Slashdot Mirror

And here it is on Bing - with the circles just barely visible: http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=50.937445~-1.874886&style=h&lvl=18&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&where1=50.937232%2C-1.873689&encType=1. (You'll have to zoom in.)
 
Which shows how hard these things are to discover - different light angles and ages and types of crops change the visibility greatly.
 
I know there are some UK [aerial photography] sites as well - any links from them?

Actually, Bing comes up snake eyes on that one.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=lesbian+teen+fisting&go=&form=QBVR

'co-founder Sergey Brin is so rattled by the launch of Microsoft's rival search engine that he has assembled a team of top engineers to work on urgent upgrades to his Web service'

What did Sergey Brin say when he was contacted by the NY Post. Did he confirm that he was 'rattled'? Did he deny he has 'assembled a team of top engineers' in response to Bing? Where and when exactly did this meeting take place. Who exactly attended?

'While Bing is presented differently from Google -- with a colorful home page and easy-to-navigate search categories compared with Google's stark white page and search box -- there is little difference between the two when it comes to searching for simple terms'

I can't for the life of me see how he describes Google as lacking easy-to-navigate search categories and Bing not having a search box. Across the top of Google.com I see Web, Images, Video, Maps, News, Shopping, Mail and more.

As compared to BINGs .. Web, Images, Videos, Shopping, News, Maps and More. Apart from the layout, I can see little difference. What must have happened is that Sergey invented time travel and went forward in time and stole Bings innovation .. :)

--
slashdot, you have disgraced yourselves yet again

Their Bird's eye view on their maps is quite nice (no clue how much of the country they have covered, but it works for Chapel Hill, NC). The way it lets you zoom out of the Street view clone is nice when I am scoping the route to a new place; the zoomed out view makes it easier to become familiar with the general area (example).

After reading many comments in this feed, I decided to get over to http://www.bing.com/ to search for something I use regularly (eclipse rcp) and compare it to Google's results on that same topic. But, I got this error when I hit [Enter]. In the 5 years I've been using Google, this sort of error has *never* happened [to me]. That was my cue to get off slashdot, stop wasting time with Bing and start some work.

ASSERT: *** Search: _installLocation: engine has no file!

Stack Trace:

0:ENSURE_WARN(false,_installLocation: engine has no file!,2147500037)

1:()

2:()

3:()

4:epsGetAttr([object Object],alias)

5:()

6:SRCH_SVC_getEngineByAlias(http://www.bing.com)

7:getEngineByAlias(http://www.bing.com)

8:getShortcutOrURI(http://www.bing.com,[object Object])

9:canonizeUrl([object KeyboardEvent],[object Object])

10:handleURLBarCommand([object KeyboardEvent])

11:anonymous(textentered,[object KeyboardEvent])

12:fireEvent(textentered,[object KeyboardEvent])

13:onTextEntered()

14:handleEnter(false)

15:onKeyPress([object KeyboardEvent])

16:onxblkeypress([object KeyboardEvent])

OK, here is the acid test. porn.

Turn off safe search, on both google and bing.

Search nude girls wallpaper. This shows up as one of the bing results:

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Nude+girls+Wallpaper#focal=20cab0835f80b0a47c8badc853d11a7f&furl=http://www.cutegayteens.com/nude-male-galleries-00325.jpg

I just don't know how that would show up in as a result for that search. Unless you were al least moderately susceptible to Search result manipulation.

That link on that result probably means that if bing starts to take off, it will get trashed by the spammers unless they make some changes.

Bing seems to have a fairly nice user interface if you are on a nice multi Megabyte/second line, but even then the image search spends a lot of time watching the spinning circles.

Looks like porn a'plenty to me in both:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=naked+women&go=&form=QBVR

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=naked+women#

(You have to turn off the safe search option on either too.)

Well, I like to think I've gotten past the point of claiming :).

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22world's+greatest+compressionist%22&src=IE-SearchBox&Form=IE8SRC

http://www.focalpress.com/Book.aspx?id=7224&terms=%22ben+waggoner%22
(finishing up the second edition right now).

If I go to the Video tab the Microsoft commercial is #17, 2 places behind some whore dressed as a Catholic schoolgirl.

And the link takes me to youtube; not very good marketing.

Right Here.

Nope, it's no good for searching pr0n. naked women doesn't turn up pr0n on the first page.

And end up with a Wikipedia link as your top result.. way to add in an extra useless click and shill for MS..

PS I just banged your mom :p

Or I could Bang it.

"just use google"

Bing Is Not Google =
Just Use Google, Sweetie = ?

Genius!
I'm off to register this domain!

Wait a minute..

