Slashdot Mirror

I do not think Microsoft views Linux as a legitimate competitor.

Besides, why risk losing credibility in manipulating search results, when there's a far simpler strategy? Give yourself free ads for common search terms

Example: content management, sql, mail server, antivirus, email account, instant messenger

I do not think Microsoft views Linux as a legitimate competitor.

Besides, why risk losing credibility in manipulating search results, when there's a far simpler strategy? Give yourself free ads for common search terms

Example: content management, sql, mail server, antivirus, email account, instant messenger

I do not think Microsoft views Linux as a legitimate competitor.

Besides, why risk losing credibility in manipulating search results, when there's a far simpler strategy? Give yourself free ads for common search terms

Example: content management, sql, mail server, antivirus, email account, instant messenger

I do not think Microsoft views Linux as a legitimate competitor.

Besides, why risk losing credibility in manipulating search results, when there's a far simpler strategy? Give yourself free ads for common search terms

Example: content management, sql, mail server, antivirus, email account, instant messenger

True, but Google's yet to pay you to search by giving you cashback like Bing does. I know it's talked about a lot on deals sites like FatWallet. I suspect a non-trivial percentage of Bing's search traffic is simply people using it to get cashback on something they buy, but they go use Google all the other times they search.

Everyone knows it's the lack of search data that caused Bing to initially suggest (and probably still does) Windows when typing in something related to Ubuntu or Linux. I mean seriously, how are they supposed to know what you want from terms like Linux or Ubuntu. What do those even mean?

Just for the record, Bing's first page of search results for Ubuntu and Linux are quite reasonable. Can't speak to what they returned in the past...

Everyone knows it's the lack of search data that caused Bing to initially suggest (and probably still does) Windows when typing in something related to Ubuntu or Linux. I mean seriously, how are they supposed to know what you want from terms like Linux or Ubuntu. What do those even mean?

Just for the record, Bing's first page of search results for Ubuntu and Linux are quite reasonable. Can't speak to what they returned in the past...

I do, but only for the sweet cashback, http://www.bing.com/shopping/pages/howtouse.aspx?FORM=R5FD2 ,actually I am just testing that out.

100% agree.

One of the things that both of these search engines do is group some similar results into a category, but they arent using any automation to dynamically create categories. For example, both will group some videos together, and some images together:

Moon Landing
Moon Landing

But they arent grouping forums together, published paper archives together, patent archives together, or any of the other classes of sites where you will get dozens of hits all with the exact same or very highly similar (copied) content.

Now, they could manually start grouping these things up, but that isnt the real solution. The solution is to recognize highly correlated sites and group them.

Here is a list of providers at risk thanks to the great new search engine Moogle

I wonder why all the dictators of countries with socialized health care (and Canadian celebrities) come to the 37th ranked USA for treatment.

You're displaying the usual American ignorance: many dictators are aware that the USA's health system is not the best. For example, when the North Korean leader needed treatment in 2008, he went to France. So did Arafat, while Chile's Pinochet preferred the UK and Ethiopia's leader goes to Belgium. The infamous Mobutu of Congo also went to Europe for his health care. There are many others; indeed, I believe a majority of the African leaders (dictators or not) get their health care in Europe (mostly UK or France).

OTOH, your argument is just silly anyway. Nobody denies you can get good treatment in the USA if you have lots of money; the problem is what happens when you don't.

Ah, should have pasted this instead:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+awesome%22&go=&form=QBRE&qs=n

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+awesome%3F%22&aq=f&aql=&aqi=&oq= ... somehow the quotes fell off.

Yep. No results from Bing. So Bing doesn't think Microsoft Windows is awesome?

I thought those results seem a bit skewed, so I thought I'd do a search on "why is google evil", on bing and on google.

If you look at those results, the google results actually have more page links related to google being evil (all on first page, exception of one like to a google corporate policy. The same search on bing only returned half of the pages actually linking google to evil (#3,4,5 are links specifying that google isn't evil). Clearly bing has a pro google bias, and google has some sort of grudge against google!

I'm not defending microsoft here, and I don't understand their search strategy, but maybe their search results deliberately return some opposites or counterpoints to the question asked / standpoint. Personally, I would rather have a search engine show a couple of counterpoints on searches like "Democrats are destroying America", "Republicans are destroying America", "Why religion is right", "Why religion is wrong" etc... Maybe it'll help people see multiple viewpoints and be a little more objective.

Ummm .... http://www.bing.com/news/search ScienceAndTechnology

Interestingly.. what happens with...
"Why is Microsoft Windows so awesome?" ... which is more relevant?

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+awesome&go=&form=QBRE&qs=n

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+awesome%3F&aq=f&aql=&aqi=&oq=

I think the Google search is actually better... but I could be biased.

