Slashdot Mirror


Bing Gains 10% Marketshare

samzbest writes "According to ComScore's qSearch, Microsoft's retaliation against Google search, Bing, has gained significant market share, now facilitating close to 10% of US searches. That's a gain of two large points in five months."

94 of 514 comments (clear)

  1. Who would've though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With such a retarded name I didn't expect Bing to reach such popularity.

    1. Re:Who would've though? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 3, Funny

      I said the same thing about "Slashdot" ;)

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:Who would've though? by 2.7182 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah. They should have named it 10^1000.

    3. Re:Who would've though? by shoemilk · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ned: Ned... Ryerson. "Needlenose Ned"? "Ned the Head"? C'mon, buddy. Case Western High. Ned Ryerson: I did the whistling belly-button trick at the high school talent show? Bing! Ned Ryerson: got the shingles real bad senior year, almost didn't graduate? Bing, again. Ned Ryerson: I dated your sister Mary Pat a couple times until you told me not to anymore? Well?

      Phil: Ned Ryerson?

      Ned: Bing!

      Phil: Bing.

    4. Re:Who would've though? by sopssa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bing is really easy name to remember. It's actually a great name from MS.

    5. Re:Who would've though? by Vintermann · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, Bing is a law professor known for having translated several good science fiction books to Norwegian long ago, and now being completely out of touch, in particular by having spectacularly un-enlightened views on copyright enforcement the need for IP law reform.

      Worst thing is, Microsoft actually paid good money for his domain name.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    6. Re:Who would've though? by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Funny

      It even works as verb: Keep binging that chicken!

    7. Re:Who would've though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Plus, it is a recursive acronym. BING: Bing Is Not Google.

    8. Re:Who would've though? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wow, I always thought BING was one of those geek recursive acronyms: Bing Is Not Google

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re:Who would've though? by One+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      They were going to call it:

      Microsoft Active Live Artificially Intelligent Search Engine

      Except 1) It's not artificially intelligent and 2) that would mean it was called Microsoft Malaise...

      --
      www.nodicerpg.com - Some RP stuff for free, some not so for free, but still cheap.
    10. Re:Who would've though? by turing_m · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, I always thought BING was one of those geek recursive acronyms: Bing Is Not Google

      While they are doing that, they ought to rename the parent company: Microsoft Is Not Google Either, or MINGE.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  2. Is it trickery? by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are they only counting the places where people go to the page and do a search or are they counting all the 'embedded' searches which are snuck into other apps like IE and Windows Live to boost numbers?

    Thought so.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:Is it trickery? by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And given that, it's astonishing that Microsoft can still only bamboozle 10% of "Darren Defaults" users into eating their dogfood.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:Is it trickery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google search is embedded into a hojillion websites as well as having browser plugins / toolbars for pretty much every browser. If "embedded searches" are counted it'll probably be to Google's advantage.

      (I'm not saying that the study isn't trickery. I wouldn't know either way.)

    3. Re:Is it trickery? by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The trickery should be clear because microsoft is trying to gain marketshare by having articles posted every time they get 1/100^56th of a marketshare increase, even though nobody wants that piece of crap. 3%, 5%, 6%, etc. It's search results are crap even. You didn't hear google publicizing every 1% do ya?

    4. Re:Is it trickery? by jonadab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Are they only counting the places where people go
      > to the page and do a search or are they counting
      > all the 'embedded' searches which are snuck into
      > other apps like IE and Windows Live to boost numbers?

      Don't be an idiot. This is Bing we're talking about, not Yahoo. Do you really think 10% of people go to it on purpose? Outside of extreme geekdom, nobody's even heard of it yet.

      Basically what this means is IE8 has, mostly as a result of automatic updates, reached about 10% market share among people who think the browser's location bar is a search box and haven't bothered to express an opinion about what search engine it should use. IE8 ships with "Live Search", alias Bing, as the default; IE6 and IE7 used MSN Search as their default, so what we're seeing here is mostly new-version uptake.

      There are also a few geeks using it on purpose to try it out, but even if 100% of the slashdot-reading population did that it wouldn't be anywhere near 1% market share, let alone 10%. And the single most popular search engine among the slashdot-reading geekdom is almost certainly still Google at this point.

      No, the bulk of the 10% we're talking about here consists of people using the IE8 UI.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    5. Re:Is it trickery? by sopssa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would Google publish their marketshare changes? Especially because only way they can go is down, unless they can gain marketshare in China (from Baidu) or Russia (from yandex).

    6. Re:Is it trickery? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think Microsoft sponsored this article. I believe it just one of many periodic reports on search provider market share.

      And personally, I don't think Bing is crap. It actually has some innovative features. I just don't have any incentive to switch from Google, especially with gmail and personalized home pages.

      Would you care to tell me why you think Bing is a "piece of crap"?

