How Bing is out-innovating Google

[curme]

The new Google image search is so slow! I'm on DSL and Bing images load faster. Google was on thin ice with me anyway when they started to bloat their iGoogle homepage with that stupid bar on the left side of the screen, but Google lost anyone to Bing because of Google's slow new image search.

[Elliott]

The new Google image search is so slow! I'm on DSL and Bing images load faster. Google was on thin ice with me anyway when they started to bloat their iGoogle homepage with that stupid bar on the left side of the screen, but Google lost anyone to Bing because of Google's slow new image search.

:huh: Google's new image search loads very quickly for me.

[c3ntury]

I'll stick to google, its quick, easy and works for me. Why change when the thing you already have fits your needs?

[Calum Veteran]

I'll stick to google, its quick, easy and works for me. Why change when the thing you already have fits your needs?

Because the alternative may be able to not just fit your needs but excel past your needs to the point you realise the improvements improve productivity and enjoyment of the system, allowing these improvements to become your new needs.

[Lechio]

Because the alternative may be able to not just fit your needs but excel past your needs to the point you realise the improvements improve productivity and enjoyment of the system, allowing these improvements to become your new needs.

Unless the alternative is a cheap knock off of the real thing. Instead of spending so much money and effort in promoting it and pushing it to the Windows desktop, Microsoft would do better in making real improvements on their search engine. Right now what they have done in terms of improvements can compare to taking a photocopy of a Picasso (Google) and painting over it with coloring pencils to make it look prettier.

That's how I see Bing! anyway, others may have different opinions of course.

[Mr. Gibs]

Unless the alternative is a cheap knock off of the real thing. Instead of spending so much money and effort in promoting it and pushing it to the Windows desktop, Microsoft would do better in making real improvements on their search engine. Right now what they have done in terms of improvements can compare to taking a photocopy of a Picasso (Google) and painting over it with coloring pencils to make it look prettier.

That's how I see Bing! anyway, others may have different opinions of course.

What? Search engines look similar? Jesus ****ing christ, who would have thought!

Maybe Microsoft should have invented a new language for use in their search engine, or a neural implant that allows you to search the internet directly through your brain and not by entering text into something so common as a text box.

Let's forget the improvements MS has done in terms of integration with other features (airline tickets, news etc), the maps that now uses silverlight which pushes it way ahead of Google maps (by the way Google earth wasn't created by Google, it was created by Keyhole which was bought out by Google), or that the search results are generally identical to the ones Google gives (at least for US ones, localized ones vary), or how Google copied Bing's image search layout, or how Google copied the picture on your homepage (not that it was some big innovation anyways), or the sidebar.

Instead lets just focus on the dam search. You enter text into a box, and it displays results below said box. **** you MS, learn to innovate..maybe throw in some 3D, put the results above the search box, put some colorful pictures to describe the results since Lechio cannot read, or even send you a letter in the mail with the results!

:rolleyes:

[pezzonovante]

Unless the alternative is a cheap knock off of the real thing. Instead of spending so much money and effort in promoting it and pushing it to the Windows desktop, Microsoft would do better in making real improvements on their search engine. Right now what they have done in terms of improvements can compare to taking a photocopy of a Picasso (Google) and painting over it with coloring pencils to make it look prettier.

That's how I see Bing! anyway, others may have different opinions of course.

No, it's the other way round. Google has been blatantly copying Bing. Just like Linux has tried and failed to blatantly copy Windows and Mac OS, while OpenOffice has produced an epic failure in trying to copy MS Office. Open-source developers are simpy not good enough to innovate.

[guru]

What? Search engines look similar? Jesus ****ing christ, who would have thought!

Maybe Microsoft should have invented a new language for use in their search engine, or a neural implant that allows you to search the internet directly through your brain and not by entering text into something so common as a text box.

Let's forget the improvements MS has done in terms of integration with other features (airline tickets, news etc), the maps that now uses silverlight which pushes it way ahead of Google maps (by the way Google earth wasn't created by Google, it was created by Keyhole which was bought out by Google), or that the search results are generally identical to the ones Google gives (at least for US ones, localized ones vary), or how Google copied Bing's image search layout, or how Google copied the picture on your homepage (not that it was some big innovation anyways), or the sidebar.

Instead lets just focus on the dam search. You enter text into a box, and it displays results below said box. **** you MS, learn to innovate..maybe throw in some 3D, put the results above the search box, put some colorful pictures to describe the results since Lechio cannot read, or even send you a letter in the mail with the results!

:rolleyes:

:laugh: and +1

some people should stop living in the 90's when trashing MS for everything under the sun was the cool thing to do. now its just old.

[Calum Veteran]

Unless the alternative is a cheap knock off of the real thing. Instead of spending so much money and effort in promoting it and pushing it to the Windows desktop, Microsoft would do better in making real improvements on their search engine. Right now what they have done in terms of improvements can compare to taking a photocopy of a Picasso (Google) and painting over it with coloring pencils to make it look prettier.

That's how I see Bing! anyway, others may have different opinions of course.

