Comments on: Microsoft Bing: Much better than expected

A test drive of the new Bing search engine reveals a solid and enjoyable product.

[Justin8888]

GOOGLE FOREVER!!!

[_Me__]

Justin8888 = IGNORANT FOREVER!
I think I'll give Bing a try, if it works fine for me, great... otherwise, there are always alternatives!

[Dalmatian28]

"If there is a will, there is a way"....this is why we should encourage competition for all businesses regardless what they do! It took Google to make Microsoft better and it will take a Bing to make Google's and Yahoo's search engines improve even more! As a users, we should try to reward this effort and make other compete even harder! If Bing and Google produce same results, I will use Bing just to reward Microsoft for the effort.... but if Google improves even more, I will go back! The key here is that we as a users can also influence how hard search providers are trying by keeping search market shares as "liquid" as possible! If we keep rewarding those that are trying hard to be innovative and punish those that are standing on on place and are happy with their market share that they have. (egz. yahoo)... the biggest winners will be users and that should be the ultimate goal for all of us using those search engines!

[eltoro2827]

GOOGLE NEVER!!!!

[eltoro2827]

good point Dalmatian28

[slapppy]

@ Dalmatian28

Yeah but umm Google has to earn a profit and be a success with the products they provide in order to improve it. How is that fair when the competition keeps failing on a product, yet it comes back again and again.

[BogusBasin]

We've all seen what Microsoft does with their Monopoly power. I will not be using Bing because I will not do business with a predatory corporation. It is bad for consumers. They have stifled so much innovation over the years, starting with their refusal to embrace open standards. How many web-pages refuse to load properly in anything but IE? Give them a monopoly in search and soon the search results will start leaning toward MS products or MS partners and away from the competition.

I better run. I think I stirred up a hive of MS loyalists. Here comes monkeyfun14 and ***********

[techsorceress]

I agree-MSN and Yahoo are always trying to compete, but never make that cut

[Cheese McBeese]

Oh c'mon bogusbasin, don't be such a bleeding-heart Microsoft-hater. Google is no saint and has left the 'do no evil' days waaay behind. Ask Google's advertising competitors how they feel about Google.

With the exception of search and Youtube (which they bought) I find Google's products to be mediocre at best and weak in many cases when compared with industry alternatives. Hey, wait a minute! That sounds just like what the masses say about Microsoft! Imagine that!

The more Google succeeds, the more they start to look and behave like Microsoft and Oracle.

The only company that is pure and true to itself is Apple (ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha)

[jumbo123]

justin you are an egocentric moron, you know why.. you are saying...there are alternative.. there are no alternatives.. google is one and only one alternative the best of the search

[jumbo123]

STAR WARS---
darth rader -- steve jobs
jedi - google
ja ja binks steve balmer

[bobmarleypeople]

Another search engine, more wasted time+money by Microsoft. I wish they'd spend said money and time on making operating systems instead of clogging the intertubes.

[FutureGuy]

@"Another search engine" are you nuts or from a different planet. Google has a monopoly on search, if Bing proves to be as good as this article states it would be the first real competition for Google.

[softwarewillalwaysbebuggy]

"Another search engine, more wasted time+money by Microsoft."

Not that I completely disagree with the sentiment, but that's exactly what I said when Google came out. Now I use it all the time.

[Mr.Californian]

Who cares about a monopoly? It is merely ignorant to follow along with the mentality that all monopolies are bad. Google is not stagnant ("complacent") and many of the features that people will claim bing "inspired" them to implement have surely been in development for a while now.
I will certainly try bing (damn that name is annoying), but, to be honest, I'm not changing from Google with only minor improvements from another because I use every Google product/service (except AdWords and AdSense) for their superiority, so it would be quite inconvenient to use bing.

[Spartan_458]

Have you seen Windows 7? Obviously they have been.

Microsoft has really been on its game lately. Windows 7 is looking like a big hit, the Xbox 360 and Xbox Live have really taken off, the Zune HD looks awesome, and now Bing looks to be really good. Call me thoroughly impressed, Microsoft.

[Cheese McBeese]

@Spartan_458 - I feel the same way. I think Windows 7 is the best o/s Microsoft has ever released. I'm loving it and starting to become impatient with OSX which feels a little 'slow and bloated' by comparison.