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    7. Re:Is it trickery? by jambarama · · Score: 3, Informative

      All the obvious product placement and subtle placement in trashy reality shows ("lets 'bing' it") probably haven't hurt either.

    8. Re:Is it trickery? by Lillebo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, one is tempted to mention the fact that Bing has been made only for the purpose of stealing users and customers from Google who built a search engine for the purpose of making information more accessible and easy to find. It just happened to be a fantastic business idea as well... Therefore at least one reason Bing is piece of crap is because of it's evilness!

    9. Re:Is it trickery? by sukotto · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I see a lot of people on the slickdeals.net and other "hot deals" forums using bing to take advantage of it's cashback ads.
      (That is, you buy a product through a bing search, and you get a certain amount of money returned to you)

      --
      Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
    10. Re:Is it trickery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I imagine you having a bar code of your google ID tattooed to your forehead.

    11. Re:Is it trickery? by onepoint · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I love your comments. It proves ( at least in my eyes ) corporate evolution. In order to make money, you must improvise, improve and use less resources.

      Google, the king of using less resources and improvising, is winning at this time. Microsoft, whom has the resources, is now investing in that side of the business, making themselves better and more productive.

      for the end user, this is important, being able to choose whom you want to do your searches with is always a benefit. Now the real question is, the quality of the search results.

      I would really enjoy if another search engine would join this field that was as innovative as Google, or had the resources of Microsoft, then a real good fight could happen, and the winner would be the end user.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    12. Re:Is it trickery? by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, don't forget that when Windows 7 came to mass market, Microsoft still didn't allow you to change the default search engine from Bing to Google in IE8. I tried several times and MS only allowed you to download 'something' Google-related (some plug-in) from their site that wasn't Google Search for the toolbar. It's only just recently they 'fixed' this.

      Anyone who snagged Windows 7 early and was using IE8 (poor deluded souls) would possibly be contributing to this 10%. Since they fixed the 'glitch' maybe we can see this 10% go down from now.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    13. Re:Is it trickery? by poetmatt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      microsoft is making themselves better and more productive? LOL I seriously hope you are joking. Bing is still very skewed to show positive results for things that MS is interested in gaining marketshare from. It's when people realize this, that they start to have less interest in bing. The only reason it has *any* marketshare beyond like 1% is being embedded and defaulted everywhere.

    14. Re:Is it trickery? by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Therefore at least one reason Bing is piece of crap is because of it's evilness!

      Nothing wrong inherently with evil, ya know. Nor is there anything inherently wrong with trying to scam off with Google's lunch. It's called 'business as usual', ya know. I checked Bing out when it first started getting airplay on tv, didn't see what all the excitement was about. IIRC, early results were heavily weighted to shill Microsoft products. Big surprise, eh? Now the recent XP/Vista updates toggle default browser search engines to Bing, Win7 ships with default search engine of Bing, any embedded native Windows search uses Bing, and it's a surprise that Bing picked up 10% of the search engine market? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

      Google took years to conquer the market and stomp on Altavista. Microsoft can do it with a click of an update button. Fun, eh? See you Patch Tuesday. And don't forget to click back to Google...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    15. Re:Is it trickery? by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reasons? Sure. Any result on things is skewed if it relates to MS. How can you call that "reliable"? There's a reason they call it a decision engine and not a search engine. Also, why do I want something that's been rammed down my throat as a default setting? I'd rather choose my own thing not have *constant* hijacking during every IE security update. Just wait for people to do bing bombs as they call "google bombs", and you'll see even more manipulation.

      Also, the layout is annoying. Why not have news links up at the top? Why do I give a crap about related searches being linked at the side as opposed to next to each item? Why do I need microsoft self-sponsoring when I search for microsoft on bing? I don't get that with google. Also it sure is interesting that very few search results show up when I put the term google into bing, isn't it?.

      I can keep searching more reasons if you want, but the end result is that the quality of results and accuracy is piss poor. Dogpile still beats results/accuracy of bing constantly.

    16. Re:Is it trickery? by Pojut · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Microsoft, like EA, has been redeeming themselves for the past couple of years. Much like EA realized they were screwed due to their draconian DRM, Microsoft realized it screwed the pooch with Vista. They really have been turning things around, and they seem to be making their business more nimble and listening to what their customers truly want (excluding WinMo 6.5).

      A monster like Microsoft can't change direction on a whim. It takes time. Windows 7 is a decent indicator of where they are headed.

    17. Re:Is it trickery? by gilroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To say they can't means the market isn't growing, which shows your lack of udnerstanding

      Um, no, I think the lack is on your part. Even a 100% monopoly can gain sales, but they can't increase market share -- that is, the fraction of the market they reach. If the number of searches doubled, and Bing doubles and Google doubled (pretending they're the only two engines), then their market share remains the same, 10% and 90% respectively.

    18. Re:Is it trickery? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is worse than that. Let us say that you want Google as the default for said address bar search feature of IE8, and you go to the Microsoft tool for adding said capability and you look for Google, it is no where to be found. WHAT???? They have search tools I have barely heard of listed, but no GOOGLE????

