it is capable of and when they are done they will leave, i am sure the microsofties & msn users will gravitate to bing, but not all...

I like Dvorak's column on Bing in PC Magazine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28250437)

His best effort? Brought in new garbage.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347651,00.asp

"Microsoft+Antitrust" (4, Informative)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250491)

Was a test search I entered into bing to compare with what came out for google and yahoo.

google returned these three first:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_antitrust_case
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/microsoft-antitrust.html

So I compared that to Yahoo:

http://www.microsoft-antitrust.gov/
http://www.zdnet.com.au/tag/anti_trust-eu-microsoft.htm
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/0,2000061744,39202361,00.htm

Bing returned these three first:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legalnews.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/legal_newsroomarchive.mspx?case=Government%20Anti-Trust%20Case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_antitrust_case

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. - Joseph Goebbels

Ah, am I the only one here asking... (0, Redundant)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250511)

...WTF is "Bing"?

Sorry, but seriously, can't say I've heard of it. Windows Live is being pimped too hard everywhere I look (thanks IE8).

Obviously not the market penetration they really think it is. Steve, call me when you start using Bing as a verb, OK?

Here's my take on it. (1)

jskline (301574) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250543)

If it did manage to over take Yahoo, my suspicions are that the only way Microsoft can accomplish that would be to install this as the default search and push it down with Windows mandatory updates and over ride the users default settings. Many users know nothing about their computers and can't change it back without calling a geek, so Microsoft would stand to win here. There's a word for this but it escapes me about now.. :-)

Corroboration from UK (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250613)

As per Hitwise [hitwise.com] , Bing doing reasonably well in UK also.

FYI (4, Funny)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250649)

If you don't know what Bing is, you should just Google it.

Not acid3 compliant? (3, Informative)

Anna Merikin (529843) | more than 5 years ago | (#28250657)

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.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>