Okay....here you go. Please look to the left to see the "related searches' Of Dark Knight Houston and Dark Knight shoes(Shoes? WTF?). Now to be fair here is the Yahoo one. Please press the "more" button which is that little blue tab below the search box.

Now I can't be sure that you will see EXACTLY what I see, because as the Finnish poster above said there seems to be something going on where Bing detects where you are and changes accordingly. But on my Yahoo Search under related concepts I get Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Heath ledger, etc. This IMHO allows me to 'springboard" much more easily to find out all sorts of related subjects I never would have thought to search for. But as I said I took off points for not labeling the "more" tab for first time users.

Now I have nothing against those that prefer Google or Bing, I was simply pointing out that for me of the three search engines Bing gives me the least useful concepts. After you have used to "more" tab in Yahoo I just find it so much more easier to drill down the content and zero my search than I do with Google or Bing. I would also recommend using this link for Yahoo searches over the home page, as the home page has a lot of junk. To be fair to Yahoo though a LOT of my older customers including my dad find the Yahoo Search link too minimal and like having the headlines on the front page. My dad even had me set him up a home network to go with his new laptop so he can "read the paper" as he calls it from his couch.

Will Bing get better? Who knows. I was simply pointing out what I feel was the shortcomings in the engine ATM. But I am not a zealot for any tech or search engine. Use what you think works best for your style. For me that is Yahoo Search. But those that haven't tried Yahoo Search should give it a fair test, since it has gotten much better IMHO in the last 2 years.

I've got to wonder what search terms you're using, because the Bing search results for "the dark knight" are conspicuously similar to both Google and Yahoo's, and contain literally none of the nonsensical related searches you mentioned. Since you haven't provided a link to the search results page, we must conclude that you made an error inputting the search string, you're intentionally spreading misinformation, some malware is altering your search results, or Microsoft altered the contents of the page between when you posted and this post.

I'm not a huge fan of Bing (I tried it, and I still use Google save for GPS-based local result searches on my phone; I prefer the Google interface), but it seems to produce reasonable search results.

So, please, provide a link to the Bing search results that are so egregiously wrong. I'm sure we'd all be interested in seeing how to replicate your results.

The misinformation you're trying to pass off as sound findings is a bit more egregious than what's typical here.

First, your overall conclusion is based on a single query and observation.

Second, your observation is completely wrong. You state that you think the Bing result for "The Dark Knight" is horrible because it doesn't show accurate breadth. You say that Yahoo's result is better because its "more" feature lets you explore things not directly related to the movie but are closely tied. You further say that you don't particularly like the "more" UI.

Now, look at Bing's result. http://www.bing.com/search?q=dark+knight&go=&form=QBLH

The breadth results are built right into the main results page. They have already categorised all the results for you. The Dark Knight Trailer. The Dark Knight Review. The Dark Knight cast. The Dark Knight poster. The Dark Knight soundtrack. Videos related Dark Knight. These are subjectively even better than Yahoo's "more" results, plus Yahoo does not show video results, plus you don't have to press a "more" link.

Please, I'm just asking you to pay attention next time.

• linux
• linux windows
• linux microsoft
• linux vista
• linux commands
• ... etc

-metric

http://www.bing.com/search?q=win+xp+serial&go=&form=QBLH

It works great in the U.S.

I get 179,000 results.

188,000 results

But, strangely enough, the first thing you get in the list when you search for, "miserable failure", is President Bush's bio page on whitehouse.gov, so apparently they've got that working for them again! ;-)

• 1+1 http://www.bing.com/search?q=1%2B1&go=&form=QBLH
• 35 +6 +67 +(9*2) http://www.bing.com/search?q=35+%2B6+%2B67+%2B(9*2)&go=&form=QBRE

for simple calculation omit the =

• 1+1 http://www.bing.com/search?q=1%2B1&go=&form=QBLH
• 35 +6 +67 +(9*2) http://www.bing.com/search?q=35+%2B6+%2B67+%2B(9*2)&go=&form=QBRE

for simple calculation omit the =

"Bing", "Zune", ...? Where does Microsoft come up with these names? And why aren't they stopped before they leave the building? Is there really no one in the company who thought to say, "You know, that name sounds kind of stupid"?

On a related topic, can anyone else see the makers of Bink Video getting a little bit leery about the creation of Bing Video? Sure, they're different things, but Microsoft has sued other companies over similar trivial name differences. There's no way Microsoft will try that in this case -- Bink has been around too long, and the Bink codecs have been used in games published by Microsoft Games for years. But one still wonders whether Microsoft is trying to muddy the waters, or if they just don't care.

What first impress me is the huge amount of ads in the search results. Searching for "sql server" I can only see two real results before having to scroll the page and is hard to distinguish the ads on the top of the page, from the real results.