      Oh wait, it is on page two. Never mind. No, Microsoft isn't trying to hide it ... NOOOOOO.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    19. Re:Is it trickery? by SadButTrue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >> Nothing wrong inherently with evil, ya know. If there is nothing wrong with evil then what is "wrong"?

      --
      grape - the GNU free, open source rape
    20. Re:Is it trickery? by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wasn't the only person to have experienced this issue (which may have been more an ie8 than windows 7 issue) -

      http://www.experts-exchange.com/Web_Development/Search_Engines/Q_24641989.html

      (scroll to the bottom for the posts)

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    21. Re:Is it trickery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      microsoft is making themselves better and more productive? LOL I seriously hope you are joking. Bing is still very skewed to show positive results for things that MS is interested in gaining marketshare from.

      I really doubt it. I just did a search for "virtual machines". Something that Microsoft would dearly love to increase its market share in. The first result was a Wikipedia article. The second was VMWare, the third was from Sun, and the 4th was Virtual PC. If they were being biased, don't you think that they would put their product 1st?

      Same thing with doing a search for "database servers". On Bing the first result to an actual product is the 5th entry and it's for MySQL. On Google, the first result to an actual product is the 4th entry and it's for Microsoft SQL server.

      I could go on, but the reality is the reality is that Bing isn't that bad and no more biased to any of Microsoft's stuff then Google is.

    22. Re:Is it trickery? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's different in that, Google has offered these things and people used them. Most of the Bing stuff that I have seen have been trying to sneak it in the back door or ram it down my throat. I will not Google for stuff on Bing.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    23. Re:Is it trickery? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Left to my own impressions, I would have assumed this was subtle humour. But you've been modded Insightful so clearly some people regard it as a valid point. So I'll deconstruct it regardless.

      Well, one is tempted to mention the fact that Bing has been made only for the purpose of stealing users and customers from Google

      Created for the purpose of stealing Google's customers is logically flawed (though I'm sure you know that). It presupposes that Google has some a priori right to these people and that it is wrong for another company to lure them away. Secondly given that we are seeing things from the customers' point of view (because that's what we are), we see no harm to ourselves in moving to a different provider if we are given a better product. In short, this statement is not a criticism that can be levelled at Microsoft, it's just a double standard.

      who built a search engine for the purpose of making information more accessible and easy to find. It just happened to be a fantastic business idea as well...

      And to steal customers from Yahoo, of course. ;) But we'll leave the double standard critiques. I don't believe that anything on the scale of Google "just happened". There was a business model all along. But really it's irrelevant. If the comment above is a criticism, which from phrasing and context it must be, then it's implying that there is something inherently more wicked about something being a business idea, which is a notion I reject. You don't get moral superiority over business rivals because you don't want to make money (not that Google aren't after every penny they can get. They censor web results in China after all which is suggestive of priorities).

      Therefore at least one reason Bing is piece of crap is because of it's evilness!

      "Crap" in the context of this discussion has clearly been along the axis of Good-Bad, not Moral-Immoral. Prejudice against Microsoft has no logical impact on whether their product is actually good or not. Though reading through the Slashdot comments, that thought is clearly lost on many.

      If people want to make the case that Bing is worse than Google, they should do so by giving factual examples: real world searches carried out in both search engines which illustrate more appropriate results from one search engine than another.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    24. Re:Is it trickery? by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Let's bing it?"

      Eh? Wait, what? YouTube or it didn't happen!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:Is it trickery? by pHus10n · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See, this is the asshat comments that drive me away from Slashdot. You stated that about Microsoft/Google in a way to present bias --- that MS is evil and Google is not. Microsoft *did* setup Bing to steal users --- that's how a business gets customers in an established area. You don't see McDonald's saying "No, we'll let them have the 30-39 age group" to KFC.

      Google did the exact same thing. Or do you believe that they didn't setup a search engine to steal customers from Yahoo, Altavista, and others just to sell ads?

    26. Re:Is it trickery? by jambarama · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ask and ye shall receive. By the way, this clip comes from InfoMania which is an awesome show.

    27. Re:Is it trickery? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 4, Funny

      If there is nothing wrong with evil then what is "wrong"?

      People who dress up little dogs in funny outfits. Definitely.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    28. Re:Is it trickery? by nschubach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um... Dragon Age... EA/Bioware ... I can't play my game unless I log into my EA account to verify that my unlocked content is legal.

      That's better?

      Windows 7 Starter forcing users wanting a real computing experience to upgrade... limitations like not being able to change your background, sounds, or colors and not even having a media center for playing your own media... really? That's not my idea. I wonder how much extra code they had to put in to disable features inherent to the actual OS.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    29. Re:Is it trickery? by Pojut · · Score: 2, Informative

      What are you talking about? Dragon Age, their most recent release, has no DRM past an old school serial number and DVD check! There is no online activation required, no install limits, nothing. Now, granted, the downloadable content for it has DRM, but the base game itself has ZERO DRM.

