Bing balloons into public view
Each day, Bing features a different background image, meaning that for many, the first public view was this hot air balloon-themed look that appeared on Monday.
(Credit: Ina Fried/CNET)Microsoft's Bing search engine has started to become publicly available, allowing the world to decide whether the company's latest effort has the goods to take on Google.
The engine, which replaces Live Search, debuted Thursday at the D: All Things Digital conference and is slated to be fully available by Wednesday. (Microsoft said it would start becoming publicly available Monday, but that it wouldn't be fully launched until Wednesday.)
Among the other naming changes that go along with the new search, Live Search Cashback is now Bing Cashback, while technology from Microsoft's Farecast acquisition now powers Bing Travel. Virtual Earth gets a name change (though not an upgrade in my book) and is now Bing Maps for Enterprise.
With Bing, Microsoft is trying to make the case that search today is still an often unsatisfying experience. That is a unique challenge for Microsoft. Although its research shows that most people repeat searches and give up without finding exactly what they are looking for, perceived satisfaction of search is actually pretty high.
To help make the case, Microsoft plans to spend (to borrow a Carol Bartz phrase) boatloads of money on advertising. Estimates in the advertising trade mags have pegged spending at $80 million to $100 million.
That's key, since very few people currently go out of their way to search using Microsoft's technology. Most Microsoft searches come via MSN, from toolbars and other methods, while just 1 or 2 percent come from people actually typing Live.com into their browser's address bar.
"Nearly 98 percent of the traffic at Live.com is passive (coming from MSN, etc.) and Bing will be an attempt by Microsoft to establish its search offering as a destination Web site with high active traffic," Collins Stewart analyst Sandeep Agarwal said in a research note on Monday. "In our view, though Microsoft's search technologies are ready for prime time, making a call on the success of Bing now will be premature."
One of the things I'll be watching is how content creators react to the new ways that Microsoft pulls content into the search pages. The main results page offers the option to hover over the result for more information, while the product search site repurposes professional reviews, user reviews, and other information directly within product search results.
On the video side, Microsoft allows a live preview of videos from within its search results, also raising some questions of fair use.
Of course, other engines also borrow heavily from the sites they are searching. Don't forget, Google hosts its own cached versions of the pages it searches.
The bigger deal, of course, is whether people take to Bing at all. Microsoft does seem to have generated a good amount of initial buzz, as well as some early positive reviews.
What's your take on Bing? Drop me an e-mail (ina DOT fried AT cnet DOT com), along with your name and hometown, and we'll publish some of the responses later this week.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 



Photo search page is slow to feed new pages and a rip off of the FireFox plug in AutoPager. Having to mouse over to gain info for each pic in cumbersome.
Video search is piggish on memory and processor too. Preview feature in search results is neat but burdensome on some machines and ISPs.
thanks,
Tom
Most users are not interested in "cpu cycles", and could care less about them. All they carre about is "is my computer going slower than it usually does".
Also, the comnputers we use at work are older Athlon conputers, not even Athlon 64. They work 100% perfectly. Nothing wrong with them AT ALL. We do lots of searches, downloading, web brousing, multitasking and don't have ANY issues.
Now, I haven't tried Bing but I can tell you this. If the computer at my work desk slowed down from searching with a new search engine, there's no way in hell I would go out and spend $600 to replace the computer just so I could use that new search engine. That would be a WASTE OF MONEY. Now, if there was something new and amazing that we just couldn't do without, sure then replacing the computer would be considered. However, even though I haven't seen it, I doubt "Bing" falls into that catagory.
You people have more money than brains.
Frankly, using Bing in Firefox has been a surprisingly good experience so far. It seems just as fast as Google, and it certainly is easier on the eyes. It also appears to do a better job of filtering out the useless search results, though that also makes me wonder if some viable and useful results aren't being filtered out as well. At this point only time and continued use will tell.
Another thing that really annoyed me and was probably a deal-breaker for me was the preferences. In typical Microsoft fashion, they were hidden. You have to click on Extras in the top right and then preferences. Then, in another typical Microsoft move, you had about twice as many clicks to save them and you max out at 50 results per page. You had to affirm you were over a certain age and other things. Microsoft, improve it, but make it simple if you want me to use it.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/165749/bing_vs_google_vs_yahoo_feature_smackdown.html
but don't get facts get in your way.
I searched "Karpenter's Kids", which is a band name.
Instead of being directed to the band's myspace, the first two results are for organisations with the "karpenters" spelled correctly.
And then the Myspace beneath that is a barely-used Myspace that perhaps belonged to the band a LONG time ago, with two friends, and almost no plays, instead of the one with countless friends and tons of page views.
And THEN...to make it even weirder...I did the same search using Safari instead of Firefox.
And I got different results. It pops up the links I've actually looking for, although the wrong Myspace is still at the top.
