Bing Gaining Market Share Faster

sopssa sends along a TechCrunch report on comScore qSearch numbers indicating that Bing is currently gaining market share faster than ever before. "In December, Microsoft's search engine gained another 0.4 percent to capture 10.7 percent of US search queries. That makes five straight months of steady share gains for Bing since it launched — Bing's share is up 2.7 percent in total since May, 2009. Google gained only 0.2 percent to end the month with 65.7 percent market share. What is even more interesting is if you look at year-over-year query growth rates for each search engine. Bing's growth is actually accelerating. Its growth rate in query volume was 49.4 percent in December."

Comments

Of course

[smooth wombat]

This is what happens when you make your search engine the default one for your web browser as well as make it difficult for someone to add or change this option.

Duh!

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Like Firefox, Opera and Chrome do with Google? It's not hard to change search engine in IE, btw

Re:Of course

[kjart]

It's actually pretty easy to change providers in IE - you just click on the drop down beside the search field and select 'Find more providers'. Brings up a page with numerous other search providers you can add (Google, ebay, etc). Also, I think if you go to google manually in IE, there is a prompt in the top right to switch (or at least there used to be - not sure if they killed this).

Also, if you were to apply the same logic, the marketshare gains by google would be non-trivial since they are the default homepage/provider in Firefox. Personally, while I do think the defaults do influence things, I also think you are overstating them slightly. Google's brand alone assures that a lot of non-savvy computer users will still go there despite defaults in their browser, simply because 'google' has become synonymous with 'search' to a large extent.

Re:Of course

[Locke2005]

It also helps if you're willing to PAY people to use your search engine... Publisher's Clearing House sends me a daily email with a link to a Bing page, offering me a chance to win VALUABLE PRIZES by searching. What I've always said: "Anybody can generate $1 million in revenue, if they are given a $2 million marketing budget to do it with." Like our current job creation which is driven almost completely by government deficit spending, I'm not sure increasing search engine market share really counts if you are losing money on every search.

Re:Of course

[Kadin2048]

I did this a few weeks ago and Microsoft makes it intentionally difficult — first, most casual users don't even know that the "Find more providers" list is there. Second, it's not obviously clear that you'd use the "Find more providers" option to change providers; i.e. get rid of Bing completely and use Google instead, rather than add additional options to the menu. Third, if and when you do get to the Microsoft page of search providers, when I went there, Google wasn't even on the front page. It took a number of subsequent clicks to even find it, which seems totally inappropriate given Google's popularity.

This is 100% the usual Microsoft monopoly-leveraging SOP.

Re:Of course

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Oh, come on. The first time you run IE8 it prompts you to pick a search provider or to use the default of Bing- and it keeps prompting every time you launch until you make a choice or tell it to go away. It lists Google right there, no need to search for more providers. It really can't be made any easier than that.

For an existing install, I can't say as I haven't tried it. But it seems odd to me that the first run would have data that a subsequent run would not.

Re:Of course

[PaladinAlpha]

Yes, I've always found it difficult to click the picture of google with the drop-down arrow and select another search provider from the many options present. And even worse is when I want to add another one, like MS's latest cash cow, requiring me to then click "Manage search engines..." and then "Get more search engines". Whole thing is counter-intuitive, I tell ya.

On the gains, didn't something happen recently to lock a lot of smartphones into Bing? Can't remember the article.

Re:Of course

[jhoegl]

Like Firefox, Opera and Chrome do with Google? It's not hard to change search engine in IE, btw

Hey....

Shut up.

Re:Of course

[Gadget_Guy]

I was surprised to find a google search returned no hits from M$ itself, but when I switched to bing, it worked. It seems that M$ is blocking google from searching it's site.

Really? I just copied the phrase from your post "Exchange Certificate on a winmo smartphone" into Google and the first result was a technet article at Microsoft. The best that Bing could do with the same phrase was some press release stuff about the phones (at least on the first page).

I know the results vary depending on your country and phase of the moon, but it seems a bit premature to suggest that Microsoft are blocking google when a million other test searches could easily prove that wrong.

Then after installing XP on another computer, and updating everything (since she wouldnt) I found that in the newest IE I couldnt use google as my search, the "easy" way of adding it was gone.