      I don't own it, but I believe Sims 3 shipped without DRM as well.

      Perhaps you are referring to the Mass Effect and Spore debacles from a year or two ago?

    30. Re:Is it trickery? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you've never heard of IE changing default search to bing? http://searchengineland.com/internet-explorer-6-forces-bing-as-default-search-provider-20398

      Huh, you got me there.

      I can dig deeper, but that is by far not the only isolated incident.

      The article you just linked said it was. The issue doesn't apply to any other version of IE. (That is, versions of IE used by sane people.)

      The issue here about the previous search results (prior comment) is that they are showing other OS's first, and MS is nowhere to be found.

      That's not evidence of rigged results.

      I wasn't even specifying an OS, so why or how would it magically put in linux and mac as insecure

      What makes you think it "magically put in linux and mac as insecure" (whatever that means?) You've demonstrated absolutely nothing here.

      You could be noticing a pattern, for example: articles about Windows don't include the term "OS" as often as articles about Linux and Macintosh. That might be a reasonable conclusion to draw, and has nothing to do with some paranoid conspiracy theory you've brewed up.

      The only thing you've concretely shown is that Google and Bing don't have identical search results. Whoop-de-shit.

      (re: your reply to me)The other issue here is, when I'm looking for something I don't need bing to tell me what I want to find, that by searching google I don't need it to automatically assume I don't know how to type google.com., which is what it's essentially defaulting.

      That's because millions and millions of users do, in fact, type "google.com" into a search box to get to Google. This just proves you're completely out-of-touch with the search industry, and know nothing about the average user.

      Likewise with Microsoft. I don't want "all about Microsoft from Microsoft's webpage", because a company's own view will always be skewed. I want "all about Microsoft from everyone else in the world other than Microsoft". This is a failure of the search engine for me.

      Then hit "more results," the link's right there.

    31. Re:Is it trickery? by NickFortune · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think the issue isn't so much one of search quality for most people as it is one of trust. In the past, Microsoft have shown no compunction about distorting their search engine results to advance their own agenda, and the recent "why is windows so expensive" debacle suggests that they will probably do so again.

      Added to that, there isn't actually anything wrong with Google's results, as such. Room for improvement to be sure, but the reason I use Google is that it seemed to me to deliver better results than all the other engines at the time. That hasn't really changed.

      So, lack of trust on the one hand, and no particular dissatisfaction on the other... I think MS may have a bit of a mountain to climb on this one.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    32. Re:Is it trickery? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not going to dig all day, there are others, you don't think the press on this was accidental do you?

      Dig all day? We've seen one claim from you that the results for "Least Secure OS" are skewed, when the initial results of both Google and Bing are identical. We've also seen you complain that when you type "Google" into Bing, you don't get the results you want (which apparently are something other than Google). Here for all to see are the comparison results: http://yfrog.com/5hgooglevbingp. I think the one on the left actually looks less cluttered and I like the way all the popular Google services are neatly collated for you at the top. So yes, as you're the one making accusations of conspiracy and saying how many instances of this there are, you do have to do more digging if you want to convince anyone.

      You seem incredulous that people think the press on this was "accidental". It's just a news story. Either you're saying that the results aren't true and that Bing doesn't have 10%, or you think this isn't newsworthy. If you have evidence to disprove the former, bring it. If you don't think the latter, don't bother posting.

      I think you're actually a Microsoft shill trying to push people into arguing the benefits of Bing by posting such easily refutable arguments against it. It's more plausible than someone actually saying these things because they believe them. Am I right?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    33. Re:Is it trickery? by enoz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In my experience the bing results have been reasonably fair, but the bing suggested searches have been laughably skewed.

      Just look at this example of searching for "linux": http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3604/3585051300_d23a37a32e_o.png

      And yes, that is not a photochop, those were the real suggestions from bing. More recently they seem to have cleaned up their suggestions for Linux but who knows what other underhanded tactics they are using or what other search terms are "poisoned".

    34. Re:Is it trickery? by intheshelter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, my recollection was a bit off, but the end results was the same.

      http://search.slashdot.org/story/09/08/06/1334225/Bing-Search-Tainted-By-Pro-Microsoft-Results

  3. Being the new default doesn't hurt either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It probably doesn't hurt that IE 8 updates make Bing the default search engine if you go the 'express' route. Even adding google as a search provider is weird - you can't just select it, you have to go to a web page and download the search engine provider package or whatever.

    1. Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I recently installed the Google search provider in IE8. Not only did I have to "Find More Providers", but Google was hidden on the second page of the default list and mislabeled as "Google Search Suggestions". Accidents.

