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!

cancel ×

514 comments

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

Who would've though? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142656)

With such a retarded name I didn't expect Bing to reach such popularity.

Re:Who would've though? (3, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142674)

I said the same thing about "Slashdot" ;)

Surprising... (4, Insightful)

Gription (1006467) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143068)

It is amazing how a simple campaign of drive-by installs and default check boxes that change your search provider can increase your market share!!!

Re:Surprising... (5, Insightful)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143102)

Yea, because Google's idiotic toolbar being bundled with everything from the end user Java VM to Adobe PDF Reader is so different a tactic.

Re:Surprising... (1)

Vamman (1156411) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143164)

Man I hate that toolbar. Google took a page out of Ask's annoyware?

Sun... (2, Interesting)

Gription (1006467) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143320)

Java is my common irritant with this. Whenever you run the install it hides a checkbox to load some type of crapware by default. I think it actually looks at your computer because it never seems to offer a piece of junk that you already have. It has offered the Google toolbar, MSN toolbar, Open Office, and now:
Bing...

Re:Surprising... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143280)

Flamebait?
Seriously, how big a fanboy would you have to be to call this flamebait?

Re:Who would've though? (3, Funny)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142680)

Yeah. They should have named it 10^1000.

Re:Who would've though? (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142692)

Especially since Bing [bingcarburetor.com] are mostly known for small engine carburetors.

Re:Who would've though? (2, Interesting)

Vintermann (400722) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142886)

No, Bing [wikipedia.org] is a law professor known for having translated several good science fiction books to Norwegian long ago, and now being completely out of touch, in particular by having spectacularly un-enlightened views on copyright enforcement the need for IP law reform.

Worst thing is, Microsoft actually paid good money for his domain name.

Re:Who would've though? (2, Funny)

shoemilk (1008173) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142720)

Ned: Ned... Ryerson. "Needlenose Ned"? "Ned the Head"? C'mon, buddy. Case Western High. Ned Ryerson: I did the whistling belly-button trick at the high school talent show? Bing! Ned Ryerson: got the shingles real bad senior year, almost didn't graduate? Bing, again. Ned Ryerson: I dated your sister Mary Pat a couple times until you told me not to anymore? Well?

Phil: Ned Ryerson?

Ned: Bing!

Phil: Bing.

Re:Who would've though? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142734)

Ha, nice.

Re:Who would've though? (1, Funny)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143038)

This is not offtopic.

Btw Ned, can you take the day off?

Re:Who would've though? (2, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142790)

Bing is really easy name to remember. It's actually a great name from MS.

Re:Who would've though? (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142874)

Yes, it's quite the four letter word.

Re:Who would've though? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142926)

as if msn or live were so hard to remember

Re:Who would've though? (3, Funny)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142982)

It even works as verb: Keep binging that chicken! [bing.com]

Re:Who would've though? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143064)

Plus, it is a recursive acronym. BING: Bing Is Not Google.

Re:Who would've though? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143326)

some would say that's the worst feature

Re:Who would've though? (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143124)

Yeah, but last time I used it in front of my mom, I got slapped!

Is it trickery? (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142684)

Are they only counting the places where people go to the page and do a search or are they counting all the 'embedded' searches which are snuck into other apps like IE and Windows Live to boost numbers?

Thought so.

Re:Is it trickery? (3, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142760)

And given that, it's astonishing that Microsoft can still only bamboozle 10% of "Darren Defaults" users into eating their dogfood.

Re:Is it trickery? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142792)

Google search is embedded into a hojillion websites as well as having browser plugins / toolbars for pretty much every browser. If "embedded searches" are counted it'll probably be to Google's advantage.

(I'm not saying that the study isn't trickery. I wouldn't know either way.)

Re:Is it trickery? (2, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142864)

The trickery should be clear because microsoft is trying to gain marketshare by having articles posted every time they get 1/100^56th of a marketshare increase, even though nobody wants that piece of crap. 3%, 5%, 6%, etc. It's search results are crap even. You didn't hear google publicizing every 1% do ya?

Re:Is it trickery? (3, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142908)

Why would Google publish their marketshare changes? Especially because only way they can go is down, unless they can gain marketshare in China (from Baidu) or Russia (from yandex).