In other branches of this thread, everyone else has already mentioned the Find more providers option (which really doesn't seem that hard), but what "easy" way has been removed?

Re:Of course

[prestomation]

Two(?) words:
Windows 7

Re:Of course

[Androclese]

I did the "Mom Test"; it has been pretty reliable for testing tech things.

Here is the exact conversation:
me : 'Mom, I want you to change your IE search engine from Bing to Google.'
Mom: 'Why? What's the difference?'
me : 'Google is better.'
Mom: 'Nah, it doesn't matter to me, I just type what I want in there and the results show'
me : 'Can you at least try?'
Mom: 'Fine, where do I do it?'
me : '(start explaining)'
Mom: 'No, no, no, forget it, that's too complicated. Stop with the geek talk; I'm still confused on how Foxfire (sic) can use the same Internet as Windows... how do you expect me to figure this out?'
me : ...

Re:Of course

[adbge]

The OP isn't trying to bash Microsoft or IE for having bing as the default search engine, but is instead pointing out that if you release a new search engine, and then make it the default in a large percent of Internet browsers, of course it will gain ground quickly. This further implies that Bing is gaining market share not on merit, but rather because of its default behavior.

Re:Of course

[h4rm0ny]

You need to upgrade to a smarter mother. Mine's fine with that.

Re:Of course

[zehaeva]

As an avid blackberry user and enthusiast on Verizon, in an office full of blackberry addicts, I will tell you you are dead wrong sir.

I can not change the default search provider on my Storm 2, I have tried.

I did not install it either. When I purchased the Storm 2 Google was the default search engine, literally over night it was changed, with out my permission and against my wishes. The same happened to every single blackberry in my office.

The only option I have is to type google into my blackberry's browser to use it. That is hardly an option at all.

Also I did not want the Bing application installed to my blackberry and yet it was done for me over the air. I have not been able to uninstall it either. It does not show up in the applications in the options at all.

What option is this?

~Zehaeva

Re:Of course

[recoiledsnake]

I stop arguing with someone's post once I see a 'M$'. It's obvious that they're either 12, a zealot, or a karma whore making up stuff that moderators want to hear. (It worked well here, the GP is at +4 interesting right now).

Re:Of course

[God_TM]

Unfortunately, you're trying to push your agenda without listening to the person with the 'problem'. You even quoted her: "Why? What's the difference? I just type what I want in there and the results show". So you want to take a system that works fine for your mother, and have her conform to the way you do things? Why? It's better? Would your mom *really* notice a difference in the results? I don't see a problem here, other than fanboyism.

Re:Of course

[adiposity]

Google is on the front page (for now), but for about a year it wasn't on the front page of:

http://www.ieaddons.com/en/searchproviders

Ask.com, WikiPedia and ESPN were beating it out, and you had to scroll down the second page about halfway to find it. I'm glad to see it is showing up on the front page.

Honestly, I can't blame them for not wanting to help you find google, but any browser these days has to be able to add a google search engine in less than 2 clicks or it's very annoying for most people.

-Dan

Sure...

[TrippTDF]

When you pay off everyone and their brother to default to your service, you'll pick up a little momentum...

Re:Sure...

[Lunix Nutcase]

You mean like with Google and Firefox?

Bing is pretty good

[DogDude]

Bing is actually pretty darn good. They don't have the countless integrated features that Google has, but for good, solid search results, in some cases, Bing returns better results than Google. Where I work, people there have set about half of the desktops' home pages to Bing, with the other half being Google.

Re:Bing is pretty good

[johnlcallaway]

Bing is annoying as hell, and I will never use it on purpose. There are way too many websites that seem to create hover points for every other word in an article, so Bing pops up all the time. Which could also account for their 'increased search results' .. people accidentally getting bing results because of hover points in web pages.

Re:Market Variety

[sopssa]

Not alternatives, but Scroogle hides your searches among thousands of others (and removes Google's click-tracking javascripts and so on).

Stupid reporting

[Anonymusing]

In other news, my 1-year-old child has gained massive weight and height, while I, unfortunately, have not gotten even a millimeter taller.

