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!

Bing Search Overtakes Yahoo

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the climbing-to-the-top dept.

Google 169

SharkLaser writes "Microsoft's Bing search engine has overtaken Yahoo for the first time. While both Bing, Yahoo and a bunch of meta-search engines like the privacy-oriented DuckDuckGo use Bing's back-end, it clearly shows Yahoo's declining market share. comScore has also released its search data for 2011 — overall, Bing gained 3.1% of market share while Yahoo lost 1.5% and Google lost 0.7%. Yahoo's new CEO Scott Thompson has lots of work to do."

cancel ×

169 comments

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

Yahoo? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672074)

That thing still has a search engine?

Re:Yahoo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672092)

>That thing still has a search engine?

lol... after 14 years of google i also struggle to find yahoo's search bar between all those ads...

the yahoo frontpage is an asshole..

Re:Yahoo? (3, Informative)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672106)

So use http://search.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com]

Re:Yahoo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672158)

>So use http://search.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com]

uhuhu.. you should bookmark it..

Re:Yahoo? (2)

johnsnails (1715452) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672244)

Just tried yahoo search for the first time... the results page looks quite similar to google, surprised me.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672282)

>Just tried yahoo search for the first time... the results page looks quite similar to google, surprised me.

Yes, totally. Their background white is also much whiter than the google background white... I can read much better when I use Yahoo... It is like I have a 20/20 vision for search results..

Not a fanboi.. but I totally think Yahoo is underrated and should be used by everyone..

Re:Yahoo? (4, Insightful)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673606)

Anyone who bases a search engines capabilities on contrast of whiteness (?) is either trying to make a joke, or is indeed a fanboy.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

jank1887 (815982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672932)

I accidentally searched on ask.com the other day too (no, really, the library had the toolbar installed). when the results came up, I realized that the entire first page was sponsored ads, with only two 'search results' on the page being real results. BUT, the layout of the results was very much like google's. colors, layout, etc. Not sure how much of that's just defaulting to browser color scheme for links, but I don't think all of it is.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673712)

Well, Google's search result styling is very much like other search engines that preceded it. Infoseek comes to mind...

Re:Yahoo? (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673594)

Nah, we've evolved past it.

Re:Yahoo? (5, Insightful)

dna_(c)(tm)(r) (618003) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672238)

I smell a marketing campaign targeted against Google. Yahoo is powered by Bing. DuckduckGoo also powered by Bing.

I still prefer Google's track record on privacy over MS's or FB's. Not that I'm not worried about privacy, it is getting very difficult to escape the all seeing eyes...

Re:Yahoo? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672268)

I was using Yahoo! for years. Up until they started pushing pop up/pop under ads. At that point they were Google powered, and I asked myself - "if I'm just getting Google results, why not use Google?"

If their search engine is Bing - why not just use Bing?

The new CEO needs to figure out the answer to that question.

Re:Yahoo? (2)

TheCRAIGGERS (909877) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672832)

If their search engine is Bing - why not just use Bing?

The new CEO needs to figure out the answer to that question.

More than likely, his answer will be the same as his predecessor: "people don't go to Yahoo for search results: they go for the /experience/."

Or some equally inane marketing bullshit. Anyway, it's an interesting idea- I'll give them that. Google already has the market pretty well cornered on a search page that only does search, so Yahoo is trying to capture the "people who want a search page so cluttered with info you can barely locate the search bar" demographic. All joking aside, it is somewhat nice to get the news-at-a-glance that yahoo offers at those times I need to check my junkmail on mail.yahoo.

Re:Yahoo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673602)

They use the same search backend but Yahoo does tweak the results. Yahoo also has different autocorrection/synonym-replacing -- though the latter has been giving me very shitty results recently. Furthermore the user interface is different -- I've been using Yahoo simply because they're the only ones who still put the cached links in the main search results instead of having to click or mouse-over something.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

DaVince21 (1342819) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673866)

If their search engine is Bing - why not just use Bing?

Becayse DuckDuckGo is apparently geared towards privacy, whereas Bing probably couldn't care less (as long as they're not getting sued enough about some inconsistency or whatever). Also, both DuckDuckGo tweak or add to the search results in their own way.