So all of the new features Bing brought with it like website previews, reference articles, best match (to name but a few) went straight over your head? Either that or you just didn't give Bing the time of day because it's clear to anybody who did that Bing is not a "cheap knock off" or a copy of Google. Bing brought with it many features Google didn't have; this is evidenced by the many features and UI changes Google have since added which are similar to Bing's implementation - background images, the whole idea of the new image search, a side-bar down the left, a drop-down for changing SafeSearch options rather than going into a whole new page (to name but a few).

[Lechio]

So all of the new features Bing brought with it like website previews, reference articles, best match (to name but a few) went straight over your head? Either that or you just didn't give Bing the time of day because it's clear to anybody who did that Bing is not a "cheap knock off" or a copy of Google. Bing brought with it many features Google didn't have; this is evidenced by the many features and UI changes Google have since added which are similar to Bing's implementation - background images, the whole idea of the new image search, a side-bar down the left, a drop-down for changing SafeSearch options rather than going into a whole new page (to name but a few).

Contrary to what you think I actually took the time to test Bing!. What I've found is that it doesn't qualify as a good search engine. A search engine is meant to be simple; easy to use; user-friendly and most importantly, provide relevant results to your search terms. Bing! lacks most of those key features, while Google has been offering all of those for quite some time.

Just to give you a flagrant example of one important key feature that it still lacks: search suggestions on localized pages

Bing! does not provide search suggestions if you do not use an English version of it, making it useless for everyone else who doesn't use English in the World.

Try it for yourself: http://www.bing.com/?scope=web&setmkt=pt-PT

Unfinished, feature lacking, low quality product.

[Calum Veteran]

Contrary to what you think I actually took the time to test Bing!. What I've found is that it doesn't qualify as a good search engine. A search engine is meant to be simple; easy to use; user-friendly and most importantly, provide relevant results to your search terms. Bing! lacks most of those key features, while Google has been offering all of those for quite some time.

Just to give you a flagrant example of one important key feature that it still lacks: search suggestions on localized pages

Bing! does not provide search suggestions if you do not use an English version of it, making it useless for everyone else who doesn't use English in the World.

Try it for yourself: http://www.bing.com/?scope=web&setmkt=pt-PT

Unfinished, feature lacking, low quality product.

Did you happen to notice that it is still in beta stage in Portugal, most likely for that reason?

I forgot your local search is the Portugese version, my previous post assumed you'd have tried the US or UK version. That doesn't take away from the fact that the Portugese version is still in beta stage though.

[Lechio]

:laugh: and +1

some people should stop living in the 90's when trashing MS for everything under the sun was the cool thing to do. now its just old.

Some people should be objective and comment on what is being discussed instead of deviating from the topic, with useless, false statements that add nothing constructive to the discussion.

[brentaal]

with useless, false statements that add nothing constructive to the discussion.

Your false statement about spyware started it all.

[Calum Veteran]

What? Search engines look similar? Jesus ****ing christ, who would have thought!

Maybe Microsoft should have invented a new language for use in their search engine, or a neural implant that allows you to search the internet directly through your brain and not by entering text into something so common as a text box.

Let's forget the improvements MS has done in terms of integration with other features (airline tickets, news etc), the maps that now uses silverlight which pushes it way ahead of Google maps (by the way Google earth wasn't created by Google, it was created by Keyhole which was bought out by Google), or that the search results are generally identical to the ones Google gives (at least for US ones, localized ones vary), or how Google copied Bing's image search layout, or how Google copied the picture on your homepage (not that it was some big innovation anyways), or the sidebar.

Instead lets just focus on the dam search. You enter text into a box, and it displays results below said box. **** you MS, learn to innovate..maybe throw in some 3D, put the results above the search box, put some colorful pictures to describe the results since Lechio cannot read, or even send you a letter in the mail with the results!

:rolleyes:

This is a genius reply, by the way :D

[Lechio]

Your false statement about spyware started it all.

As you failed to read the previous comments on that, that explain how these types of sites work and keep doubting my word, I dare you to visit this site advertised on Bing! after searching for the term "antivirus software": http://www.stop-sign.com/

and try one of their "products". According to Norton's Safe Web it's a harmless site.

But just take the time to read some of the reviews on that same site: http://safeweb.norton.com/reviews?url=stop-sign.com

Obviously Bad...Actually Worse.

Stop-Sign, Where to start?...ok, well 1st off, this is actually rogue security software (hence on anti virus, and anti spyware) and most basic users could even look at the website, and conclude that its not legit. norton technically would put this as safe, because the download is on another server and not on this website. but it should be red, even mcafee's Site Advisor detect's it as red.

Bing! works with spyware companies to advertise their products.

[brentaal]

As you failed to read the previous comments on that, that explain how these types of sites work and keep doubting my word, I dare you to visit this site advertised on Bing! after searching for the term "antivirus software": http://www.stop-sign.com/

and try one of their "products". According to Norton's Safe Web it's a harmless site.

But just take the time to read some of the reviews on that same site: http://safeweb.norton.com/reviews?url=stop-sign.com

Bing! works with spyware companies to advertise their products.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/926414-how-bing-is-out-innovating-google/page__view__findpost__p__592992960

Stop derailing this thread with your nonsense.