The combination of XBOX and XBOX Live is killer. Just like iPod and iTunes. I like the look of the new Zune, but until msft can deliver an iTunes to go with it, it will struggle.

[pentest]

"I think Windows 7 is the best o/s Microsoft has ever released. "

When the bar is on the floor, it is not hard to step over it.

[Mr. Dee]

How can I try it when its not even available? They couldn't even pre-release it just to give consumers a taste. I am looking forward to it though and plan on pressing it hardware with some questions.

[Vegaman_Dan]

It's been in use for months now at MSFT and its business partners. Kind of surpised it has teken this long to get set to public release.

[knowles2]

They trying Wolfram Alpha tactic here, talk about something, let internet reviews hype it up and then release the product and then we all go back to Google realising they still are the best and king of the jungle and we all stoping talking about the new/old kid on the block.

Of cause Microsoft hoping the last bit does not happen and we continue using the service.

[dgutf]

I'll give it a good look. Unlike many others, I prefer not to write off something just because its offered by a company I may not care for.

[eccles1214]

Agreed. I never cared for Google nor Microsoft all that much, although I do use YouTube and Microsoft Office. I rarely use Google anymore -- it was nice for a while but it brings up too many ad listings, plus I hate those ubiquitous "Ads by Google" that are everywhere. I will try Bing because it is new.

Likewise, I stopped using IE and Firefox; now I use Safari and I may try Chrome but only if it doesn't force me to use Google like Firefox did at first. Unfortunately, Safari limits me to Google and Yahoo, but there is an add-on that allows the addition of alternative search engines.

[cnetbelmatic]

Google..better because youre used to it? maybe..Id give it a fair and impartial shake when i get to it, seems a bit Google biased, but noones denying Google is good, but it wasnt always what it is now, from what I see so far I would say this is leaps beyond what google was when it started, of course relatively speaking...and if it grows organically over time like google did it could definitely be a contender
I see you switched to calling it "Kumo"

[dgutf]

I'll give it a good look. Unlike many others, I prefer not to write off something just because its offered by a company I may not care for. As has been suggested before, if Microsoft would put out an app that didnt have the Microsoft name on it, people would often love it.

[peterpulmonary]

hooray for bing!

[basraw]

Will searching for LINUX return more than 5 results? Or will they be suppressed as previous MICROSOFT SEARCH ENGINES DID?

[lsilvest]

Why don't they use some of this technology in their Help searches for Windows and Office which are truly pathetic. I teach classes for these products and advise students to just type their question in Google since MS Help won't give you anything resembling a cogent result.

Microsoft's history with any kind of search is so bad that anything they come up with would have to far surpass Google to get anyone to switch. The only ones that use Microsoft Live Search are the brain dead that don't know how to change their default engine in IE (or aren't smart enough to use FireFox or even Chrome).

As for this article, it wouldn't be the first time by far that a CNET "expert" was completely off base with a review.
.

[Rawnchie14]

"track record". You lost me completely once you suddenly decide to judge a product you didn't use by a track record, then follow it by judging an analyst for his opinion of something he actually used - as opposed to you.

I feel bad for your students, having ... a teacher who knows how to bring up completely irrelevant products (such as Office and Windows, since they are separate devisions from the web search team), and related it to Bing.

You're a champion.

Regardless I'm glad this guy is judging it by what it is, rather than who developed it...
[CNET editor's note: Personal attacks deleted.]

[w0000992]

Don't worry about Raunchy. Most who have any experience agree 100% with what you said.

[monkeyfun14]

History History History

Does anyone believe in change anymore? The Germans used to be Jew hating racists does that mean they are now?

[knowles2]

To be fair you do have a valid point if there new search algorithms are good then instead them reinventing or coming with new ones for other products it would make sense for them to use the bing algorithms through all there products. Also this would make it easier for them to maintain and developed these algorithms using one team of developers instead of many.

But I guest would want to at least get bing working online first before integrating it into all there products.

[eccles1214]

Firefox and Chrome aren't the only alternatives to IE. There are others, some quite good.
Went from IE to Netscape, then to Opera, and then to Firefox. When I found out that Google was feeding innovation at non-profit Mozilla (through Mozilla's for profit subsidiary), I stopped using Firefox. Chrome is fast, but it's a Google product meant to both deflect the fact that Google has its paws up Mozilla's @$$ and to funnel more people to Google sites. Google controls enough traffic already, just like Microsoft controls enough desktop apps and OS's already.