Re:Yahoo? (4, Interesting)

ajo_arctus (1215290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672390)

I wondered that too. And the funny thing is, if it's the case, it might work -- I didn't know that DuckDuckGo was powered by Bing and, now that I do, it changes the way I feel about them. All of a sudden they aren't the champions of freedom that I thought them to be.

I just went over to their site and searched around. No mention anywhere that they're Bing powered. They must know that if they do have ties to Bing and they try to hide it, it'll hurt their image.

I wonder if it is FUD. There's just one article I found about DuckDuckGo being Bing powered (because of the similar low placement of Libre-Office when you search for Open Source Office on DDG and Bing), but it doesn't have anything concrete, just 'what ifs' and 'maybes'. Does anybody have a more official announcement on the matter? Do we know if DDG get money from Bing for using their results?

Re:Yahoo? (2)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672424)

I wondered that too. And the funny thing is, if it's the case, it might work -- I didn't know that DuckDuckGo was powered by Bing and, now that I do, it changes the way I feel about them.

Wow, so just because you only now realized that they use MS technology their search engine is suddenly worse? Talk about hating just for the purpose of hating.

And you get mention of Bing when you search something and scroll down. There's this:

results by Bing

built with Yahoo

What does this mean?

Re:Yahoo? (4, Insightful)

iserlohn (49556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672460)

I don't think the distaste is for the technology, although there may be technical reasons. The distaste is for Microsoft's commercial practices.

So, you should dislike Apple too. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672570)

The distaste is for Microsoft's commercial practices.

Considering what has happened in the last few years, Microsoft is run by bunch of Boy Scouts compared to your typical Wall Streeter.

But let's go further back, Enron. Or even further to the 19th century robber barrons, some of whom actually had people killed for striking. I have yet to hear of MS having Pinkerton Security start shooting at people.

But when you actaully look at MS' business practices, their "crime" seems to be to have bullied their way into putting thier OS on 90%+ computers. Whoop-ti-do.

Yeah, yeah, yeah - a court found them to be a monopoly. And now that MS' market power is being erroded beyond beleif, you have another company, Apple doing things that you should be developing a "distaste" for their business practices too. No? I have never known MS to demand $99 per year to just test your own code on your own machine/device like Apple does.

tl;dr - Get a life.

Re:So, you should dislike Apple too. (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672692)

You're a fucking moron DCTech/NorthKorea/CmdrPony/whoever-else-you-are.

Yeah. [insert thing here] isn't bad - for proof, just look at all those people raping and killing people!

When you actually look at MS business practices, you see them being the sleaze of the earth. "you have to smile when you pull the trigger", etc. Assholes. Assholes that you admire, obviously.

tl;dr You're a fucking moron.

Re:So, you should dislike Apple too. (1)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672962)

Why are you calling me a moron when answering an AC? Besides, Microsoft hardly did anything evil. Both Apple and Google are being much more evil now a days. Gee, your OS comes with a browser so you don't need to ftp to some address you don't even know to get a browser. Outrageous!

Re:So, you should dislike Apple too. (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673086)

Because you constantly switch your main account, and you probably use AC too.

I don't care about the browser coming with the OS thing, I care about the stuff that I bothered to post a month or two ago but can't be arsed repeating to you. The management culture in MS in the 90s was demonstrated as completely rotten, and Ballmer is still in charge. Nothing has changed apart from they have to watch their step more. Both MS and Intel have used their monopoly positions to try to scare their clients into not dealing with competitors.

Re:So, you should dislike Apple too. (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673968)

Sorry, but no. Microsoft is still as of today essentially mugging people (both device makers and by extension their buyers) by charging for the FAT patents.

The damn patent consists essentially on converting "longfilename.txt" to "LONGFI~1.TXT" - behold the innovation! - and for that they are able to extort any organization that wants to work with their monopolist OS (which was in large part gained through shady deals with OEMs).

Others bad acts never excuse your own (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672700)

Something you should note, digest and accept.

Just because Pol Pot didn't kill as many as Hitler or Stalin or Mao doesn't mean he should get a pass for his evil acts.

Neither should Microsoft because of other companies acting badly.

Re:Yahoo? (4, Informative)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672532)

Here's the info [duckduckgo.com] you're looking for.

They have their own webcrawler, but it's young and doesn't have much data yet, so general search results come mostly from Bing/Yahoo, judging by few queries.