    2. Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either by jefu · · Score: 4, Informative

      I had the same experience - it took some digging to figure out how to make Google the default search provider, and there were several Googles listed on the page where Google eventually showed up and no good information on which to choose. Worse yet, I was in the process of installing Windows 7 and it decided to install updates after I'd done this, and somehow managed to reset the default search provider to Bing in one of those.

    3. Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      MS really loves to reset IE default page and also reload their url bookmarks for their websites if they are removed. Very annoying.

    4. Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had the same experience - it took some digging to figure out how to make Google the default search provider, and there were several Googles listed on the page where Google eventually showed up and no good information on which to choose.

      Can you clarify the latter part? When I click on the dropdown arrow on the right of the search icon in IE, and select "Find More Providers...", it opens this page. Google provider is indeed tucked away on the second page there, but so far as I can see, it's the only one with "Google" in its name.

    5. Re:Being the new default doesn't hurt either by zero0ne · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is because _GOOGLE_ doesn't want you using IE8 to browse their results...

  4. Well by MistrX · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Still 90% to go.

    I wonder if they get that far. I think Google is so fixated in the minds of people that it's hard to get it out. It's even on the homepages of not only younger people but also the digital elderly who are less computer savvy. Bing has to offer more and better search results then Google does before it gains any more then 20% of the market I think.

    Don't forget, humans are conservative creatures, they only like changing when it saves money or reduces fat quickly.

  5. MSN/Live had about the same market share before by guruevi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not really news. Bing is just a rebranding of MSN Search. In June 2007, MSN had a spike of 16% market share (http://blog.compete.com/2007/07/09/june-search-share-msn-live-google-yahoo-ask/). Given the huge marketing behind Bing as well as the conversion of practically all search engines on every site that has anything to do with Microsoft, I would say, meh, no big deal.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before by sopssa · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bing is not just a rebrand of Live/MSN Search. When they launched, they added tons of features and introduced new indexing and ranking algorithms that actually bought the results pretty much to same level as Google's, even if not over.

    2. Re:MSN/Live had about the same market share before by dingen · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sure they did some work on creating Bing, but even so it did replace both MSN Search and Live Search. So it really is no surprise at all that Bing has about the same market share than those combined.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
  6. Defaults.... by Dartz-IRL · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder if there's any relation between this, and the number of users who've upgraded too IE8 and just not bothered/realised that they can change the default in-browser search client?

    --
    So there I was, scribbling down some notes off the PC screen by hand, when I reached for the keyboard and Ctrl-S'd.
    1. Re:Defaults.... by StealthBadger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except for the fact that you have to jump through extra hoops AFTER installation to get to Google's entry in the IE8 search provider listing.

      --
      Searching for Truth, Justice, and the Guy Who Boosted My Wallet a Few Weeks Back....
  7. Shocked by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm shocked - *SHOCKED* - I tell ya. I find it hard to believe that ComScore would report such a thing.

    Yes, I know the numbers may be valid but when a company is reporting on another company, with whom they are partnered, I find it hard to invest any credibility in the report.

    1. Re:Shocked by Ant+P. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I find it hilarious that - even with the obvious money-under-the-table bias, even with the fact it's shoved in every IE user's face by default (and the fact changing the default on that is deliberately hard and confusing), they can still only get 10%.

  8. The Deal Seekers Are Probably Partly Responsible by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Go ahead, you can probably blame some of this on me -- and people like me. I was in the market for an XBox 360 Arcade (with intent to add a HDD on my own) and had found through slick deals mention that if you went to bing and searched for Dell and clicked on the cashback link you could get an XBox 360 Arcade for 15%-30% off depending on when you do it.

    Now, from what I read, your mileage may vary. Meaning you got anywhere from $20 to $30 off the price but you still paid $200. It was just recredited to your paypal account. It happened/happens with other large retailers like Amazon so I found myself periodically using Bing to squeeze 10% off a purchase here or there ... or even just hitting it up every couple days to see what I could find. Kept with Google on my other searches (Firefox and Chrome still put me through the same default search engine). But for a while, my desire to save a couple bucks probably pushed up Bing's marketshare. I can't help it, I blame my overly frugal parents.

    I'm not sure how this was orchestrated. I mean, I thought commodities like DVDs and CDs and XBoxes were already shaven down to the some of the lowest prices online ... so what happened and who is giving me the money back? Is it Microsoft putting ad dollars to hard work for Bing or the retailer giving up some more profit margin in exchange for moving product? If anyone could shed light on how I was able to get better deals on -- sometimes any -- products on Amazon by first going through Bing, I'd appreciate it. And this isn't like a few pennies click through ad revenue, this is like tens of dollars across several purchases. Am I really that inept at how the world works to not figure this out?

    So in the end, I apologize for causing all that cancer. You are correct to direct your slurs at me but I assure you that as soon as those deals dry up I will stop using Bing.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  9. Market Share Gains by TheFlannelAvenger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been seeing a lot of machines lately with the Bing Toolbar installed, and the client having no idea how it got there. Automated updates on a Windows machine are nice, but sometimes you get the latest helpful tool bar offering along with it. Sun Java, Adobe Flash, etc. often offer tool bars and other goodies that although are not harmful, might be unwanted. I'm not sure how much this would skew actual results, but it has to count for a few points of market share and larger reported install base of tool bars and hence search engine use.

