Google's Schmidt dings Bing
This story was updated at 9:38 a.m. PDT Wednesday with the correct spelling of Patrick Pichette's last name.
Google CEO Eric Schmidt, as one might expect, offered no public sense that Microsoft's new Bing search engine has him pacing the halls at night.
Google plans to review Microsoft's Bing tomorrow, but CEO Eric Schmidt isn't losing sleep just yet.
(Credit: Dan Farber/CNET Networks)"It's not the first entry for Microsoft. They do this about once a year," Schmidt said Tuesday in an interview with Fox Business Network. "I don't think Bing's arrival has changed what we're doing. We are about search, we're about making things enormously successful, by virtue of innovation."
Bing has been well-received in its first trip around the Internet, but it obviously has an awfully long way to go before it makes a dent in Google's business. Still, with some in the search industry now wondering if Yahoo really intends to compete in search over the next few years, Bing may shape up as the only true alternative to Google.
Schmidt seemed to acknowledge those thoughts. "Google is about getting all the information and organizing it. Yahoo has a different strategy. We think ultimately Bing will evolve to a different strategy as well."
Earlier in the day, Google Chief Financial Officer Patrick Pichette said the company planned to hold "a review tomorrow on it with the executive committee," so it's not like Google is ignoring the possible threat, either.
Schmidt held forth on a wide range of topics during the interview, including:
• Yahoo: "As you know we got within an hour of doing a very deep partnership with Yahoo, but we were unable to do it because of the government and their concerns over various parts of the deal."
• Smartphones: "This is the year of mobile phones. What we like is every one of these has a powerful browser and every one is used to search."
• And Google's new plug-in for Outlook: "I grew up with Outlook as well, which is why we're doing these things. It's very important to bridge the new kind of customer, the young customer, with the existing customer that has grown up with the Microsoft infrastructure."
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
I do admit it was better than Live by a long shot, but not enough reason to even bother with it any further.
I think Microsoft would be better served to use this new found technology in their help searches in Windows and Office programs which are as truly pathetic as anything I've ever encountered. Their help searches in these programs don't come up with answers even closely resembling the questions asked. All they're about is greed. They won't improve what people are already paying for, but consistently try to profit from someone else's innovation.
While trying to repair a crashed mail server last week I did research, side by side, with Bing and Google. It was still no contest. Google found what I needed. Bing even missed a Microsoft knowledge base article.
I will say that Bing is not bad. If Google were not around I would be using Bing. But Google is around and it finds what I need.
And I learned something new from this article....Yahoo still does search? Huh..go figure.
Well, it makes it easier to find porn, doesn't it?
I like the comment: "It's not the first entry for Microsoft. They do this about once a year," OK. Live SEarch was last year. the year before? Live SEarch? Before that? Live Search. Before that? .... Schmidt is copying Apple's skirting the truth handbook.
I don't think you live in the US. If you do, try switching to the US version of Bing, and I don't mean just type in www.bing.com, but instead go to the website, change your language/country to the US. I think you'll see a significant difference.
Also, I don't know what the hell you're doing, but
http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=Nikon+d5000+body+only&mkt=en-US&FORM=BPFD
gets the answer for your query.
Also, the queries Flight honolulu, travel honolulu, travel to honolulu, go to honolulu, don't even have Expedia in the first page. On bing, you get comparisons of all sorts of flights and their farecast predictions.
google is no better than any other search engine? Uhh, have you actually ever used google?
You should be so doomed...
That was kind of the point.
@bryanwalker
Microsoft is old tech. Windows has been losing ground. Slowly, but losing ground. That's what happens when other options come along with significant improvements.
Bing doesn't offer significant improvements over Google. In fact, all Bing offers is an easier to access porn search engine. Anything else is either just as good or worse than anything Google has. That's coming from actually trying both search engines.
It looks like Google and the anti MS crowd are panicking, looks like a good sign for MS.
Google is Web 1.0 and Bing is Web 3.0. Microsoft has done some amazing work, good job Microsoft. Now as things progress we will get a lot of defensive comments from Google executives who will want to defend their product, instead of making it better. Listen Google you need a face lift now, get to work.
Yeah, it makes Bing awesome as a search engine for porn, doesn't it?
As for other stuff, though, I find more relevant non-porn information on Google than on Bing. For most searches I do, Google returns more results than Bing does (on average, about twice as many; sometimes, as much as three times more than Bing does), which makes me think Google is probably searching a lot more of the Web.
Google seems significantly better than Bing at searching for technical or scientific information. Bing is better than Google at returning and categorizing results for pop musicians or rock bands; about the same (though with fewer results) for recent movies; and not as good at searching for information on blogs. For book title searches, they're pretty much dead even. When searching for reviews of popular consumer electronics, they tend to return the same results, though Bing shows far more paid ads (some of which are so profoundly inappropriate to the search terms I'm left scratching my head).
Overall, Google is clearly searching a far larger database and indexes far, far more sites than Bing. I don't plan to jump from Google to Bing.
http://blindsearch.fejus.com/
Then tell me what you choose. Can be tampered very easy but be honest try it a least 3 times your selected search must be allways the same as it is the best for this task.