Let's wait and see if it'll grow out of conveniency privacy/aggregation wrapper to become a real competing search engine.

Powered by Bing? (2)

MurukeshM (1901690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673330)

Not exactly. [duckduckgo.com]

Re:Yahoo? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673608)

Your post is exactly the reason why I hate Slashdot. And it's exactly the reason why I've become a Microsoft fan.

People around here are so hopelessly infected with "Microsoft hatred disease" (as Linus called it) that it has skewed your entire world. None of your technology opinions should be considered reliable or well-informed because according to you, technology doesn't matter. It's all feelings. And your feelings are that no matter what Microsoft does, they're evil. They've always been evil and they always will be evil and you want them destroyed.

Re:Yahoo? (4, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672432)

FB and google both have business models built around extensive tracking and profiling of users. It is their source of income, their purpose as companies. Google's whole search business is just a way to gather user data, as is facebook's social networking. You can expect them to invade your privacy - if they don't, they aren't doing their jobs right.

Re:Yahoo? (2)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672886)

I smell a marketing campaign targeted against Google. Yahoo is powered by Bing.

And the changes Nov-Dec 2011 are:
* +0.5 Google
* +0.1 Bing
* -0.6 Yahoo

In other words, 0.5% of the global search volume moved from Bing-powered to Google-powered in a single month.

Re:Yahoo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673120)

I personally don't search on yahoo anymore because I can go to bing and use it directly. I don't see a value add to use yahoo anymore.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

Ragica (552891) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673144)

ixquick.com (or startpage.com) is a privacy oriented meta search engine that's been around a long time. Its current incarnation anonymously repackages google search results. DuckDuckGo is pretty cool. But I don't like Bing's results as much; and also I've been using ixquick for a long time... you hear about duckduckgo a lot these days, but sadly rarely hear of ixquick/startpage.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

helix2301 (1105613) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673428)

Bing is also the default search provider in IE which helps this process.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673950)

As opposed to Google being default search provider in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari and tons of other browsers?

Re:Yahoo? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672302)

>That thing still has a search engine?

lol... after 14 years of google i also struggle to find yahoo's search bar between all those ads...

the yahoo frontpage is an asshole..

No that it goatse you are thinking of.

Re:Yahoo? (1)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672984)

I can't take this seriously. Right at the top. Nice big search entry box. Bright yello, big, "Search" button.

Mind you, I just go to my.yahoo.com.

No SharkLaser/DCTech first post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672852)

You faggots must be getting lazy.

Re:No SharkLaser/DCTech first post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673052)

He's higher than first post

lame (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672080)

the search button on that webpage i did for my grandmother overtook Yahoo one day later..

I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise... (5, Interesting)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672090)

Here's how I have contributed:

I used to employ Google for all kinds of web searches, but over the last few month's, I realized (by accident), that Bing's video search returns were better presented (but not necessarily more relevant) than Google's.

Particularly, I have come to love Bing's playing of the videos when the mouse is hovered over them. Google has nothing close! Google should watch out.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (5, Interesting)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672096)

That's a great feature in Bing, actually. Especially if looking for more adult material. Another thing is that Google has really crapped their design lately. It relies heavily on javascript and they've gone and hidden the cached link in the side panel that opens when you hover it. It's slow and clumsy. Same thing happened to their image search. It's sad because Google always took pride in providing clear, useful interface, but not anymore. I guess they get more ad clicks by frustrating users who use the normal search.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672126)

Google's image search fucknuttery revamp certainly pushed me in to trying alternatives.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (3, Interesting)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672132)

I like the image search, too. I started using Bing when Google+ came out and every website wanted to have me report to Google through a javascript tied to google.com, but blocking google.com meant search became really lame, so I started using Bing and sandboxed Google into Chrome. I find Bing's results to be better on obscure searches where Gooogle hasn't had someone pick out the best result already, but for most searches Bing is not quite there, but it is getting there. On a side note, I had never used Chrome before, so in 2011 I contributed to the increase in users using Bing and Chrome, however, Firefox is still my regular browser and I use Google and Bing about equally.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672812)

I believe the way the cache links and hover to view a preview are now there like thatto so google can say it takes user action to get those to show up so google is not technically infringing copyright, the user is requesting it, etc. Kinda annoying really.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (4, Funny)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673336)

That's a great feature in Bing, actually. Especially if looking for more adult material.

so Bing is the porn search engine of choice?

gives "let me Bing that for you" a whole different meaning.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673764)

Google is turning into the proverbial "horse designed by committee".