SwitchingToUbuntuFromWindows on the Ubuntu wiki is the first hit on both for me.

Bing search
Google search

Why is the parent modded troll? The results are easily reproducible:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+expensive%3F%22&go=&form=QBLH&qs=n&sc=1-40

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=%22Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+expensive%3F%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aql=&aqi=&oq=%22Why+is+Microsoft+Windows+so+expensive%3F%22&fp=e8d6ef47431c6a4a

The specific first hit on Bing is the specific answers.yahoo.com question "Why are Mac's So Expensive".

You're probably new here, but if you'd RTFA, you'd see that:

It seems their bots completely ignore the rules specified in the robots.txt, despite me setting it up as per their own guidelines on their site

Come to think of it though, isn't this what happens to most people who try to interoperate with Microsoft?

Amusingly, if I Google for "bing robots.txt" I get a link to a bing page titled "Bing - Robots.txt Disallow vs No Follow - Neither Working!" which has already been elided from history by Microsoft. CLassy.

Mark my words: Apple will not partner with Bing. The reason for this is simple: Bing is an inferior product. Don't believe me? Using Bing for any length of time evidences this. I'll give you a simple example. Let's say you want the carbon Firefox icon. You search for "carbon firefox."

Here are the results for Google.
Here are the results for Bing.

Now, they share many sites, but out of the links provided more of the Bing results go astray. Bing, for example, decides it's horribly relevant to link you to The Carbon County Chamber of Commerce.

Your assertion that Apple isn't large enough to create their own search engine is also preposterous. How many employees does Yahoo! have? About 14,000. How many employees does Apple have? About 35,000. Apple will not partner with Bing because Bing simply isn't better than Google. Apple would likely create their own search engine before doing so.

As a side-note, that carbon Firefox icon is pretty nice.

What market are you in? For the US version I get:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Honda+Civic&mkt=en-us

1) An infocard showing: summary, price range, MPG, reviews and specs

2) The link to the official Honda Civic page
3) The wikipedia article
4) Image thumbnails

5) SECTION of results related to Used Honda Civics
6) SECTION of results related to Honda Civic Accessories
7) SECTION of results related to Honda Civic Parts
8) SECTION of results related to Honda Civic Manuals

It's spot on in all respects.

Considering the efficiency of Bings webcrawler it is really sad to see.
Bings webcrawler is indexing new pages in weeks where Googles webcrawler does it in hours...
...and this is btw. known by Microsoft

I just entered Bing and the daily picture today is this.

According to Firefox the file size is 81.98 KB (83950 bytes). Which would take a whole 15 seconds to download on a 56k modem. Using the average 5.1 mbps connection speed in the US it would take far less than 1 second. Does the image really make it that much slower?

I have made a webpage, that is just a js withouth html, and it score the first, and second on bing movile, and first for normal devices.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=fotos+de+perritos&go=&form=QBRE&filt=all

this page:
http://www.servicios-dpi.com/fun/perritos.htm

It used to score well in Yahoo too. It seems these primitive search engine ( Bing, Yahoo, ) are more confident on meta data like title, than in the actual data of the website. AND/OR these search engines are easy cheated because use %, so if the 100% of your webpage is relevant, your page is awesome, so your page made of only the search term will be the best page.

The algorithm of Bing is poor.

The algorithm of Google started as rather good, and Is getting better and better, because is good, and because is need to fight spam. Any other search engine is way behing.

Missed one. I guess maybe Bing is useful after all. It's a humor engine.

Which is the sole reason I dont use NetFlix. Or watch videos on Microsoft's site.

I've seen this response many times, yet I have never seen a reasonable explanation for the boycott. Do you hate Silverlight because it's Microsoft or is there something wrong with the technology that has made you stay away?

I have limited exposure to the Bing Video site, but with that limited exposure, I have had nothing but positive experiences. I've experienced no problem streaming HD content, for example. YouTube, on the other hand, struggled badly to stream 720P content through my FiOS connection running at 25 Mb/sec (both up and down).

From an architectural / security standpoint, Silverlight runs in a Sandbox, among other things, which greatly improve security (this most certainly isn't another Active X). Additionally, as a developer, I feel that C# is a better language than AS 3. I don't know any designers that have worked in Expression Blend, so I can't comment on their vantage point. I welcome their comments, however.

