Comments on: Bing balloons into public view

Microsoft's big bet on search begins to be publicly available, with the opinions rolling in fast and furious.

[C_Urrea]

Graphically intensive homepage and search results are piggish on memory and processor.
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.

[empirestatebuddy]

are you using a Commodore 64? lol

[tgrenier]

Can you post some specifics? I'd be very interested to find out how many CPU cycles and page faults a search is taking on your computer. Memory utilization would be interesting as well. If you really want to be useful and credible, you could post same information from a similar search using whichever engine you prefer to bing.

thanks,

Tom

[troyrig]

I second the comment by empirestatebuddy. Seriously, if pictures are hogging your resources then it's time to upgrade from a 1990's system.

[drwam]

Listen. It is more resource intensive than Google. It is better looking too. We all need some days to compare usefulness in real world, gotta-have-it search situations.

[eltoro2827]

@C_Urrea how bout buying a computer not loaded with windows 3.11

[Mergatroid Mania]

You guys are so snobbish, it's unbelievable.
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.

[make_or_break]

Clean off the trojans, worms and spyware; you will be amazed at the performance upgrade.

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.

[gofalcons]

mergatroid mania.....if you need to upgrade your computer to look at a search engine, your computer is 20 years old, or you're using a calculator.......maybe youre i.t. team needs to do some cleanup maint. on those cpus?

[gofalcons]

oh and mergatroid, more money than brains......youre the one talking about a product youve never used when you obviously know nothing about computers....who has the brains here.......lol.

[myles taylor]

When I first heard about Bing, I thought it would be another failed Microsoft attempt to take a crack at Google, but it actually looks pretty good. I don't think it will be a major game-changer, but it looks decent at least and I might try it out.

[myles taylor]

I tried out Bing for awhile and I like some things, but ultimately, it has to do some things just as well as Google in order to win my use. Where Google really wins is simplicity and that's why I use them. Bing tries to make things too complicated. I was looking for a song and I randomly typed in the lyrics, as I often do on Google, and it took some creative scrolling and jumping around the page to find it. Google found it on the first try.

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.

[sean_001]

Bing makes google look old.

[ogman]

Moogle (Bing) is Google with a fancy dress. Nothing more.

[manojlds]

Bing is good and it just might give Google some competition. But your statement is way overboard. Or rather, Google lives up to the adage "Old is Gold". Google will still be the numero uno, in the near future atleast.

[gefitz]

In that, it looks like Google has for years? Yeah, it does. Why invent when someone else already has (Microsoft's growth model in a nutshell)?

[Mergatroid Mania]

Reinventing the wheel is a waste of resources unless you have some major improvments to make. I think the jury is still out on that.

[FutureGuy]

@ogman
http://www.pcworld.com/article/165749/bing_vs_google_vs_yahoo_feature_smackdown.html
but don't get facts get in your way.

[pentest]

Too bad it still can't compete your it counts: returning relevant results.

[karpenterskids]

First search I've done so far...and I've gotten weird results.

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.

[dhavleak]

In terms of learning from what's clicked -- that adaptation doesn't happen instantly -- it takes more clicks (not a single user) and more time (typically a day) for log processing, index updating, etc. Same is the case with any search engine.

[Ted Miller]

Heh! Heh! "with the opinions rolling in fast and furious" I come on thinking there will be over a thousand comments and there where only three. Mine makes 4 at this time. Ha, Ha, Ha joke on me. ;-)

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...

[hpjin]

Looking forward to using Bing (4 letters), hopefully better than Google (6 letters)

[rcrusoe]

Using a bing in my state is a Class A misdemeanor unless you are holding more than .5 oz at which time it becomes a Class E felony. :)

What is it about Microsoft that makes them incapable of coming up with good names for their services?

[karpenterskids]

Good point...if we're REALLY in a rush to search for something, it'll at least be two letters easier. :)

[Jonathan]

I don?t give a crap what Live Search looks like or is rebranded to. If it can?t do as good of a job as Google on MS?s own sites, let alone the rest of the web, I won?t touch it.

[eltoro2827]

thank god...wont have to worry about you slowing things down .

[woodycr]

Search: Garmin 750

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.

[ogman]

" 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.

[FutureGuy]

No search engine is always accurate, it relies on other sites to come up with its information.
Here's a comparison for Google and Bing.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/165749/bing_vs_google_vs_yahoo_feature_smackdown.html

[zwu_ca]

About fair use of preview of the videos -- how about the websites such as http://www.elookinto.com and http://www.clusty.com? They do 'preview' (embedded the other web pages directly in their web pages). Nobody goes after them? They have been around for awhile. Embedding videos seems to be reasonable to me.

[scdecade]

Bing is worse than Live Search. My universal search engine test is a search for my own screen name: scdecade. The previous time I checked Google was 5,500% better than MS Search. Now using Bing I find that Google is 12,000% better. So MS needs to get twelve thousand percent better before they're equal to Google. It's going in the wrong direction for MS I'm afraid.

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.

[Super2online]

There is no such thing as "too late" in my book. If a site gives better results through a mix of additional features that pin point the information your looking for more accurately, then it's better late than never.

[scdecade]

"If a site gives better results through a mix of additional features..."

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.

[massfat]

scdecade, Bing has only been around for less than 2 days. Give it some time. Also, publishers have discovered that Bing crawls and indexes at much higher rates than Google, so you can look forward to that.

[pentest]

Bing(what a stupid name, what is wrong with MS?) has been indexing for some time, not "two days".

[tippcity]

I did a search on the following keywords "traps sofie wordpress uncategorized support"
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.

[Super2online]

Watch the videos (and read all the other info) at www.discoverbing.com and you will find a wealth of knowledge about all the new features that Microsoft's new competitor is offering that aren't immediately apparent when you look the search results pages for any given search. Until you do, it's impossible to evaluate and measure the differences between Google, Yahoo and Bing.

[ducttape36]

just set it as my default search in the browser. going to give it an honest chance, at least a week. so far its ok, but i hate the images that show up with the results. they are distracting.

[pcampagna]

I did a search for my name which i've ranked number one in google for like 4+ years. I don't even come up in the first 17 pages??!!!! ***?

That pretty much tells me Bing is Crap. Microsoft products always suck. Google is king....

[eltoro2827]

google is old

[a85]

Google is king? MS always sucks? A quick overview:

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.

[massfat]

Dude, bing has only been around for 2 days. Why don't you let it crawl some more pages? Or maybe Bing's algorithm is just different and your websites are like spam?

[empirestatebuddy]

I like Bing and have already made it my "default" search engine.

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.

[applebibek]

Bing couldn't cross over google.
till now google is best.

[mjconver]

Too slow, but the balloons are cute. I'll tell my Mother-in-law to try it, she doesn't care how slow the searches are, she's in her 80's. In the mean time, I'm sticking with Google, speed is everything.

[woodycr]

Search: multiple routes garmin google maps

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.

[DigitalAngelic]

Searching for Google Maps stuff on Bing? Of course Google's going to get better results for THAT. XD

[walletless]

BING: BING Is the New Google

[Seaspray0]

or Bing Is Not Google (read that one friday). I'm sure there will be plenty of accronyms floating around soon.

[karpenterskids]

But...It's Not Google!

[Proud_Geek]

BING: Bring In New Government

[CodyG [WINDOWS-TEAM]]

If you've got some specific questions on Bing, or just want to see it in action, there'll be a
"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

[Seaspray0]

Does this mean we'll finally find out who shot JFK?

[gtdtm]

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

[empirestatebuddy]

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

[gtdtm]

@empirestatebuddy:

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?