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38674016)

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise.

That's a great feature in Bing, actually. Especially if looking for more adult material.

Really? No. Surely you're just fucking with us now. Right?

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672210)

I believe I'm having an OMG moment (or a woosh)(by accident).

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (1, Insightful)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672396)

Getting the astroturfing in early.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (0, Troll)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673342)

Indeed. The astroturfers have mod points as well. I can see your comment possibly being modded "offtopic" but only an idiot or a shill would have marked it "troll". I wish someone would mod you back up.

Bing didn't pass Yahoo because Bing's search engine is any good, it passed Yahoo because Bing's interface is clean and sharp and fast -- compared to Yahoo's incredibly shitty interface; plus, Yahoo search uses Bing's engine. Of COURSE Bing would pass them. Duh.

A fellow earlier responded to one of the shills saying that he contributed by mistake because of MS's underhanded tactics, and I have as well. A programn I DLed from C|NET changed Firefox's default search engine to Bing and even added a goddamned Bing toolbar. No more DLs from C|NET for me! That's just fucking sleazy. If you have to trick people into using your product, your product must REALLY suck.

When you have to resort to paying shills to post and moderate on messageboards, you're pretty goddamned sleazy as well. Even if their products didn't suck I'd still avoid them if possible just because of their sleaze. It's insulting and annoying.

Now go ahead and mod me troll as well, shills.

Bing video search (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672498)

What's up with Bind Video Search? Is it good or is it whack?

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (1)

Sport89 (1320659) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672836)

I've contributed as well, but unwittingly as a result of msn.com's misleading "Feature Story" links. Each link is not really an article, but rather a pre-canned Bing search. This sort of practice has got to be skewing results, since people who click these links did not necessarily intend to use Bing.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672974)

"I have come to love Bing's playing of the videos when the mouse is hovered over them."

If only Yahoo! News could incorporate that so the videos, that are always "no longer available", show that message instead of users having to wait through an advertisement and 12 cookies. Sadly, advertisements and cookies are the only 2 things that seem to work properly on Yahoo! any longer. IMHO of course.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (3, Insightful)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673006)

And even more importantly those videos come directly from Bing so they bypass webfilters.

Re:I believe I've also contributed to Bing's rise. (1)

caseih (160668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673490)

Google's pulled a lot of dumb moves recently. It used to be that if you disabled instant search you could get your search bar back at the bottom of the search results page. Now it's just gone permanently. You have no choice but to scroll back to the top of the page to change your query. Google says this is by design; they want you to use instant search, so you can just hit backspace and edit your search query string from anywhere on the page. But half the time I can't remember exactly what I typed, so I still have to scroll back up. And even then that's only if I can stand instant search. Bing, on the other hand, presents the traditional results page thank goodness.

Things like this combined with Google's increasing inability to return relevant results (their results are poisoned by link aggregators and years-old irrelevant results), is likely driving more than a few people away.

I call bullshit. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672100)

There's no way they got 3.1 people to use bing.

Re:I call bullshit. (1)

billcarson (2438218) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673926)

Do you refer to people using Windows 3.1?

The results still suck (4, Informative)

Monoman (8745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672108)

MS is making inroads through partnerships, interesting presentation of search results(like video searches), and putting using Bing as the default in their OS (just like they did with IE). However, I still get better results with Google over Bing even when looking for stuff on microsoft.com. It really becomes frustrating when you are on a MS site and can't find something (that you know exists) because the site's search tool is powered by Bing. Yes, Google needs competition but Bing isn't it. Sad for MS but true.

Re:The results still suck (5, Interesting)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672138)

Yes, Google needs competition but Bing isn't it. Sad for MS but true.

At this point there won't be anyone else than can compete with Google either. Now a days search engines rely heavily on datamining and especially keyword data supplied by users when searching. It's also the reason why Google datamines so much. With their market share they get significantly more data than Bing, especially long tail keywords and keywords people search less often.

Google also relies on looking which result users choose and if they return back from that site. If user chooses a particular search, it means the user thinks it's relevant and could be good. But if he quickly returns back from the site, it means he didn't find the information he was looking for from that results. That is also data that Google gets much more just because they have so much more users.