So I now use Safari. And NO, I don't own an iPod nor a Zune.

[lonestarState]

Been using my own custom Live Search, for sometime now, that was created using the BuildaSearch Service, and find Live searches to be quite good. I Guess I should be calling them Bing Results now. I went from using Google to Yahoo search in a few days. People are just to scared to try anything new.

[w0000992]

No not scared, just sticking with the best. Are you suggesting that yahoo search is better than google?
Test them side by side. You're find that you're mistaken.

[eltoro2827]

sorry you think google is the best. guess what...its not.

[manojlds]

I used the Yahoo BOSS Api for my search web app and I found the results that I got in my application to be much better than those given by Yahoo Search. On par with Google. Seems like Yahoo has optimized their search, but that definitely degraded the results for my search queries. But am sure, having used Yahoo extensively, and of course, Google, Google is better...

Hope Bing does well!

[knowles2]

Yes I scared, I also find it hard that consider how much google knows about my search history and so fourth that any other search engine could do better.
Certainly when I have test them they rarely do better but they are often worst.
Only one I fine occasionally does better is Ask, but only occassionally.

But humans do not like change, we never have and never will and that why I congratulate companies like Google and Facebook who regularly force change down people throats and even Microsoft forcing everyone to change to a new gui design in office. I hope they all continue to do it.

[eccles1214]

To w0000992:

I think another thing that lonestarState is hinting at is that what constitutes the best search is subjective:
It depends on what you are searching for, how you phrase your keywords, and what search engine you use and their results depend on their current index at the time of your search.

While results from Google, Bing, Yahoo, Gigablast, Mamma, Anoox, Mahalo, Cuil, Altavista, Hotbot, Looksmart, Excite, Ixquick, AOL search, Ask, etc. do overlap and have different degrees of depth and comprehensiveness, no search is perfect. The web is ever-expanding, and search engines need to crawl, sort, index, and analyze what they find. That takes time.

Most people find Google's results the best because of force of habit or force of link via Firefox or suggested by their peers.

Next time, try Blindsearch. blindsearch.fejus.com

It anonymously allows you do compare Yahoo, Google, and Bing.
I've tried it 30+ times now, and am finding that I get about 40% for Google, 35% for Bing, and 25% for Yahoo.
Your mileage may vary, depending on the terms you choose.

So why is Google at 70%+ market share: habit, word of mouth, inertia, in addition to good results.
It's brand marketing at work, whether intentionally done by Google, but more likely done by its fans and users.

[sean_001]

I use yahoo, i never bother to look at google. it is something weird, something only weirdos want to try. now, I like to try Bing.

[w0000992]

huh?? am I hearing right that people here are disputing whether google is king of internet searches?
So the majority of all internet users are ignorantly using an inferior product?

I can handle you being hopeful that bing might challenge google, but until then, get over yourselves.

[De Ward]

"huh?? am I hearing right that people here are disputing whether google is king of internet searches?
So the majority of all internet users are ignorantly using an inferior product?"

Allow me to use an acronym. Lol.
Especially that last part, ever heard about that little operating system called Windows? What the masses throw their flowers at, doesn't necessarily make it fabulous.


Don't get me wrong, I love Google, use it all the time. What I love even more is some competition, as stated that's what really forces companies to keep going. I'll support Linux and Macs if it forces Microsoft to do a better job (Windows 7 seems to catch on, I welcome this, keep up the struggle to be the best, it benefits the users most of all). I'll support Windows if it forces the people behind Ubuntu to make their OS more perfect. I'll support Mac if it forces the rest to give me more eyecandy.
Exact same thing with browsers, exact same thing with this. I'll try out Bing, maybe even like it more and pray to science it catches on and forces Google to do an even better job.

[Ilgaz]

Well, in that case, majority of computer owners run Windows so Windows must be spectacular.

I won't even touch MS Search service unless they change their policy of giving hell to anyone who doesn't use Windows/IE once and forever, including proof that it won't change but please, don't let me start about Google which build an empire with locking down users to their search bribing browser developers and even OS Vendors (check Apple Safari on OS X).