    1. Re:Market Share Gains by SoonerSkeene · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Java will install the toolbar: but Windows Update will not install things like this without specific opt-in. They came under too much fire about that stuff, so they've changed Windows Update to only install critical security updates, never optional features, toolbars, search providers, etc.

    2. Re:Market Share Gains by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've been seeing a lot of machines lately with the Bing Toolbar installed, and the client having no idea how it got there. Automated updates on a Windows machine are nice, but sometimes you get the latest helpful tool bar offering along with it.

      Do you mean Live Toolbar?

      WU won't install that thing quietly behind your back. You can get "Windows Live Essentials" - which contains the toolbar - via WU, but it's an optional update, meaning it will never get installed automatically - you need to go into list of updates after the check, open the "Optional" tab there, and check the product. Even then it won't install silently - it will download and then run the normal installer, and that will ask which products you'd like to install (granted, it checks them all by default). So it's pretty hard to "have no idea" how it got there if you go that route.

      Another option is - surprise - Java. That has a single, "oh yes, install this BTW" checkbox tucked away in the middle of the wizard, and it's checked by default.

  10. I'm not sure I believe those numbers by CoffeePlease · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I look at AWstats for my site:
    Google 18020 pages (linked to from Google)
    Google (Images) 976 pages
    Bing 226 pages


    And from Google Analytics:
    Top traffic sources:
    Google 26,738 visits 85.24%
    Yahoo 676 visits 2.16%
    Bing 346 visits 1.10%
    Admittedly the site is not about shopping or entertainment - it's mainly about technical topics which maybe colors the results.

    1. Re:I'm not sure I believe those numbers by lawnjam · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have a slightly fairer comparison which excludes relative rankings.

      If you search for the name of my shop, Hannah Zakari, my website is the first result on every major search engine (I've just tried google, yahoo, bing, ask, search.com and baidu)

      People who have searched for "Hannah Zakari" in the past 30 days came from the following search engines:
      1. google 95.86%
      2. bing 1.60%
      3. yahoo 1.35%
      4. aol 0.75%
      5. search 0.30%

      The same period last year looked like this:
      1. google 92.77%
      2. live 2.95%
      3. yahoo 2.09%
      4. search 1.52%
      5. aol 0.57%

      The site is UK based, so this will be a geographically limited sample, but I'm not seeing a massive surge in Bing-age.

  11. Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux by turing_m · · Score: 3, Funny

    If 10% Bing is "shit", then what does that make 1% Linux?

    Invisible to writers of malware?

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  12. Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...not backed by a global monopoly with 20+ years of entrenchment.

    Just think of all of the captive Windows and IE users out there that can have MS-Whatever shoved down their throats.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  13. Amazing what money will buy by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful
    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Amazing what money will buy by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. MS PAID LOTS of companies to switch to IIS. Problem is, that problems continue so a number of companies have quietly switched back to Apache and other servers, since MS only paid for the switch, not for the continued staying on IIS.
      Bing will follow a similiar bell curve as more ppl realize that Bing is simply manipulated results. HOWEVER, it will never go back to flatline. The reason is that it is the default for Windows install. Considering that MSN is pretty much the default for Windows and will likely indicate what is likely, then Bing will probably get to about 25, maybe 30 % (due to MS payments) and then will trend back to under 20%. It will continue that way until Google's leadership is turned over to business ppl who will then kill innovation (think IBM, GE, Disney, Intuit, Yahoo, etc).

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  14. Mod parent up or I curse thee by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 3, Funny

    These increases are very likely to correlate (causally, no less!) to Infection Explorer 8 being pushed hard, leveraging the majority number of computers that have M-Windows installed.

    Capitalism is about having or obtaining a large quantity of something at price P, "talking it up" through Marketing or other bovine excrement until people want it, and then setting new price NP > P when they come asking for it.

    Or, in clearer Slashdot format:

    1) Have a large install base.
    2) Push your browser hard onto the install base and set the default page to Bing (just as Google arranged with Mozilla).
    3) ???? (bovine excrement)
    4) PROFIT!!!

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    1. Re:Mod parent up or I curse thee by rattaroaz · · Score: 5, Funny

      So you are saying Microsoft is leveraging an existing monopoly to force their way into other markets. Wow, that's pretty clever, and certainly innovative on their part. Surprised they didn't try that earlier.

  15. Well...it's my homepage anyway by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone is speaking of trickery to get the users. I switched my homepage over by choice - and I'm a Mac Safari user.