So all in all, if it wasn't for Microsoft, we would only have Google. No one else can compete with them at this point. Interestingly, Google is failing in Russia, China and South Korea where local companies got the market share before Google, and they can't really do much about it. Google tried to play dirty tricks in Russia by disabling the initial search engine choice dialog [posterous.com] and defaulting to Google instead of Yandex, but they were quickly called of it and had to stop that practice.

Re:The results still suck (2)

semi-extrinsic (1997002) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672834)

This. This is where Bing fails. It almost sucks as hard as the "Fast" search engine they push for companies and organizations' internal website search tool. My university (which partially spawned Fast, so they probably got a good deal) uses it, and it is utter crap. Going to google and using "$searchterm site:$myuniversity.com" consistently yields better results: more relevant, less duplicates, and often things that the Fast engine does not even find. I cannot believe that they continue to spend money on a crappy product that no-one uses, when the (much better) alternative is free.

Re:The results still suck (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673672)

Thank god for resolv.conf....

Wow...That was difficult. [/sarcasm] (3, Insightful)

Tehrasha (624164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672120)

I think the only thing keeping Yahoo in the Search market are the various software packages that try to push the Yahoo Toolbar during install, and ISPs that use it as the their default Homepage during setup.

Re:Wow...That was difficult. [/sarcasm] (2)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672180)

I think the only thing keeping Yahoo in the Search market are the various software packages that try to push the Yahoo Toolbar during install, and ISPs that use it as the their default Homepage during setup.

Google is changing that though, as they're been heavily pushing Chrome with software installs, OEM's and ISPs. So instead of Yahoo toolbar or Bonzi Buddy, you now get Chrome when you install some software. How delightful.

Re:Wow...That was difficult. [/sarcasm] (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672388)

watch out, shill.

Bing Sucks (0, Troll)

leon.gandalf (752828) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672124)

So, a shitty useless search engine overtakes a lame search engine. No wonder Yahoo is so useless it uses Bing.

Did Yahoo check the results? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672142)

I hope Yahoo checked that Bing isn't deliberately returning bad results to its customers.

I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to deliberately salt a few Yahoo searches just to have this exact effect of reducing yahoo's market share.

Re:Did Yahoo check the results? (2)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672170)

Yeah, that's not paranoid at all. There's a much higher change that users would change to Google instead of Bing, and since Microsoft gets paid for the Yahoo deal, why would they deliberately shoot themselves in to leg?

Microsoft pays Yahoo not the other way around (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672264)

Yahoo LOSES customers with Bing results, whereas Bing GAINS customers, with the SAME RESULT DATA. So immediately I'd want to make sure it is the same they serve, and at the same speed.

Also note that Microsofts 'cost of revenue' increased due to the Yahoo deal, as though Microsoft paid Yahoo to get that traffic and to be able to serve adverts to them.

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-01-27/tech/30087727_1_bing-default-search-engine-microsoft

So yeh, I would check carefully if Microsoft are screwing Yahoo over, because leopards and spots, but also because if Microsoft gets even half of Yahoo's lost customers it sames money on the Yahoo deal and gains direct users of Bing.

And in other news... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672182)

Sales for the Zune have overtaken sales for the Sony Walkman.

Does that include... (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672194)

...people who use Bing to find Yahoo! before doing their search, or people who use Bing to find Google to find Yahoo! before doing their search?

LOL-ed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672222)

Bing, Yahoo and a bunch of meta-search engines like the privacy-oriented DuckDuckGo use Bing's back-end

Yahoo and Bing search results aren't all that diff (5, Interesting)

knuthin (2255242) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672226)

Cross post for a pic from reddit.com [imgur.com]

There's always a reason why people still prefer using Google. The only reason why I can see people using Bing or Yahoo is because that's the default engine on their web browser or something like that.

Re:Yahoo and Bing search results aren't all that d (1)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672254)

I would put money on a large proportion of their searches being 'google'.

Re:Yahoo and Bing search results aren't all that d (1)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672374)

How much would you like to put? There is also 7,5 million monthly searches in Google for 'bing'.

Re:Yahoo and Bing search results aren't all that d (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673392)

who'd have thought Bing Crosby and Bing surfboards were that popular!