Google is the established leader, with a massive market share that is unlikely to grow much further. Bing is the new kid on the block, starting at zero. Of course Bing is going to grow. There is nothing else for it to do. Even if it's lousy, it is impossible for it to not gain share. This is like comparing the Zune marketshare with the iPod.

Re:Look, it's actually not bad

[superstick58]

I haven't used the basic search much, but I've been much happier with the maps tool. I used to use google maps, but bing has been much more accurate and up-to-date with maps for some locations. I'm tired of searching for an address I know exists, but get no results because it was built in the last 2 years. So bing increases their market share not just with search, but with their other services as well.

Re:Easy to do

[Thornkin]

Wasn't all that being done for Live Search too though? And that market share was way below Bing's and dropping. It's something more than just those 3 items.

How much would you pay for it?

[grahamsz]

Obviously the costs of operating a search engine are pretty significant and the market for people who'd pay for privacy is quite small. I suspect it'd need to be in the $20-50/month range, and i think that would deter a lot of people.

Little in life is free, and businesses that run on millions of dollars of hardware and fast internet connections are going to need to finance that.

In any event, if i'm going to have to deal with ads online then i'd PREFER that they were tailored to things i'm interested in.

Contradicting numbers

[trazan]

This completely contradicts two other reports from the last few days, which has Bing losing market share in December.

http://searchengineland.com/nielsen-yahoo-bing-down-google-up-in-december-33464

http://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/search-enginedec2009/

And another thing

[Weaselmancer]

MSDN is now powered by Bing too. So every windows programmer in the world is now making Bing queries by default. That's got to boost things a bit.

Once again a misleading story about Bing

[pdboddy]

That total you see in the image in the article is for Microsoft Sites. This number includes searches from ALL of Microsoft's search boxes: Bing, Live, microsoft.com, etc etc.

If you look at the Nielsen report here: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/nielsen-reports-december-u-s-search-rankings/

You'll see that they list Microsofts search sites as "MSN/Windows Live/Bing Search", which is a bit more explanatory I would say.

And if you check Hitwise, where they list searches BY domain name, www.bing.com LOST 4%. (http://www.hitwise.com/us/press-center/press-releases/search-enginedec2009/)

But Google didn't lose - it gained!

[twoallbeefpatties]

You know, when I look at the graph in TFA the Search Share for Google increased just as much as Bing did! In Dec-08, MS sites were at 8.3%, up to 10.7% in Dec-09. During that same timespan, Google went from 63.5% to 65.7%.

And in that timespan, Yahoo dropped from 20.5% to 17.3%. AOL also dropped from 3.8% to 2.6%. Guess what - MSN isn't stealing Google's shares yet. It's stealing from Google's competitors.

Re:Look, it's actually not bad

[NeutronCowboy]

Just for fun, I tried Honda Civic as a search. Actually, Bing sucks. Where the results differ, Bing has either a comparison between Civic and Integra windshields, or an ungodly list of used car sites. The one bonus item: it actually has sites that show the manuals for various Honda/Acura cars. Here's the deal though: if I type in "Honda Civic", I want information about the car, not about a manual for it, and I don't want to buy one. Especially not a used one. Google on the other hand presents me with sites that have information about the car - edmunds review, price comparisons, guide sites, etc. Stuff that will help me know more about the car.

If I want specific topics, I'll search for them, thank you very much.

I found similar issues with the maps site: directions are easier to manipulate in Google, and Google lets me search by public transit, or by walking. One good feature in Bing: get directions based on traffic. Google does something similar with "avoid highways", but it's not the same thing.

You are right, Google hasn't evolved much in its core business of search - but that's good, because there isn't much that can happen, until the semantic web (ha!) comes along. Bing tries to pretend it can do semantics, but it really can't. It's just faking it fairly badly. Oh, and final gripe: the stuff it does to wikipedia pages is nasty, and on its own a reason to avoid it like a plague. Yes, I don't have to use the readability feature, but I can't turn off the side bar where that option sits. If I go to a site, I either run my own scripts, or I want to see the page as the site creators intended. Not what MS thinks would be a good version.

In tl;dr format: Google gets out of my way. Bing is and stays in my face. Google wins.