I think we are heading to more powerful, small and cheaper devices. One of the defining things will be physical screen size (not pixel resolution). I think there will be four first order sizes:

1. The pocket/portable sizes. Things like phones that you can carry all the time. There will be various sizes, but there is an upper limit - perhaps something a little larger than todays iPhone.
2. A range of mobile sizes - these are (and will be) more laptop like devices - clam shells and slates. These wont be pocket able, but they will range in size from 10" screens on up to 14 or 15 inches.
3. Desktop and mobile devices with larger screens, 17" on up for mobile, and 20 on up for desktops.
4. TVs

Some people collapse the 2nd and 3d categories into one and talk about "Three screens". This is how Ballmer currently sees things,

Well, in computing, 2 is just 3 but backwards 5 years in processing power. My 1 year old netbook (cat. 2) is similar in processing power as my 5 year old desktop PC (cat. 3)

Perhaps - though we do see technology becoming cheaper and more powerful over time. My first Intel 286 based PC was $2,500 and had a whopping 128KB of memory.

Today, my iPhone has orders of magnitude more processing power, memory, storage and screen pixles. Its just a few hundred bucks.

I think we are heading to more powerful, small and cheaper devices. One of the defining things will be physical screen size (not pixel resolution). I think there will be four first order sizes:

1. The pocket/portable sizes. Things like phones that you can carry all the time. There will be various sizes, but there is an upper limit - perhaps something a little larger than todays iPhone.
2. A range of mobile sizes - these are (and will be) more laptop like devices - clam shells and slates. These wont be pocket able, but they will range in size from 10" screens on up to 14 or 15 inches.
3. Desktop and mobile devices with larger screens, 17" on up for mobile, and 20 on up for desktops.
4. TVs

Some people collapse the 2nd and 3d categories into one and talk about "Three screens". This is how Ballmer currently sees things,

Google is the first and so far the only ones to do that

Google was the first to make it a production-quality feature, in 2007. On the other hand, Live Maps (now Bing Maps) had a publicly accessible demo of a similar thing in 2006 (the link in the article still works, but the UI is really painful to use).

Once Google released Street View, and it became quite a success, others have followed, so it's not really the only one providing this. Their coverage is still superior, though.

Google is the first and so far the only ones to do that

Google was the first to make it a production-quality feature, in 2007. On the other hand, Live Maps (now Bing Maps) had a publicly accessible demo of a similar thing in 2006 (the link in the article still works, but the UI is really painful to use).

Once Google released Street View, and it became quite a success, others have followed, so it's not really the only one providing this. Their coverage is still superior, though.

The best way to help Google improve is to use another search engine. Blacklists don't work.

Making Google understand that good alternatives exist is the only way to force them to improve, for example...

Exercise Bike Clearance

The New Bing Maps, for Microsoft's version of Street View.

That was the problem--he should have used bing.

Oh, do you mean these :)

Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Protocol Documentation

Here is the announcement from Feb 2008: Microsoft Makes Strategic Changes in Technology and Business Practices to Expand Interoperability.

Bing is your friend.

-Foredecker

I think he means the front page, which does look sort of like some crappy domain squatters web portal:
http://bing.com/
http://why5.com/

As opposed to Bing's results for "increase site members" ?

Chandler Bing?

There's also Maps - http://www.bing.com/maps/

Microsoft actually did maps before Google: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraServer-USA

Before even Google was founded.

And there's Photosynth except now it requires installation of Silverlight, which I can't be bothered to install.

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/the-guild-episode-11-battle-royale/y0g5hgdl

God help you if you actually try the search on their maps: http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?q=1+exchange+square+london+uk&mkt=en-GB&FORM=BYFD
That's a horrible mess of a map.

One of the biggest weakness of Bing is that when I type in a search for an address (in London,UK), it does not bring up google maps http://www.bing.com/search?q=1+exchange+square+london+uk&go=&form=QBLH&filt=all. With google maps, I can see nearly transport options and I can quickly see nearby candidate restaurants and coffeeshops after an event http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=1+exchange+square+london+uk&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a.

Nope, it looks like Microsoft has caved in as well. Try it now...no sign of the image. Pixsy, however, is still displaying it.

Trouble is; can you actually AVOID Bing?
I mean, you can choose not to visit the search engine or any other Microsoft site, but can you catch this cookie through visiting other sites?

Cookies do not work in a cross-domain fashion. Meaning if Bing sets a cookie on your machine, no one other than Bing can read it back.

The problem here was that the site was checking for the referral tag to see if you came from Bing's cash back page, and then set a cookie of their own to remind them that you came from Bing.

What they did is very unethical and I hope Microsoft bans them completely from the program.

I'm guessing the safest way to go would be to avoid all shops that participate in the cashback program, but I doubt Microsoft will be so helpful to provide a list for this purpose.

I hardly doubt you can avoid that list, it includes Newegg, Barnes and Noble, Walmart, the list goes on. But then again you don't need to avoid them or Bing, that's just FUD.

As for the list, there's a detailed list of all the cash back stores available at Bing (clicking on the stores in that list will take you to their site which will tell them you came from Bing).

Bing doesn't tell me!!
http://www.bing.com/search?srch=105&FORM=AS5&q=%22Will+people+finding+out+cost+more+than+lawsuits+if+it+isn't+legal%22.