Unless they're searching for Carmella Bing [wikipedia.org] , as I'm told that Bing is the best porn search engine [slashdot.org] :)

Re:Yahoo and Bing search results aren't all that d (1)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673930)

I looked at exact match data (ie. [bing] ), not broad. There really is 7.5 million searches for "bing". If you look at broad search (so that it includes things like Bing Crosby), then there's 16.6 million searches.

Other bing related searches:
[bing maps] 1,000,000
[bing.com] 450,000
[bing translator] 201,000
[www.bing.com] 135,000
[bing games] 135,000
[bing travel] 110,000
[bing images] 90,500
[bing map] 74,000
[bing search] 60,500
[bing video] 27,100
[www.bing] 27,100
[live search] 22,200
[bing videos] 18,100
[bing toolbar] 12,100
[bing rewards] 12,100
etc....

And these are search requests per month, with these exact terms, on Google. People are obviously searching for and wanting to use Bing.

Due to Google Instant and other crap? (3, Interesting)

Hyperhaplo (575219) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672326)

So, how much of this swing away from Google is due to the seriously annoying things they have done recently including, but not limited to, Google Instant (seriously annoying), Google Preview (irritating and annoying) and screwing over the gmail interface.

As for the third, in this day and age there is no excuse.

As for the first two... I use other search engines in places where I can't disable google instant and google preview. I find both of them so annoying that I waste more time disabling them than actually using the search engine. The interface gets in the way of the function. Yes, there are ways to ignore and bypass these irritations.. but why I am wasting effect on doing so?

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

smash (1351) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672486)

here here. and i suspect that plus integrated search results will only pollute what i am looking for.

I've been using bing more often simply due to mistrust of google and its honestly not THAT bad. I think its necessary to give the competition a chance, if only to keep google on their toes. Not that I like to support microsoft, but they're currently the only competitor in a position to keep Google honest.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672548)

and screwing over the gmail interface.

My god, that new interface is terrible. To put it in a way that is semi-relevant to the topic of this slashdot post, the graphic design of the new gmail interface looks like it was designed during a time when Yahoo was still relevant.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672550)

So, how much of this swing away from Google is due to the seriously annoying things

My off-hand guess is that it's approximately 0%. I'd bet most of the reason people are moving to Bing is that people have bought new computers with Windows 7, and Bing is the default search. Also, Microsoft changed the selector to set a different search engine provider, and it's ultimately a bigger pain in the butt to change providers.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672650)

I started using DuckDuckGo because Google Preview, Google Instant, and now-broken boolean queries. All are huge steps backwards in terms of what I'm looking for in a search engine, and it looks like I'm not alone.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

iserlohn (49556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672578)

As a heavy gmail user, the new interface is great. There's nothing not to like about it - it's more flexible, has more features and better implemented than the old interface.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (0)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672598)

get a life.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672684)

"screwing over the gmail interface" this.

If only I could lay my hands on the scoundrel that does this. First, they annoyingly push it to you, which I consistently decline, then they just force it onto you.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

fafaforza (248976) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673508)

I use '1' and '2' in Opera to move between tabs, and Google's interface keeps taking focus and putting whatever I type in the search box, even if I removed focus from it. I disabled javascript for google. Their interface is really irritating, and thankfully I can use the 'g' shortcut in the address bar of Opera to search, and don't go through Google's page directly.

Re:Due to Google Instant and other crap? (1)

jzuccaro (1234644) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673554)

How about removing the "+" operator? [google.com]
I have started to consider other search engines for the first time in years because of that dumb move that makes the whole searching experience even more annoying. Want to look for an exact term? Now you have to surround it with quotes, adding 3 additional keystrokes.

High Five Territory For Microsoft (3, Funny)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672462)

That's a high five moment for Ballmer right up there with the Zune out-selling one or two unbranded, generic mp3 players.

Unsustainable (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38672488)

I doubt even MS can keep this up - they have to buy vast quantities of their traffic. Whilst there's probably a bit more left in the budget (which of course they hope will take them to the tipping point where it becomes self-sustaining), if they aren't careful, they'll run out of money and be back on the decline.