[Lechio]

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/926414-how-bing-is-out-innovating-google/page__view__findpost__p__592992960

Stop derailing this thread with your nonsense.

? What's your point?

After reading all of that you still fail to understand how those sites work?

[yowanvista]

Google FTW

Bing is :x

[HawkMan]

? What's your point?

After reading all of that you still fail to understand how those sites work?

Oh look again, the SAME ads that Google uses and places in the SAMe spot as Bing above and to the right of your actual search results.

I guess you're going back to altavista now ?

[lamminium]

After reading all of that you still fail to understand how those sites work?

I didn't get your point about "Microsoft's working with spyware companies" from the very start. When I tried to search for "virus" with Google, I got the following:

STOPzilla.com is a bad website rated by WoT.

According to your line of argument, is Google promoting malicious websites through their ad service?

[Mr. Gibs]

What I find funny is this Lechio.

1. You claim Bing links to spyware. Google has the same links, but that doesn't matter to you.

2. You claim MS copies Google when it comes to search. But when Google implements multiple account login a few days ago in the exact same way MS has done for the past few years, you don't mind that at all.

Hypocritical much?

Note, I'm not complaining about the way Google implemented multiple account login, since it's pretty much a logical way of doing it. Same thing applies to Bing vs. Google, if you read my post on the previous page you'll know there's only a few ways to display search results without it getting overly complicated. MS obviously did research to see what the market wants, and since the market has been used to the way Google and other search engines have done it, MS should logically implement a similar design. They have, however, built upon it extremely well. And all those improvements are finding their way into Google now, but you don't have a problem with that either since it isn't MS.

[Lechio]

1. You claim Bing links to spyware. Google has the same links, but that doesn't matter to you.

I did not say it doesn't matter. What I've found after using Bing! for some time is that it provides a huge quantity of ads to those types of sites. If Google advertises those same sites, that's a problem too, but I have yet to encounter such a quantity of that type of advertisement in a Google search as I've found in Bing!.

2. You claim MS copies Google when it comes to search. But when Google implements multiple account login a few days ago in the exact same way MS has done for the past few years, you don't mind that at all.

Note, I'm not complaining about the way Google implemented multiple account login, since it's pretty much a logical way of doing it. Same thing applies to Bing vs. Google, if you read my post on the previous page you'll know there's only a few ways to display search results without it getting overly complicated. MS obviously did research to see what the market wants, and since the market has been used to the way Google and other search engines have done it, MS should logically implement a similar design. They have, however, built upon it extremely well. And all those improvements are finding their way into Google now, but you don't have a problem with that either since it isn't MS.

MS copied Google's search engine and other technologies from Google, I did not say they shouldn't be doing it. Just saying it's a bad lower quality copy of what Google has to offer.

[solcroft]

Bing! works with spyware companies to advertise their products.

Really? Wow. Judging from Google's results, I guess that means their motto of "don't do evil" just got flushed down the toilet as well then.

Like I've said before, Lechio, you're an extremely entertaining character. I certainly admire your perseverance: you never give up pushing so hard for the crusade, even though you invariably fail and end up falling splat right on your face. BUT if you're interested in facts instead of your own narrow agenda, here's the real picture on malware distribution by the top three search engines:

Google tops comparative review of malicious search results

"Overall, Google takes the crown for malware distribution – turning up more than twice the amount of malware as Bing, Twitter and Yahoo! combined when searches on popular trending topics were performed. Google presents at 69 percent; Yahoo! at 18 percent; Bing at 12 percent; and Twitter at one percent."

- http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/google-tops-comparative-review-of-malicious-search-results/7009

[Mr. Gibs]

I did not say it doesn't matter. What I've found after using Bing! for some time is that it provides a huge quantity of ads to those types of sites. If Google advertises those same sites, that's a problem too, but I have yet to encounter such a quantity of that type of advertisement in a Google search as I've found in Bing!.

Keyword: Virus

Bing search: 5 sponsored links

Google search: 5 sponsored links

Holy ****, they're the same

MS copied Google's search engine and other technologies from Google, I did not say they shouldn't be doing it. Just saying it's a bad lower quality copy of what Google has to offer.

Goes back to my earlier point. How the **** do you want to innovate a search engine? Please do share with me your enlightened crap.

And if its of such a "low quality," why is Google copying them now? The results on the US site are in the majority of cases the same as Google. On international sites, Bing is still in beta. Not to mention Google has had what 12 years? to improve and build on their search engine. MS has only had 3 with Bing, and they've done a pretty dam good job about it.

Don't try and hide your hatred for MS, we all know it and you've proved it in every single news article that mentions Microsoft.

[Eric Veteran]

Some people should be objective and comment on what is being discussed instead of deviating from the topic, with useless, false statements that add nothing constructive to the discussion.

Yes, they should.This means you can stop with the spyware crap. It's wrong. You're twisting the results and manipulating your screen shots. You're claiming sites are spyware even though a) they're not, and b) they're also in your Google results screenshots. As sponsored sites.

This must mean the Google is working with those "spyware" companies.