So, no different to Google then?

Doing a comparison in my current window, Google is indeed more compressed, but both show 8 non-ad results before I scroll down (Google is more compressed, so gets extra ads at top... and Bing seems to have a "Best match" category in addition to ads). Searching for something more commercially competitive (like "web hosting") produces more ads (for both engines), but again, I can see 8 not ads on each.

That said, it will take some work to oust Google as #1 search engine... competition can't hurt though

Google's natural language query features are so spotty that you can't ask a question and expect an answer with any reliability. For example, similar to your example, "How tall is Barack Obama" answers me correctly. "How old is Barack Obama" does not.

"Florida Unemployment Rate" answers me. "Florida Minimum Wage" does not.

And on and on.

And in different areas, it really does shine. For example:

Farecast integration, eg TPA to ORD:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=tpa+to+ord&filt=all

Search-the-site box, eg New Egg:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=New+Egg&go=&form=QBRE

Guided Search Sidebar, eg atrial fibrillation:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=atrial+fibrillation&filt=all

And the hover states for search results are impressive. It doesn't just pull the first X bytes, it parses the entire page and returns a synopsis as best it can. These features were from Powerset and they've done a good job with them here. Similarly, the hovers on image search.

I don't know if Bing will gain any traction or not. But at the very least it's the 2nd best search engine available and it's been live for about 12 hours now...

Google's natural language query features are so spotty that you can't ask a question and expect an answer with any reliability. For example, similar to your example, "How tall is Barack Obama" answers me correctly. "How old is Barack Obama" does not.

"Florida Unemployment Rate" answers me. "Florida Minimum Wage" does not.

And on and on.

And in different areas, it really does shine. For example:

Farecast integration, eg TPA to ORD:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=tpa+to+ord&filt=all

Search-the-site box, eg New Egg:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=New+Egg&go=&form=QBRE

Guided Search Sidebar, eg atrial fibrillation:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=atrial+fibrillation&filt=all

And the hover states for search results are impressive. It doesn't just pull the first X bytes, it parses the entire page and returns a synopsis as best it can. These features were from Powerset and they've done a good job with them here. Similarly, the hovers on image search.

I don't know if Bing will gain any traction or not. But at the very least it's the 2nd best search engine available and it's been live for about 12 hours now...

Google's natural language query features are so spotty that you can't ask a question and expect an answer with any reliability. For example, similar to your example, "How tall is Barack Obama" answers me correctly. "How old is Barack Obama" does not.

"Florida Unemployment Rate" answers me. "Florida Minimum Wage" does not.

And on and on.

And in different areas, it really does shine. For example:

Farecast integration, eg TPA to ORD:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=tpa+to+ord&filt=all

Search-the-site box, eg New Egg:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=New+Egg&go=&form=QBRE

Guided Search Sidebar, eg atrial fibrillation:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=atrial+fibrillation&filt=all

And the hover states for search results are impressive. It doesn't just pull the first X bytes, it parses the entire page and returns a synopsis as best it can. These features were from Powerset and they've done a good job with them here. Similarly, the hovers on image search.

I don't know if Bing will gain any traction or not. But at the very least it's the 2nd best search engine available and it's been live for about 12 hours now...

Bing has a calculator.

1 + 1: http://www.bing.com/search?q=1+%2B+1%0A&filt=all
2 * pi: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+*+pi&go=&form=QBRE
2 miles in feet: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+miles+in+feet&go=&form=QBRE
etc

Bing has a calculator.

1 + 1: http://www.bing.com/search?q=1+%2B+1%0A&filt=all
2 * pi: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+*+pi&go=&form=QBRE
2 miles in feet: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+miles+in+feet&go=&form=QBRE
etc

Bing has a calculator.

1 + 1: http://www.bing.com/search?q=1+%2B+1%0A&filt=all
2 * pi: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+*+pi&go=&form=QBRE
2 miles in feet: http://www.bing.com/search?q=2+miles+in+feet&go=&form=QBRE
etc

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

You just have to phrase it right.

It seems it does other calculations too.

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

You just have to phrase it right.

It seems it does other calculations too.

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

You just have to phrase it right.

It seems it does other calculations too.

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

You just have to phrase it right.

It seems it does other calculations too.

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

You just have to phrase it right.

It seems it does other calculations too.

No. I did. And here is my proof.

But it fails to answer this important question!

Notice how Google gets it right.

What first impress me is the huge amount of ads in the search results. Searching for "sql server" I can only see two real results before having to scroll the page and is hard to distinguish the ads on the top of the page, from the real results.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=bing+is+shit&go=&form=QBLH&filt=all

fourth link - I think they've got that covered

The web's favicon looks suspiciously similar to ebuddy's logo.