What are bing and yahoo? oh wait... (4, Funny)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 2 years ago | (#38672938)

I can google that. Nevermind! :P

How many of those users actually selected Bing? (5, Interesting)

Gumbercules!! (1158841) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673096)

No one chooses Bing (ok some do but not many). People use Bing because their WindowsUpdate updated their browser from IEx to IEy and it changed the default search engine to Bing and the user never even noticed. I say this because, as an IT professional, every single user's PC I have ever seen with Bing as the default search engine, the user still thinks they're using Google. They simply don't pay attention to anything that's going on in front of their own eyes.

Bing is not gaining market share by being good - it's gaining it because MS is using their OS monopoly to "trick" users into using Bing. I say this as someone who generally likes Microsoft, too. When it comes to someone changing my browsers settings - any of them - without asking me, I get really pissed off.

Re:How many of those users actually selected Bing? (1)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673484)

I know people who use Bing because google search results, for the queries they do, are so flooded with spammer sites as to be useless.

For example if I search for "ipad 3 release date" on google most of the sites are clearly spammer sites designed to catch that particular query. On Bing only two of the results are those sites and the rest are from actual tech coverage of the question.

Yahoo! is not a search company. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673348)

They've been saying it for years. Their actions are saying it.

Yahoo! is a content company now.

Win7 and IE Bing lock-in (1)

blackfrancis75 (911664) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673416)

I wonder if Bing's increasing market share is due in any way to their increasingly maddening lock-up of IE's search behaviour in Windows 7.
I helped my father-in-law get a new Dell machine up and running over the Christmas break and was seriously astonished at how many steps are required now to make Google the default search agent in IE rather than Bing. A novice user has effectively no chance to avoid using Bing.
I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been more backlash against it, but I guess this shit is less likely to fly outside USA.

Bing on smart phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38673432)

I use Google on all of my desktop but for mobile searches Bing has a great app for the 3 platforms (Windows Phone included) that is vastly superior to Google's. In short I almost exclusively use Bing on my smart phone (except for tracking number which for some reason Bing's mobile doesn't do?), and the Xbox Bing is pretty nice...though it would be sooo much better if it searched local and network content as well. (hinty, hinty Microsoft.)

It's about simplicity of interface (1)

bhspencer (2523290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673474)

Clearly as the same search back end is being used by both bing and yahoo it has nothing to do with the search results. Back in the 90s I stopped using yahoo. There were a few reason and one was the main search page was cluttered an ugly and googles was not. I think this is still true. Bing's growth probably has a lot to do with being the default search in MS products and the yahoo search page looking like it came from1996 doesn't help matters. That yahoo logo is a piece of junk that looks like it was made with MS word art.

Kinect? (1)

obijuanvaldez (924118) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673568)

I am surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet, but post-Christmas and the Fall update for the XBox, I would wonder how many more searches were driven by additional traffic from the Bing search from XBox, especially the voice search via Kinect. I think that would amount to a very sizable increase alone, because I still don't know, like most posters, anyone who goes to bing.com via browser deliberately for a search.

"Lots of work to do" (1)

Richy_T (111409) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673628)

And, to compete against Bing, "lots of work to do" means to create an OS running on the vast majority of the world's workstations, bundle a web browser that's used by default and "can't be removed from the operating system" and make their search engine the default in the search box or if you make a typo in the address bar.

Make no mistake, I'm not fan of Yahoo but the rise of Bing is certainly not due to the quality of its search results, real or imagined.

Pre-installed advantage (1)

Larry_Dillon (20347) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673750)

Does this really have anything to do with the quality of Bing search results and people choosing it or, as I suspect, is this just a side effect of Bing being the default search engine in Internet Explorer?
I've also noticed that it's harder than it used to be to change IE over to Google as the default search engine.

Long Live Alta Vista (2)

nic (14402) | more than 2 years ago | (#38673832)

After long ago abandoning Alta Vista for Google, I've recently found myself compelled to return, for one simple reason; Google try too hard to tell me what I'm looking for.

What I mean is this, Google are not content to let me tell them what I want to find. Their search algorithms now completely discount my use of quotation marks to group words, or to try to indicate that I really want whatever unlikely word I enter. Many of the old tricks for hinting to the search engine that you mean what you say are now ignored entirely. On Alta Vista, powered by Yahoo! (and therefore by Bing, I guess) those tricks still work.

When I perform technical term searches, which is much of what I do, I don't need the search engine second guessing my spelling. If Google would let me override their "corrections" I would continue to use them.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?