Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Has Bing Already Overtaken Yahoo? 319

nk497 writes "Microsoft's newly revamped search tool Bing has already overtaken Yahoo in the US and globally, according to StatsCounter. The net traffic watcher said Bing has topped Yahoo 16.28% to 10.22% in the US, and 5.62% to 5.13% globally. Though the firm noted Bing's popularity may drop off after the excitement wears off, the firm also said: 'Steve Ballmer is quoted as saying that he wanted Microsoft to become the second biggest search engine within five years. Following the breakdown in talks to acquire Yahoo at a cost of $40 billion it looks as if he may have just achieved that with Bing much sooner and a lot cheaper than anticipated.' Google, of course, still leads by a considerable margin."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Has Bing Already Overtaken Yahoo?

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Not really (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:00AM (#28249841)
    Exactly. Delayed news is okay. Old news which has not remained current is false news.

    >>There is certainly a very long way to go before it even begins to approach google.

    Not only that, but people's search habits are not at all easy to change. I suspect Bing will take a while even to approach Yahoo.
  • by castironpigeon ( 1056188 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:03AM (#28249861)
    I did a little experiment. I loaded up IE, hit the search button, typed something in, and ran the search. Whaddayaknow, Bing comes up with the search results. So every idiot that has the same Windows installed as the day they brought it home from Walmart with IE as the default browser and the little search button as their only gateway to the world is going to use Bing whether they know it or not. Apparently there are quite a few such idiots. Are we surprised?
  • Redirects (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sycodon ( 149926 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:05AM (#28249883)

    How long before M.S. sends out an update that automatically redirects URL typos to Bing?

  • by Junta ( 36770 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:07AM (#28249911)

    1. Their marketing strategy seems to be to push the name 'Microsoft' as far away as possible. Interesting they view their own name as a liability in this space.

    2. 'Bing is not google' abbreviation seems particularly weird. Suggesting that currently google has an oppressive, monopolistic grip on the search industry, leaving little choice but to have to go with them as they are the defacto standard. The company that wants to save a market from an oppressive, de-facto standard monopoly is.... Microsoft?

  • by blahbooboo ( 839709 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:15AM (#28249999)

    I did a little experiment. I loaded up IE, hit the search button, typed something in, and ran the search. Whaddayaknow, Bing comes up with the search results. So every idiot that has the same Windows installed as the day they brought it home from Walmart with IE as the default browser and the little search button as their only gateway to the world is going to use Bing whether they know it or not. Apparently there are quite a few such idiots. Are we surprised?

    People like you are why IT people get a bad rap.

    Why is someone an "idiot" who does not care what search engine or browser they use? You are into (or do it professionally) IT, so this sort of thing is important to YOU. I bet in other fields, maybe for example sake investing, people could say "Wow, you're an idiot for not performing a split. Moron!"

    Fact is different things are important to different people. It doesn't make them an idiot.

  • by rolfwind ( 528248 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:20AM (#28250053)

    Around a decade ago, it was enough to have a better search engine to get people to switch. But in the meantime, google has me hooked on mail, sites, and documents. Other people use other apps, but just like Microsoft snagged the desktop OS market based on it being the default on commodity hardware and then maintaining it with applications later, I believe Google will keep it's top spot on the same idea.

    Migrating from a search engine simply is a lot of hassle now especially since it's diminishing returns, I have a feeling that "perfect" results and google and maybe even bing won't be that far apart from each other. Also, a decade ago, the internet was more of a wild west in terms of searching for information about some topics far and wide. You just didn't know what sites had relevant information. These days, a great majority of my searches start as "X Y wikipedia" because now there is a centralized spot for info.

    I applaud Microsoft's effort though. Competition is always a good thing and might bring something unexpected or at least keep google honest and on its toes. Also, the bing page has learn/copied the good part of google, and that is the minimalization. A far cry from the horrendous "portal"idea that Yahoo, MSN, comcast.net, AOL, and others are still attached too.

  • Re:Indeed (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:35AM (#28250187)

    What were your search terms? I could find plenty of information in all three engines. It all depends on how you structure your queries. For example, "Immigration in Germany" in quotes like that would almost certainly give you good results for something like this. I used

    "Immigration in Germany" pre-ww1

    as my query and got plenty of results.

  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:41AM (#28250235) Journal
    Not going to happen. Yahoo! is at around 5% of the total market. We all know about it, because we remember when it was at the top, but for most people if you say 'better than Yahoo!' they say 'huh? Better than what? Is Yahoo a thing you Google with?'. All that kind of advert would do is draw people's attention to the existence of Yahoo.
  • by Zerth ( 26112 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:43AM (#28250251)

    Bing does have that "see bits of videos straight from the search page by hovering over the image" feature. I'm sure they'll remove it as soon as publishers and porn sites complain.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:47AM (#28250309)

    He's not criticizing you for commenting, he's criticizing you for calling these people "idiots".

    Having different interests/priorities than you doesn't make someone an idiot.

  • Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TropicalCoder ( 898500 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:47AM (#28250311) Homepage Journal

    When I saw this story on Slashdot just now I thought - is this a story or a paid commercial promotion? It is clearly way to soon to be evaluating the impact of bling (or whatever it is called - I am not paid to help establish brand recognition so I won't repeat it). It should also be obvious that there will be a lot who will click it out of curiosity alone and never go back again, as I did. Since Microsoft has made it clear that they intend to spend a fortune to promote bling, all articles become suspect since we are all well aware of how Microsoft routinely buys journalists and bloggers, and that in fact this is their preferred method these days. In the end, I arrived at the decision that this is simply a timley story like any other to the Slashdot editors who know that we are interested in all things Microsoft. Obviously this site wouldn't enjoy the success it does if they pass off paid commercial promotions as subject matter, but there are so many others doing this that if I were an editor I would take pains to avoid even the appearance of such a thing.