Interesting thing is that this will also limit how much Google can spend on their side products, which are direct competition against Office. About Chrome OS vs. Windows I wouldn't worry so much, as Chrome OS wont run any other programs on the computer than a web browser.

Lots of people always seem to note that this wouldn't hurt Google because if people want news from certain sites they just go to the site directly. But truth is, it's a lot easier to find the news you're looking for from search engine. If you spot theres a news site you think is good quality, then you go to it.

Now if the big news sites suddenly drop from Google but can be found via Bing, people are going to change there. This is even more true with both Bing's and Google's News search. Bing is starting to be nicer to use than Google, has nifty features (like providing useful results from Wolfram Alpha, integrating Wikipedia nicely, etc) and the search results quality is on par with Google. Bing is also more stylish than Google for "casual people", but while maintaining Google-like simple interface.

And before someone has to jump on the "but only reason people use Bing is because it's default search engine in IE8!". This is no different tactic to gain users what Google uses too. They pay Firefox, Opera and other browsers and even computer manufacturers like Dell to have Google as the default search engine. But neither party overwrites the previous setting, like many seem to say about IE8 - it doesn't change it if Google is already set there.

Google is even more problematic because of the amount of datamining they do. Their analytics tracking code is everywhere on the internet, with Android and Chrome OS you are always logged-in to your Google account (just to use your phone, wtf?). Both Bing and Google do some hidden datamining on back too (like when you click a link, theres javascript that sends info about what link you clicked on the back). But this is worse with Google, as their complete business model relies around datamining to provide info and services to advertisers.

It's actually interesting how much they have improved their search engine from MSN/Live age. Seems they're going after Google at full force now and it seems to make sense to attack them from every direction now.

"The point is that Microsoft have a credible case here that they aren't censoring the results."

I agree, but the problem there is that they don't advance that case. They could have came forward and said that they are merely incompetent and hadn't tested their system and considered the ramifications of their poor design decisions. Instead they won't admit it, and they instead say that it is just that they have a different mechanism in place than Google. This leaves me to have to choose between if they are more incompetent or more evil in this case.

Now they have a response where they do admit that their is something amiss, but again make excuses, etc. and minimize it. Most likely, they had code to censor in addition to bugs, and the code to censor was still active. Now they may have eliminated the code to censor and still have to deal with the bugs. This is, in my mind, the most believable scenario, though I admit that my perspective is tempered by the overwhelming evidence I have seen over 20 years that they are both incompetent and evil ;-)

Finally, consider that offering proof that the results aren't skewed at this point is rather Orwellian, as Microsoft has had time to tweak their engine. Just because they say that they found a bug and it will be fixed doesn't mean that it is true. They very well may have had a policy that they have already adjusted due to the negative publicity. This lets people say: "Look citizen! Microsoft is at war with viruses and an ally of openness! Microsoft has always been at war with viruses and an ally of openness!", and many people will swallow that hook, line, and sinker :-(

Bing just repsonded to the issue here:

http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx

They've found a bug in their image search algorithms and promise a fix by the end of the week.

http://www.bing.com/community/blogs/search/archive/2009/11/21/committed-to-comprehensive-results.aspx

The Bing results are similar to Google, when searching from the U.S. in Chinese. But Google over all shows more of the 1989 protest.

"Tianamen" in Simplified Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&go=&form=QBIL&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(No democracy statue in either set.)

"Tianamen" in Traditional Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&go=&form=QBIR
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Democracy statue in both sets, scroll way down in Bing though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Simplified Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets, much more prominent in Google though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Traditional Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets)

The characters I used came from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

The Bing results are similar to Google, when searching from the U.S. in Chinese. But Google over all shows more of the 1989 protest.

"Tianamen" in Simplified Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&go=&form=QBIL&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(No democracy statue in either set.)

"Tianamen" in Traditional Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&go=&form=QBIR
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Democracy statue in both sets, scroll way down in Bing though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Simplified Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets, much more prominent in Google though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Traditional Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets)

The characters I used came from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

The Bing results are similar to Google, when searching from the U.S. in Chinese. But Google over all shows more of the 1989 protest.

"Tianamen" in Simplified Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&go=&form=QBIL&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E5%B9%BF%E5%9C%BA&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(No democracy statue in either set.)

"Tianamen" in Traditional Chinese:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&go=&form=QBIR
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU309AU309&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E5%BB%A3%E5%A0%B4&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Democracy statue in both sets, scroll way down in Bing though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Simplified Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%97%A8%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets, much more prominent in Google though.)

"Tianamen Incident" in Traditional Chinese
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&go=&form=QBIR&qs=n
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&sa=1&q=%E5%A4%A9%E5%AE%89%E9%96%80%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0
(Tank Man in both sets)

The characters I used came from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989