Re:Is it trickery? (4, Interesting)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142914)

I don't think Microsoft sponsored this article. I believe it just one of many periodic reports on search provider market share.

And personally, I don't think Bing is crap. It actually has some innovative features. I just don't have any incentive to switch from Google, especially with gmail and personalized home pages.

Would you care to tell me why you think Bing is a "piece of crap"?

Re:Is it trickery? (2, Informative)

Lillebo (1561251) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143120)

Well, one is tempted to mention the fact that Bing has been made only for the purpose of stealing users and customers from Google who built a search engine for the purpose of making information more accessible and easy to find. It just happened to be a fantastic business idea as well... Therefore at least one reason Bing is piece of crap is because of it's evilness!

Re:Is it trickery? (0, Offtopic)

areusche (1297613) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142848)

And why is this modded troll? This is by far one of the most insightful comment here.

Re:Is it trickery? (5, Insightful)

jonadab (583620) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142890)

> Are they only counting the places where people go
> to the page and do a search or are they counting
> all the 'embedded' searches which are snuck into
> other apps like IE and Windows Live to boost numbers?

Don't be an idiot. This is Bing we're talking about, not Yahoo. Do you really think 10% of people go to it on purpose? Outside of extreme geekdom, nobody's even heard of it yet.

Basically what this means is IE8 has, mostly as a result of automatic updates, reached about 10% market share among people who think the browser's location bar is a search box and haven't bothered to express an opinion about what search engine it should use. IE8 ships with "Live Search", alias Bing, as the default; IE6 and IE7 used MSN Search as their default, so what we're seeing here is mostly new-version uptake.

There are also a few geeks using it on purpose to try it out, but even if 100% of the slashdot-reading population did that it wouldn't be anywhere near 1% market share, let alone 10%. And the single most popular search engine among the slashdot-reading geekdom is almost certainly still Google at this point.

No, the bulk of the 10% we're talking about here consists of people using the IE8 UI.

Re:Is it trickery? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142938)

>Don't be an idiot. ...the bulk of the 10% we're talking about here consists of people using the IE8 UI.

Um, that's what I said.

Mod parent up or I curse thee (3, Funny)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143036)

These increases are very likely to correlate (causally, no less!) to Infection Explorer 8 being pushed hard, leveraging the majority number of computers that have M-Windows installed.

Capitalism is about having or obtaining a large quantity of something at price P, "talking it up" through Marketing or other bovine excrement until people want it, and then setting new price NP > P when they come asking for it.

Or, in clearer Slashdot format:

1) Have a large install base.
2) Push your browser hard onto the install base and set the default page to Bing (just as Google arranged with Mozilla).
3) ???? (bovine excrement)
4) PROFIT!!!

Re:Is it trickery? (1)

Lillebo (1561251) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143160)

Parent should get a higher meta score than 1?

Re:Is it trickery? (3, Informative)

jambarama (784670) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143016)

All the obvious product placement [tvbythenumbers.com] and subtle placement in trashy reality shows ("lets 'bing' it") probably haven't hurt either.

Re:Is it trickery? (1)

conureman (748753) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143168)

I tried Bing once, algorithm didn't work well for me. Before optimisation, Google used to put my result on top every time, nowadays I usually have to scroll down a bit, but not far.

Re:Is it trickery? (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143264)

No, it's all legit. Most of the increase in searches is coming from 15th Congressional District out in Arizona. They must really be spreading the word on Bing out there.

Being the new default doesn't hurt either (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142686)

It probably doesn't hurt that IE 8 updates make Bing the default search engine if you go the 'express' route. Even adding google as a search provider is weird - you can't just select it, you have to go to a web page and download the search engine provider package or whatever.

Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142824)

I recently installed the Google search provider in IE8. Not only did I have to "Find More Providers", but Google was hidden on the second page of the default list and mislabeled as "Google Search Suggestions". Accidents.

Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either (4, Informative)

jefu (53450) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143116)

I had the same experience - it took some digging to figure out how to make Google the default search provider, and there were several Googles listed on the page where Google eventually showed up and no good information on which to choose. Worse yet, I was in the process of installing Windows 7 and it decided to install updates after I'd done this, and somehow managed to reset the default search provider to Bing in one of those.

Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143284)

You should know better.
It is well known that Nanny Microsoft wants to keep you forever inside her coccoon. This is just her way of wrapping yet another layer around you.
Think of the Children. Nanny MS knows best...

Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either (1)

csartanis (863147) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143268)

Strange, it was 3rd in the list last time I looked. (Last year sometime... I don't use IE)

Well (2, Insightful)

MistrX (1566617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142690)

Still 90% to go.

I wonder if they get that far. I think Google is so fixated in the minds of people that it's hard to get it out. It's even on the homepages of not only younger people but also the digital elderly who are less computer savvy. Bing has to offer more and better search results then Google does before it gains any more then 20% of the market I think.

Don't forget, humans are conservative creatures, they only like changing when it saves money or reduces fat quickly.

Re:Well (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142810)

People won't switch unless it's better - no shit. How long did it take you to come up with this?

Re:Well (0)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142842)

You think Bing seriously thinks they will gain 100% marketshare? Also remember that either Bing or Google are not the most used search engine everywhere - Chinese #1 is Baidu, Russian's and russian speaking countries #1 is yandex.ru.

For that matter, Google has "only" 65-70% marketshare.

And Bing is quickly adding features that go over Google - like giving Wolfram Alpha's results [slashdot.org] in the search query. I'm actually considering changing Bing as my default search engine, since it has more features and the results are just as good.

Re:Well (1, Flamebait)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142904)

Wolfram Alpha? LOL, it's garbage.

But nice shill, I'll give you that, you MS cowboy.

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143094)

So which competitor of MS paid you to write negative comments?
Cmon... out with it shill..

Re:Well (1)

azav (469988) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143190)

No, but their marketing department will say they will.

New campaign by MS (1)

NoYob (1630681) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142960)

Well to google is googling, does that mean to use Bing it's binging?

Why yes, I'm binging on the internet and I still can't get my fill!

Re:New campaign by MS (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143180)

Better than "Googling" on the internet, which gives me a mental image of some creepy guy leering at security cam footage from a ladies toilet that he downloaded from Limewire.

Re:Well (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143020)

True, but how the mighty have fallen over the years.

Twelve years ago AltaVista was king.

MSN/Live had about the same market share before (4, Insightful)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142706)

It's not really news. Bing is just a rebranding of MSN Search. In June 2007, MSN had a spike of 16% market share (http://blog.compete.com/2007/07/09/june-search-share-msn-live-google-yahoo-ask/). Given the huge marketing behind Bing as well as the conversion of practically all search engines on every site that has anything to do with Microsoft, I would say, meh, no big deal.

Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before (2, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142862)

Bing is not just a rebrand of Live/MSN Search. When they launched, they added tons of features and introduced new indexing and ranking algorithms that actually bought the results pretty much to same level as Google's, even if not over.

Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before (5, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143056)

Sure they did some work on creating Bing, but even so it did replace both MSN Search and Live Search. So it really is no surprise at all that Bing has about the same market share than those combined.

Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143132)

Yawn.

Call me when you hear real people* say they "Binged it". Google is a freakin' verb. Hard to beat that.

* I mean real people, not some marketing droids or college kids in the Microsoft Club or who attend Windows 7 (tm) parties.

Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142878)

that is funny. So really Microsoft has lost another 6% market share instead of gaining 10%.

Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before (1)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143174)

that is funny. So really Microsoft has lost another 6% market share instead of gaining 10%.

Not so hard to explain.
The other day I was forced to go to MS's home page to look for their free PowerPoint viewer.
I entered "free powerpoint viewer" into the search box at the top of the page.

Of course this resulted in some strange server error...

There was another search box on the error page where I repeated the query and then found what I was looking for.

Strange, the very same search yields to vastly different results...

But this IS MS after all, where good ideas are typically implemented rather badly.

Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142708)

If 10% Bing is "shit", then what does that make 1% Linux?

Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux (1, Insightful)

gavron (1300111) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142774)

Yes Bing is what you said it is.

There is no "1% Linux". Perhaps you're confused by the many distributions of Linux that offer you a choice between a Desktop (ubuntu), a server supporting the latest hardware (Fedora), a server which runs forever (CentOS), a bootable USB... well you get the point. With Linux you have choices.