[eccles1214]

To w0000992:

No the majority of people use Google not just because of results, but because of habit and marketing.
All those Ads by Google just reminds people subconsciously to use Google.
All those Google search bars just feed into Google.
Firefox defaults to Google search.

Why not see for yourself that while Google is probably the better search engine, it does not garner 65-85% of the market by good results alone. It's the above and more.

Try Blindsearch: blindsearch.fejus.com, and see for yourself.

I did, and now I am using Bing and Yahoo more often, because most of my searches came up as either Yahoo or Bing. Google was close, though.

Bottom line, the accuracy of your search results is only as good as the engine you use and the results YOU expect to find. Using the same search engine over and over out of habit may prevent you from finding results that that particular engine doesn't prioritize up front; it may be hidden in back pages.

[eldibujante]

Microsoft must have a better search engine before its even worth a try. What's the point in providing search "features" when the search results are not the best? Google by default works by relevance, in the news article you mentioned, Google directed you to the best answer according to its calculations.

That is what Google does best, it finds what you are looking for, normally within the first results so there is no need for additional formatting. This is the reason why they haven't change the format of searching very much, most of the times the good stuff is right on top in front of your eyes. I have to use google to find stuff inside microsoft.com, have you ever tried finding something in microsoft.com? of course this is not the same than bing but it shows that they have never really cared for the science of searching.

[monkeyfun14]

But Bing also has faster indexing this is also a newer search engine give it time.

[pentest]

It doesn't matter how fast it is when the results aren't very good.

[eccles1214]

@pentest:

"when the results aren't very good"

How do you judge good or bad results? By your own subjective satisfaction. _You_ decide if the results are good enough for you to use. If I use a small search engine like Gigablast and I like the results I get, then why using Google? If I am unhappy with the results, then I'll try another engine. If you take the time to compare results from the big engines, there is a great deal of overlap, but there are also things that each engine misses.

Also, because Bing does things like Wolfram Alpha DOES NOT mean that Bing copied WolframAlpha. Software doesn't evolve nor is written overnight. Microsoft has been working on Bing for quite some time, just as Wolfram Software has been working on Alpha for a long time. Coincidence doesn't mean plagiarism in every case.

[experiencemusic]

Great article! Just one question - you mentioned that Google's results were better for the query "Best house paint for humid climates". What answer did Google's results give you for this query? I couldn't find anything on Google that gave me an answer to this valid query. Seems to prove that search is bad across the board rather than google is better. Thoughts?

[Seaspray0]

I put it into google and it gave me this link...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10251432-2.html

[massfat]

LOL Seapspray0!
That's just funny.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Heh, I didn't believe it until I tried it. Heh. No place like home.

[SebDavies]

Wishes they just relaunched Live as this in stead of changing names. Windows Live Search fits in with all their other products!

[SebDavies]

eg. Windows Live Skydrive
Windows Live Photo Gallery
Windows Live Mail
etc

[SebDavies]

But it sure does look good whatever the name!

[CyStarkman]

Bing Shming.

But what I don't really get is why people believe Google is so good. Of course I Google along with the rest of the planet but I don't think its very good.

Google is just the biggest index, like the net within the net but as for giving meaningful results, its primitive.

Those "advanced algorithms" that Google launched with that looked at who referenced, not what something said about itself, well, such innovation long left Google. They have been replaced with the world's most advanced advertising algorithms coupled with the world's most bizarre corporate acquisitions plan.

This has led to a sprawling mostly dissimilar empire of properties in various stages of construction or collapse, with the corporate focus shifting from new toy, to new toy while the whole web is splattered in "ads by google"

And to repeat, yes I use Google Search, News, Earth, Maps, YouTube and Blogger.

Search is whatever
News is good
Earth is crumbly
Maps is pretty good
YouTube is crumbly
Blogger is lame (I also use Wordpress which is awesome)

[t8]

Sure Google isn't for everyone. You might be the 20% outside of Google services. Your choice.

[The_happy_switcher]

The name is just dumb. I hear it's an acronym for But It's Not Google.

[aukid32]

Dumb as Apple inserting "i" in every product?

[Seaspray0]

@applerocks1993. Your first sentence... waste of our time. Your second sentence... it made me laugh in a good way. Atleast you're showing some improvement... and who knows, it actually could be an acronym for that.