    Reason? Much against my expectation, I found I liked the daily pictures rather than the blank of Google. I fully expected to prefer the clean look of Google (after all, it was that rather than quality of results which made me move from Alta Vista to Google many years ago.) but instead I found it was time for a change and I like the different appearance and the tagging they do I find interesting.

    Search quality results - variable. Some good, some not so. It's no effort to just click the search box top-right and start using Google instead however, so effectively by having Bing as the homepage with a quickly accessible Google search I've got quick access to two potential sets of results.

    So yes, I switched over for the pretty pictures. Yes, that's a shallow reason. It's doing no harm however, and I like it.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:Well...it's my homepage anyway by csartanis · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you used Firefox (or Opera) you could use greasemonkey (or userjs) to change Google's background to Bing's. Then you could get your pretty pictures and quality search results at the same time.

  16. Surprising... by Gription · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is amazing how a simple campaign of drive-by installs and default check boxes that change your search provider can increase your market share!!!

    1. Re:Surprising... by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yea, because Google's idiotic toolbar being bundled with everything from the end user Java VM to Adobe PDF Reader is so different a tactic.

      --
      I hate printers.
    2. Re:Surprising... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yea, because Google's idiotic toolbar being bundled with everything from the end user Java VM to Adobe PDF Reader is so different a tactic.

      Well, MS is pushing out updates via OS updates.

      I discovered the other day that IE on my XP box had suddenly decided that Bing was its default search engine, despite the fact that I'd previously set it to be Google.

      I'm not saying I agree any more with the bundling of such things when you install other software (I don't), but Microsoft has an even more privileged access to my system in that they can push updates and I don't even get asked (other than agreeing to a cumulative security update with a long number and no real explanation). I certainly wasn't asked if IE could change its default search engine or to become the default browser (which has happened on occasion).

      I have no doubt that a significant amount of their new-found market share was automatically set for users without their knowledge.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Surprising... by sarhjinian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a very different tactic: a defensive one.

      Put it this way: if Google didn't piggyback on things like Acrobat or Java, they'd be wiped out by Microsoft. Most MSIE updates (and more than a few non-MSIE installs) over the past few years have switched users to MSN/Live/Bing/Whatever-its-called-this-year, and it's not at all easy to straightforward to change MSIE's search provider to Google. Heck, Bing is designed to look enough like Google that users aren't alerted sufficiently to the change

      If Google wasn't pushing back, that 10% gain for Bing would be a lot higher.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    4. Re:Surprising... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      only time Windows Updates ever remotely came close to changing my search page is when it installed IE8 and it went through a wizard the first time I ran it and asked what I wanted my search page to be. Even then, I believe the default option was to keep my old search provider, which was imported from IE7 settings.

      You're right, except for one thing: when installing IE8 (doesn't matter if it's from Windows Update, or manually), there is indeed a selection screen where you choose between "Express settings" (which sets your search engine to Bing, among other things) and "Custom settings". But neither one is the default - there is simply no active selection there when the screen loads, and "Next" button is disabled. You have to pick.

      It is pretty upfront about what "Express" means, though (it's all listed right on that screen, as in "Express settings: set my default provider to Bing, ...".

    5. Re:Surprising... by snadrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Consider Ubuntu Linux. Its security updates aren't just packaged preferences & programs you don't want.

      --
      Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
  17. Sun... by Gription · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Java is my common irritant with this. Whenever you run the install it hides a checkbox to load some type of crapware by default. I think it actually looks at your computer because it never seems to offer a piece of junk that you already have. It has offered the Google toolbar, MSN toolbar, Open Office, and now:
    Bing...

  18. Re:I wonder what happens when you Google Bing by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not sure your two links prove your point. As I age, I'm getting more critical of bad user interfaces.

    If you are searching for Google, then you almost certainly want http://www.google.com./ Might as well show only that as sometimes less is more.

    If that isn't what you wanted, click on the other results link just below and you can see lots of other stuff. But really, if you want anything other than the homepage, you are going to have to come up with a better query than "google".

    Google got a lot of attention in the early days for its clean uncluttered interface. I applaud Bing for their clean uncluttered results page. At least for the example you pointed out.

  19. Re:Bigger marketshare than desktop Linux by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 4, Funny

    can I get this analogy in a term I can understand? Like perhaps Cars per Library of Congress?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  20. I use it by the-matt-mobile · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I find myself using Bing quite a bit. The reason - if I'm logged into gmail or Blogger, then Google shows me as logged in when I search in another tab. I can't log out of Google search while staying logged in to gmail or blogger, so I use Bing. Why do I want to log out? I don't really know - it's not like Google can't still identify me, but it just feels icky to have them blatantly flaunt that they track my searches.

    A couple of other items of note - for C# programmers, Bing is nicer in that it allows the sharp sign in a search, as opposed to google which doesn't (even though it does a mightly fine job of returning relavent results anyway). And, probably the best feature of Bing is that it's image search is really nice. You just scroll down and more results are loaded. It's worth using Bing for that feature alone.