So please take your attitude over to your 10% bing *LOL* (MSN search down 5 points in two months isn't a "win for bing", it's a LOSS for microsoft) with you and have a home professional ultimate day.

Ehud

Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143108)

Perhaps you're confused by the many distributions of Linux that offer you a choice between a Desktop (ubuntu), a server supporting the latest hardware (Fedora), a server which runs forever (CentOS)

Since when is Fedora not for desktops?

a bootable USB

By now, most popular distributions' live CDs can be installed to a 1 GB SD card or USB stick using UNetbootin.

But seriously, the "1% desktop Linux" probably measures desktop-like tasks such as web browsing. If a site with wide appeal gets 1% of its hits from web browsers that self-report as having been built for Linux, then close to 1% of web users use Linux.

Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux (3, Funny)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142830)

If 10% Bing is "shit", then what does that make 1% Linux?

Invisible to writers of malware?

Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux (2, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142836)

...not backed by a global monopoly with 20+ years of entrenchment.

Just think of all of the captive Windows and IE users out there that can have MS-Whatever shoved down their throats.

Defaults.... (3, Insightful)

Dartz-IRL (1640117) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142712)

I wonder if there's any relation between this, and the number of users who've upgraded too IE8 and just not bothered/realised that they can change the default in-browser search client?

Re:Defaults.... (1)

Eirenarch (1099517) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142764)

No because MSN/Live has been the default search engine in IE since XP SP2 or something like this so IE8 has nothing to do with it.

Re:Defaults.... (1)

Dartz-IRL (1640117) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142996)

True, I didn't think of that. It does depend on how the statisitics are being calculated. Bing is the defualt IE8 search provider. While it offers a choice, most people just click through the defaults to get browsing. Are these registered -for want of a better way to say it- as Bing users then?

Re:Defaults.... (3, Insightful)

StealthBadger (168482) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143008)

Except for the fact that you have to jump through extra hoops AFTER installation to get to Google's entry in the IE8 search provider listing.

Shocked (5, Interesting)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142714)

I'm shocked - *SHOCKED* - I tell ya. I find it hard to believe that ComScore [cnet.com] would report such a thing.

Yes, I know the numbers may be valid but when a company is reporting on another company, with whom they are partnered, I find it hard to invest any credibility in the report.

Fallout from Windows Live? (2, Insightful)

auntieNeo (1605623) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142716)

Yes, but how much of this market share comes from old Windows Live Search users? A quick Google search (haha, guess I'm not in that 10%) reveals old statistics that placed Live at around 10% also. Is this really news?

Re:Fallout from Windows Live? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143126)

I guess the news is that there was a period of time during which Live Search fell below 10 percent despite being the default in 90 percent of desktop PCs.

The Deal Seekers Are Probably Partly Responsible (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142726)

Go ahead, you can probably blame some of this on me -- and people like me. I was in the market for an XBox 360 Arcade (with intent to add a HDD on my own) and had found through slick deals mention that if you went to bing and searched for Dell and clicked on the cashback link you could get an XBox 360 Arcade for 15%-30% off depending on when you do it.

Now, from what I read, your mileage may vary. Meaning you got anywhere from $20 to $30 off the price but you still paid $200. It was just recredited to your paypal account. It happened/happens with other large retailers like Amazon so I found myself periodically using Bing to squeeze 10% off a purchase here or there ... or even just hitting it up every couple days to see what I could find. Kept with Google on my other searches (Firefox and Chrome still put me through the same default search engine). But for a while, my desire to save a couple bucks probably pushed up Bing's marketshare. I can't help it, I blame my overly frugal parents.

I'm not sure how this was orchestrated. I mean, I thought commodities like DVDs and CDs and XBoxes were already shaven down to the some of the lowest prices online ... so what happened and who is giving me the money back? Is it Microsoft putting ad dollars to hard work for Bing or the retailer giving up some more profit margin in exchange for moving product? If anyone could shed light on how I was able to get better deals on -- sometimes any -- products on Amazon by first going through Bing, I'd appreciate it. And this isn't like a few pennies click through ad revenue, this is like tens of dollars across several purchases. Am I really that inept at how the world works to not figure this out?