[bbabadu]

That's exactly what I said about "Google" when I first heard the name.

Actually, in the tradition of GNU (GNU's Not UNIX), it would be Bing Is Not Google.

[Vegaman_Dan]

There's a lot of product names out there that are silly, yet are taken very seriously.

Yahoo
Google
Twitter
Fandago
Pepsi
iPod

[Seaspray0]

Ok, it's been over a day now and I still have that stuck in my head... "but it's not google." LOL. Applerocks, where did you dig that up? It's positively brilliant!

[kojacked]

I don't think the name is anything like AppleRocks or it's comments but I do think that "Bang" would have been a better choice. I would love to be able to say "I Banged it".

[DarkDragonflyy]

Bing makes surfboards and is also an energy drink.

[jbolsen]

I searched "Best house paint for humid climates" on Bing and it gave me one link to this article.
Same search on Google gave a number of articles (20000+) on how to paint etc.
Better on Google so far but not exactly answering the question either...

[jbolsen]

Scratch that! I used quotation marks on Bing which of course narrowed the result to an exact match which the Google search was without quotation marks.

Doing it right gives me a number of MORE relevant articles on Bing - the top link is a scientific study on how to mix paint for hmid climates "http://www.buildingscience.com/documents/primers/plonearticlemultipage.2006-11-16.8755545932/section-2-the-basic-mixed-humid-climate-house"

I'd say that Bing wins that one easily.

[jbolsen]

Actually I was wrong again. reading the article it's clear that it's NOT about house paint but simply contains the words spread out in the article. The problem is that the preview feature mislead me into thinking that's what it was about. Seems like a possible problem to watch out for when searching and reading the link-previews.

I'd say instead that the Google results are more relevant as this article mentions - not perfect but better than Bing where the first paint-relevant link comes as number 8 in the results...

So I now call Google the winner of that one.

[monkeyfun14]

How did you get access to bing?

[ExWinUser]

I searched the word "****" and it gave a definition of "A Microsoft Fanboy!"

[Vegaman_Dan]

@ExWinUser:

"I searched the word "****" and it gave a definition of "A Microsoft Fanboy!""

And how exactly does this comment add to the value of the conversation taking place? Did you honestly believe people would look at that comment and think, "Why, this person has an excellent point and this will greatly affect my view on this new service!" Did you make the comment in hopes of being witty or humorous? Did you revel in the anticipation that people would take your comments seriously as a thought provoking statement? Or did you do it just to be an immature clown?

I think it's clear to the readers which one it is... oh, and the big red floppy shoes can be found on Aisle 14.

[tipoo_]

I do believe "Bing" captures the entire scope of the impact this will have on the market place. Well, that and maybe a hint of riccochet whine.

[technewsjunkie]

HOW MUCH will they TIE it to Windows and Office?

Get it?

[Seaspray0]

There is a plug in for office 7 and windows live. Since office has already been released, it would take a plug in to make the connection to bing. Plug in's have to be downloaded and installed manually, so if you're expecting some automatic tie in, chances are no.

[technewsjunkie]

It is much easier to copy or imitate than to INVENT or see the future direction of technology (like browsers for instance).

If you also have a monopoly, it is much easier to propagate your imitation, and certainly gain market share.

"Too big to fail"?

[monkeyfun14]

How much more can you innovate a search engine I mean honestly.

[viper396]

There's a certainly irony in people who are so narrow-minded that they can only bring up tired old arguments about copying, innovation and monopoly. There's nothing original about your commentary and you're obviously too closed minded to look beyond it.

It's not like Google, Apple, Linux, or any other company were actually first at everything they do. We all benefit when multiple companies make similiar products and try to one up each other. If only the innovator or inventor of a product were allowed to make that product we'd all be using one kind of computer, driving the same kind of car, watching the same kind of TV, and wearing identical clothes. Innovation is more then simply being the originator of an idea.

[Vegaman_Dan]

I findi it ironic that you yourself are copying and imitating a very common old saw used by fanboys. Does that mean you yourself are part of the problem?

[pentest]

"How much more can you innovate a search engine I mean honestly."

A lot.

I will forgive you for not understanding that the mathematics behind search are extremely difficult, which is why MS fails so consistently at it. After all, you MS shill aren't exactly known for your intelligence.