    However, the trouble with numbers like the ones in the article are that very few people will ever use only Bing. Google is still the de facto search engine, and Bing is an alternative for those times when you want something google doesn't do the way you want it to.

    1. Re:I use it by eulernet · · Score: 2, Informative

      A couple of other items of note - for C# programmers, Bing is nicer in that it allows the sharp sign in a search, as opposed to google which doesn't

      Forget about Bing for C#, try Google Codesearch:
      http://google.com/codesearch

      About finding the pictures, I'm now frequently searching for better image sources with the reverse image engine:
      http://www.tineye.com/

      You just scroll down and more results are loaded.

      What a crappy feature !
      IE8 is already slow, increasing the size of the page just makes it slower.

      It's also on slashdot, on your messages page.

  21. I'm not surprised by Nerdposeur · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why, I did a Bing search myself just the other day. I was using IE for the one thing at work that requires it, and I didn't know that Bing was the default in IE.

    It only took me about 15 seconds to change it, though.

    Seriously, though, other than the fact that it's the Evil Empire's search, I think this is mostly good. Competition breeds better products.

  22. What the...seriously? by Pojut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seriously? I don't personally know anyone that uses Bing, and I even know a few people that aren't even aware of its existence.

    I know that who I kow is a very small slice of "everyone", but still...where are these legions of people using Bing? Could the fact that many Windows Mobile phones use Bing as their default search engine be contributing to this number?

  23. Re:The Deal Seekers Are Probably Partly Responsibl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Funny story on this one. I was talking to someone about Bing Cashback and so he went to bing and tried to navigate the site and find information about the cashback program. However, he couldn't find anything. We tried using the search and the site navigation, and it was nowhere. I knew I had seen the main cashback page, and simply said to just Google it instead. So, yes that's right, he had to Google Bing (and it was the very first result). I think that is an indication of a search engine failing when you have to use another search to even find it.

  24. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  25. igoogle changes = win for bing? by BlueBadger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yesterday Google changed the layout of the igoogle page in Canada to match what it started around a year ago in the states. Over the past year many countries have suffered the same fate. There was however a work around that would let people use the main google.com page by going to http://www.google.com/ig?hl=all and this worked up until yesterday. It's very surprising that Google would force a significant and controversial change like this on its user base after over a year of people complaining and asking and googling for ways to change it back... I'd hope that they could at least figure out how much of the population that uses igoogle tried to get it to work with the established layout by talking to people on the appropriate team and using their own Google tools. I’m one of the many upset users who are now going to have to consider the value of my google branded homepage and if it is worth getting used to the new layout when the current people in charge over at Google don’t seem to understand the significance of keeping an option for the old layout that is in many opinions a much better use of space. I might or might not switch to bing, or yahoo, or any number of other sites but I’m honestly strongly considering leaving the igoogle home page after many happy years.

    --
    BlueBadger
  26. Re:Duh. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

    I wonder if this has to do with Window 7. Its the default search

    It's not really default - when you run IE for the first time on a new user account, it'll ask you if you want "Express: Bing Search", or "Custom", with neither checked by default, so you have to pick one to move on. I would imagine that more people who don't know any better pick "Express" though, so there may be something to it.

    The problem is that Win7 is still at, what, ~2%? And most of its early adopters are power users or developers, who usually install a different browser pretty much first thing after the OS install.

  27. Interestingly, in Chrome (/Chromium)... by jonaskoelker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's how you do it in chromium:

    • Go to bing.com and perform a search query (so that bing gets added to your list of search providers)
    • menu--options--search--manage, click bing, click "make default"

    (Just tested it, it works just fine. Now, let me change it back :D)

  28. Bing is fine, except one thing... by ByzantineAlex · · Score: 4, Interesting
    • So many people have such a blinding hate for everything Microsoft that they lose all semblance of moral and logical integrity. Therefore the argument becomes puerile, unfortunately, like many of the replies above.
    • Anyway, back to the subject: in my opinion Bing is quite good, and has some interesting qualities. Are they enough to make people leave their "google" comfort-zone ? No, not yet. There's nothing revolutionary enough. Anyway, I really wish them well - competition is always welcome.
    • Note. In my experience one area where Bing really fails badly at this time is searching for references to people. Search for instance for "bruce springsteen" (with quotes). How many hits you get ? In Google you get almost 11 mils. In Bing you get around 4.5 mils. In this case, of course, there's no difference (comparing two almost infinite numbers doesn't make sense - nobody will go past page 10 anyway), but searching for less well-known people will be something else - you'll get, say, 334 hits in Google, and 2 in Bing. Now that's a huge difference ! Some of the 334 hits in google were real hits. Search for instance for your own name, or for the names of your friends, not for "celebs". That's Bing's biggest downside right now, imho.
  29. And... by Gription · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The real chuckle with IE8 and its search provider choices: MS has moved Google to the second page of search providers and some of the 1st page choices are a joke...