So in the end, I apologize for causing all that cancer. You are correct to direct your slurs at me but I assure you that as soon as those deals dry up I will stop using Bing.

why i stuck with google (1)

uncanny (954868) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142740)

I actually found them "re-branding" their search to be catchier insulting. it's like pop music, they are just trying to be trendy to cater to people who are easily amused. bing is just a shiny object.

Re:why i stuck with google (1)

datapharmer (1099455) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142932)

so what you are saying is that bing is actually just b(l)ing?

Re:why i stuck with google (1)

Vintermann (400722) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142934)

"Bing is just a shiny object."

No, that would be bling. Bing is just.. bing.

Will Birg pay for News next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142748)

Though Murdoch and Wolfram be analytical opposites, their property behaviors seem similar.

Can Alpha parse FOX?

Market Share Gains (4, Interesting)

TheFlannelAvenger (870106) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142770)

I've been seeing a lot of machines lately with the Bing Toolbar installed, and the client having no idea how it got there. Automated updates on a Windows machine are nice, but sometimes you get the latest helpful tool bar offering along with it. Sun Java, Adobe Flash, etc. often offer tool bars and other goodies that although are not harmful, might be unwanted. I'm not sure how much this would skew actual results, but it has to count for a few points of market share and larger reported install base of tool bars and hence search engine use.

Re:Market Share Gains (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143032)

Yeah but just imagine how many of those machines also have the Yahoo toolbar installed too!

Well... (1)

Iburnaga (1089755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142786)

This may have to do with the fact that I.E. uses it automatically and many users don't think about switching. I don't think we'll see people Binging anytime soon.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142968)

Since I don't use Windows, I didn't know that. However, if that is the case, am I wrong when I predict another antitrust case in the future? MS using its desktop monopoly to gain a search engine monopoly...? If eventually 99 % of Internet users use Bing for their searching needs, what will happen to google?

Duh. (0, Redundant)

headhot (137860) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142814)

I wonder if this has to do with Window 7. Its the default search, and they bury the hell out of google to replace it.

I'm not sure I believe those numbers (5, Interesting)

CoffeePlease (596791) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142820)

When I look at AWstats for my site: [thedesignspace.net]
Google 18020 pages (linked to from Google)
Google (Images) 976 pages
Bing 226 pages


And from Google Analytics:
Top traffic sources:
Google 26,738 visits 85.24%
Yahoo 676 visits 2.16%
Bing 346 visits 1.10%
Admittedly the site is not about shopping or entertainment - it's mainly about technical topics which maybe colors the results.

Re:I'm not sure I believe those numbers (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142952)

You can't really compare traffic source percents in to how many users actually use what search engines. Your site may and most likely does rank differently in each search engine, and like you said the democracy of your visitors also affects.

Re:I'm not sure I believe those numbers (1)

cyrano.mac (916276) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143054)

Nope, it's not because it's about technical stuff. I run a number of sites about things as general as food and see exactly the same thing. Plus, I also see people arriving on pages with the wrong search terms. It's impossible to check if the visitors are on the right page and Bing just reports an erroneous search, or if the visitors were looking for something else. And when you check some of the incoming links from Bing, the site doesn't even appear on the list a couple of days later. Stuff like that happens to Google too, but only very seldom.

Amazing what money will buy (3, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142876)

Re:Amazing what money will buy (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143104)

It's funny you put it like that, because looking at the current NetCraft stats [netcraft.com] it seems like IIS is back to about the market share it had in 2006.

BING stands for... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30142912)

Bing Is Not Google

Bing market share is ill-gotten (1)

rmcclelland (1383541) | more than 4 years ago | (#30142986)

It's not surprising they have gained market share, but it is not because of the quality of the search engine, rather heavy handed forcing of the engine on unwitting customers. Somehow, many of my friends and families computers started defaulting to the bing search engine in both IE and FireFox, perhaps after a windows update. Microsoft changed the defaults of the browsers without giving the user an option and it was not trivial to return the default search engine to Google. I'm not sure exactly what happened, but I didn't like it.