It's not just a fluke, either...and it's not learning from what's been clicked, from what I can tell.
I search for "Karpenter's Kids" again in Firefox, and the same old results are shown.
Ina: what where you expecting? I am going to give it a try anyway. I kinda liked the quick first look I gave it.
Maybe the opinions will start rolling in after mine...
What is it about Microsoft that makes them incapable of coming up with good names for their services?
It deliverers not only not all data. But
WRONG data.
Bing product spec:
http://www.bing.com/shopping/Garmin-750-GPS-receiver/search?q=garmin%
20750%20&p1=[CommerceService+scenario%3d%22s%22+docid%3d%
22DCB1CD1FA995CFBF66A4%22+p%3d%22df5c7f1ba4404c05b3f423c4e307eee6%
22]&wf=Commerce&FORM=GTCL
Waypoints 500
Waypoints per route 10
Features Hands-free calling via Bluetooth, built-in microphone,
built-in speaker, built-in FM modulator, 2D / 3D map perspective, Garmin
Lock, custom POIs, preinstalled POIs
===
In reality the system has 10 routes and 50 waypoints per route.
It doesn't have Bluetooth.
Doesn't have a build in microphone.
See:https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=37419#specsTab
Not good at all, prices shown are not the best either.
And they never will be. Microsoft results have always been more about who is paying to be listed than providing actual results. Nothing's changed, save a parlor trick or two and a pretty picture.
Here's a comparison for Google and Bing.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/165749/bing_vs_google_vs_yahoo_feature_smackdown.html
Has it occurred to anybody that it's basically too late to compete with Google? As an Input/Output exercise the time and compute necessary to crawl and index the web to complete with Google... it's maybe not impossible but it's beyond inordinately difficult. MS is not within 10,000% of getting the job done just to be equal.
That's only part of the issue. What about the size of the index? If Bing has only indexed 1/1000th of the web compared to Google then the quality of the results must be suspect. The point I'm making is by the time Bing has indexed 2/1000ths of the web Google has already increased the size of the denominator such that the relative percentage is falling away. MS and Bing are falling behind unless they can index the web faster than Google. By admittedly anecdotal experience it certainly seems like MS is falling behind at an increasing rate. In order to catch up and pass Google, MS will need to crawl and index much faster. I'm not saying it's impossible or it's too late but it doesn't get any easier and Bing seems like it's even keeping pace let alone making progress. Catching and passing Google would require compute power beyond comprehension.
Bling returned 34 of 56 results. I could not find a way to view all 56 results.
This morning, Bling only allowed me to see 8 results.
Google returned 1710 results including my blog's home page.
Looks are in the eye of the beholder. Yes Bling looks pretty, but I will stick to results. Thank you.
That pretty much tells me Bing is Crap. Microsoft products always suck. Google is king....
As for Google?s many and varied successes: Google video, Google Catalog search, Notebook, Dodgeball, Jaiku, Mashup editor, Shared Stuff, Web Accelerator, Google Answers, Google Coupons, Voice Search, Google Viewer, Google Checkout, Orkut, Knol, Hello, Joga Bonito, Lively? would you like me to continue? They are ALL epic failures.
As for what they?ve done well: search, Google docs (arguable, but an acquisition (Writely)), Google earth (acquisition again - Keyhole), maps (acquisition again - where 2), youtube (arguable success, but again an acquisition) and Android (arguable and again an acquisition). Even Wave was developed in Sydney by the Where 2 guys largely <before> they were acquired. So, other than search, what have they done well? Answer: not much.
It needs to work on its "News" section though. Google news, for the time being, has more and better stories. If Bing beefs up its news section in the coming days, Google will increasingly become my secondary spot for search and news.
till now google is best.
Bing:
No valid return on first page.
Google:
Second link on first page
Help Bing with: multiple routes garmin google maps import
Still no good results on first page
Page preview shows: Just a moment.
Then changes to: We're still looking for more info. Try again later.
Totally useless.
"Bingcast" at 10a.m. Pacfic today (June 1). Folks from the Bing team will demo and answer user questions about Bing. If you're interested, check out http://ms.istreamplanet.com/search.
I hope you find it useful!
Thanks,
Cody
Windows Outreach Team
- by gtdtm June 1, 2009 9:54 AM PDT
- I have a very unique name. Google easily finds blogs and other sites that relate completely to me. Bing on the other hand found 0 results mentioning me. Win=Google
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by empirestatebuddy June 1, 2009 10:50 AM PDT
- well, if i'm ever looking for your weird name, i'll use google. but for normal searches, i'm gonna at least give Bing a try. lol
-
-
- by gtdtm June 1, 2009 3:02 PM PDT
- @empirestatebuddy:
-
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (93 Comments)That's not the point. If Bing can't find highly unique information, how can I trust that it will weed out the non-relevant information in my searches for popular keywords?