Ahahahaha...yeah sounds about right. Forgot to add the fact that Microsoft has two nice cash cows to keep funding this money losing programs. I guess they figure they'll eventually win if their patient enough. Sooner or later Google will have a downturn, and with no "dual cash" cows to feed them....... Good plan.
Bing to Google!
It is now a corporation, get over it.
By the way, I dont use any M$ product, they have NOTHING for me.
This sounds like Microsoft from about X years ago. I've seen more and more of this type of arrogance out of Google lately. Maybe you don't need to shift your entire strategy based on one competitor, but at least take a look at what they are doing and see how it impacts your business. See if you can improve your business by taking parts of what they've done. It can still fit into your mission of organizing the world's information.
Sure, Google may have overreached with Android and Docs (though I think they're both viable contenders to MS), but you can't touch them on search at this point in the game. Doubt that? Try to Bing something hard to find. You'll see.
Thanks for your paid comment. Please come to one Microsoft Way to pick up your pay.
Good work Microsoft shill.
Oh and by the way, if you are using the US version, then maybe you should stop downloading porn and getting viruses while you're at it that reroute all your searches.
I can see Google signing a deal with Expedia - or maybe buying it from that big mogul - to work their API into Google's search page.
I tried out a number of searches that seem to give Bing properties preference.
e.g., "Auckland Map" brings up bing windows live maps or whatever it is called.
But Google Maps should be there in my opinion.
I have found this with other Bing results.
Google launched a service called Knol and people worried that Google would favour this service over Wikipedia. But Knol fails to show up in search results showing how unbiased Google is. They let Know compete like every other service out there.
I am sticking to Google, after all, Microsoft has proven itself as a dishonest company mnay times. Their history is based in dishonesty. So why would I trust my data to their cloud services and why would I use a biased search engine?
Also Google is still a great search engine, so I don't need to change the way I search.
Funny. Yes you are right.
They must have changed it after they read this comment.
They gave themselves no1 position for the last week and I checked when I made my post.
I guess they removed it after this exposure.
Still, I can almost guarantee that if they ever get dominance in search, then they will slowly point traffic to themselves. This is Microsoft we are talking about. It is in their DNA to be biased toward themselves and Windows. People and organisations don't change just like that.
http://blindsearch.fejus.com/
This just an experiment have fun.
go figure.
I would tend to agree that Google's recent statements tend to be a bit arrogant. Bing of course is just one of a few such as the one about Twitter. Now arguably you Twitter may not be to your liking, but dismissing a technology even as it gains interest by the public is worrisome. Google which is an engineering company and should continue to produce great technology is beginning to lose touch with the more instinctual/subjective side of brilliance that others are working on. What made Google was not technology alone, but also it's simplicity and how it appealed to the public. If Google continues to lose touch of what appeals to the public, no amount of cool technology is going to save them. Hopefully they can manage that balancing act which is terribly difficult.
1: You couldn't buy a high "search result ranking", so results were "real".
2: It didn't force you to work a certain way (yahoo did).
3: It didn't mix in a bunch of stuff. It did what it did, no more, no less.
Honest and uncluttered search and results, and letting the user decide what and how made them successful. I tried Bing, and it seemed almost like Google with a pretty picture added to the search screen. I didn't do any comparative searches to determine which search engine is "better". However, Microsoft has a history of considering their users to be idiots who need to be led, and this mindset came out in a couple of articles/interviews I saw about their plans for bing. So I'll stick with Google for now.
On a separate note, I prefer Live Maps over Google Maps mainly due to the birdseye view and advanced paste (multi-line address), but with bing, the maps are in a subdomain instead of on a different server, which means I can't just type "maps" in the URL bar and pick the dropdown (although maps.live gets redirected for the time being.)
Even then, it appears Microsoft is trying to 'create' a dissatisfaction with <unnamed search site> which doesn't exist. Search overload? It's exactly what people are looking for: lots of options and varied potential answers. If 'search overload' was a problem, then Yahoo! would be creaming Google, not the other way around. I'm shocked that these commercials got past a focus group; I can guess the people in the room said "Wha? Huh?" Definitely spots which will pass almost unnoticed, and accomplish almost nothing in the way of sampling by most folks. Those who will sample are those who would anyway. A colossal waste of money. [My experience with Bing itself? Meh.]
T
T
Why would I want to use a inferior search engine?
Virtually every review gives Google an edge.
Microsoft is a Dinosaur.
Schmidt has been here before and he dropped the ball big time... Novell was the leader by far in the server marketplace... Microsoft can in strong with a so so product and Schmidt decided they was nothing to worry about....
Oh ya where is Novell now...
I'm just saying....
So far and for a number of years now, Schmidt has been winning the Web. Microsoft just keeps fumbling. And you know why that is? I will tell you. Google is 110% focussed on the Web. Microsoft is 25% focussed on the Web. 5% focussed on Xbox and the like, and 70% focussed on software that is fast becoming outdated compared with Web apps.
- by M5F6 June 9, 2009 9:17 PM PDT
- I tried to switch to Bing after Google commemorated the anniversary of D-Day with an homage to Tetris, but there was just no comparison. Bing's image search was better, but that's about it. If I was looking up a name, but misspelled it, Bing helpfully provided the 6 pages on the internet that used the same spelling I did, and nothing else. Google is smart enough to overlook what I ask for and give me what I probably want, and that's enough to keep me coming back.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (74 Comments)