Anti-Google vs Anti-Microsoft (0, Troll)

Danathar (267989) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143000)

I think there is always going to be a segment of the userbase that hates a "top dog" and will switch if they think one particular company or product is getting too powerful. The differences between searches in Google and Bing are minor, so being that is the case why would 10% switch? For no reason other than because there is satisfaction in not doing what everybody else is doing.

Just my 2 cents.

Huh? (1)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143002)

"two big percentage points"? No, all points are the same. Please don't try and editorialize or sensationalize.

And also, these stats put another way say that Google et al have 90% marketshare. Windows also has a 90% marketshare and we refer to that as a monopoly.

Re:Huh? (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143218)

Google actually only has 65-70% marketshare. And for example in Russia yandex.ru is the largest search engine, and Baidu is in China.

Must be all that Cashback. (1)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143046)

I just got mine from the laptop I purchased a while back. That's a pretty nice incentive...

Well...it's my homepage anyway (4, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143052)

Everyone is speaking of trickery to get the users. I switched my homepage over by choice - and I'm a Mac Safari user.

Reason? Much against my expectation, I found I liked the daily pictures rather than the blank of Google. I fully expected to prefer the clean look of Google (after all, it was that rather than quality of results which made me move from Alta Vista to Google many years ago.) but instead I found it was time for a change and I like the different appearance and the tagging they do I find interesting.

Search quality results - variable. Some good, some not so. It's no effort to just click the search box top-right and start using Google instead however, so effectively by having Bing as the homepage with a quickly accessible Google search I've got quick access to two potential sets of results.

So yes, I switched over for the pretty pictures. Yes, that's a shallow reason. It's doing no harm however, and I like it.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Well...it's my homepage anyway (2, Informative)

csartanis (863147) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143192)

If you used Firefox (or Opera) you could use greasemonkey (or userjs) to change Google's background to Bing's. Then you could get your pretty pictures and quality search results at the same time.

No wonder. (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143072)

With the Google top 1000 sites being theoretically offered massive cash handouts for abandoning Google it's obvious why consumers would switch to Bing. After all, regular consumers work just like the stock market and adjust their behavior based on any rumor, right?

and the #1 searched for phrase on Bing is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143076)

White Christmas

I wonder what happens when you Google Bing (1, Interesting)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143084)

Re:I wonder what happens when you Google Bing (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143250)

What is your point? Both return each other as first result, if it was something along those lines.

Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143142)

...I, for one, welcome our new websearch overlords.

10% over what? (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143176)

Is this 10 percent greater than the combination of MSN and Windows Live Search? Is it a statistical bump (has the combination of MSN and Windows Live occasionally bump like that)?

Warming to Bing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143204)

As a 'hands-on creative' (louche wastrel) who has to source a lot of random materials and knick-knacks from around the internet, I have to admit to turning to Bing more frequently.

Google seems to struggle with practical relevancy in its results - Bing seems to return pages of companies offering the things I'm looking for, in my country (UK).

Don't get me wrong - as an ex-web monkey, I've loathed Microsoft's online game for years, but if they can even begin to offer an alternative to THE GOOGLE, that's got to be a good thing.

That said - Bing still issn't looking likely to replace Google as my default search for a wee while yet.

Keep it simple, stupid! (1)

hexed_2050 (841538) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143244)

Google's page is simple and pure. There is one logo and a search bar.
Bing has decided to make their search page bloated with graphics that actually update.
Do you know how painful it is to remote desktop or vnc to someone's computer that has yahoo, bing, or some other search engine besides google set as their homepage? grr!

Article is slightly misleading... (1)

pdboddy (620164) | more than 4 years ago | (#30143274)

Bing doesn't have a 10% share of total searches, according to the scores. The total search % for all Microsoft sites is 9.9% however, which includes Bing and other search options from all the MS sites. Just as the total search % for Google includes all Google sites, not just the main Google Search engine.

If you look at the expanded search stats below the first blurb on ComScore's press release, and do the very simple math, Bing has 5.6% of total search. Just as the main Google search engine does not have 65.4% of total searches, but 44.4%.

I do wish folks would read and do the math before claiming Bing or Google has such and such a percentage.

Bing != All MS search queries

But but but..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30143314)

Microsoft sucks at anything they do!!!
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>