  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @09:53AM (#28250407) Journal
    How is this related at all? You can still store your documents, code, and mail with one provider and use a different one for search.
  • by noidentity ( 188756 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @10:14AM (#28250633)
    Agreed; Google is getting more on my nerves every day, partly because it doesn't do as told. I search for "foo bar" and it shows pages without any mention of "bar". OK, so search for "+foo +bar", and get my hits. Then try searching for "generic.h" and it returns pages with the string "generic" (no .h). Even adding a + doesn't avoid this. And then it regularly "corrects" my "misspellings", causing the wrong search. Once I finally get it searching for what I asked it to, it puts lots of irrelevant hits first.
  • Re:Redirects (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @10:24AM (#28250753) Homepage

    Fair's fair. Yahoo only gets traffic via of all the browser-hijacking toolbars it's managed to sneak onto people's machines.

    (Or is it because Yahoo's adverts create more of an emotional connection with people...?)

  • Re:-1 HopeDashing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TaoPhoenix ( 980487 ) <TaoPhoenix@yahoo.com> on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:15AM (#28251371) Journal

    Sorry.

    They'd just game them separately with twinned sites & such.

  • Re:Not really (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kalriath ( 849904 ) * on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:19AM (#28251415)

    It's really not that hard. Click the little drop down beside the search box, and pick "Find More Search Providers". Two clicks, really. Google even features prominently on the (Microsoft-hosted) search engine page that appears.

    Ignore the retards that will appear to say "get firefox" with some witty 4 item list (often including "???. Profit!" while clapping the bottom of their hands together in short bus glee.

  • Overtaken? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dvoecks ( 1000574 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:21AM (#28251429)
    In hype, perhaps... I thought that "search overload" commercial was clever the first time I saw it. Then, when I saw it 3 more times in the same hour, I wanted to hurt someone. It's about twice as long as it should be, and it gets unbelievably tedious. It annoys me so badly that I've already sworn off ever using it.
  • by Locutus ( 9039 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:30AM (#28251567)

    So "Bing" is another name for MS search but we are supposed to believe they jumped Yahoo by changing the name? That would mean not only would have all the previous MS search lemmings basically stayed put and people jumped from Google and/or Yahoo. That's just dumb and I have no doubt this is just another Microsoft marketing gimmick so more lemmings might get a warm and fuzzy feeling thinking there weren't the only ones using MS Bing. But, knowing Microsoft, maybe they did an OS patch which "fixed" the default search field for everyone using Windows and now they all use Bing. Or they only did that to the ones naive enough to still be using MS Vista. IMO.

     

    What made me laugh when I tried MS Bing was when the search returned something like 6 pages but from page 3 onward all it did was reshowed the same last page of search results.

     

    LoB
     

  • I Was There (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:37AM (#28251643)

    It's more like this:

    A mechanic and an IT guy are yelling to each other. "What do you mean you don't care what engine it is? You're a fucking idiot!"

  • Re:Uh, evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TropicalCoder ( 898500 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @11:46AM (#28251729) Homepage Journal

    not any evidence whatsoever in response to the GPs question.

    Our mission is to establish Microsoft's platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry.... Working behind the scenes to orchestrate "independent" praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy's, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. "Independent" analyst's report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them).

    "Independent" consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour).

    "Independent" academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted).

    "Independent" courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.

    I think that is some evidence. I combined that with my own observations. Your observations may be different than mine.

    anything from Groklaw should be dismissed out of hand due to incredible bias.

    Yes, Groklaw is biased - towards those in favour of upholding the rule of law whether it's against convicted monopolies or scam artists trying to destroy Linux. However, they do supply a link to just about every little detail backing up whatever is the subject of the day. This permits the reader to follow the evidence and come to their own conclusions, as you have just done.

  • by kenbo0422 ( 1567789 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @12:25PM (#28252145)
    I can't see how anything MicroSoft puts out there could rival either Yahoo or Google. They don't really have the best of anything, the dominate by the 'deluge' factor. All the 'Live' stuff that's forced on you through MicroSoft Products has already existed at Google or somewhere else and MicroSoft being the Borg Monopoly it is, is just trying to break down the door in an area that most of us really don't want to see their footprints. Stick to the software you used to make exclusively, guys! They're so spread out now that any innovation from a competitor may not pull the rug out from under them, but it can jerk them around.
  • Good, Bad, Ugly (Score:4, Insightful)

    by salesgeek ( 263995 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @12:29PM (#28252203) Homepage

    Good - Easy to use, decent results, refreshing look.
    Bad - Poor related links.
    Ugly - Can't try out everything because I don't have silverlight on my laptop and cell phone.

    I'm wondering if bing is more about Silverlight than it is about being better than MSN Search or Live.

  • Re:Not really (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mgrassi99 ( 514152 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @12:41PM (#28252371)

    Funny, because my related searches for "the dark knight" are:

            * The Joker
            * Heath Ledger And The Joker
            * The Batman
            * The Dark Knight 2008
            * Superman The Man Of Steel
            * The Punisher
            * The Incredible Hulk

    Seems pretty relevant to me.

    You also get this nice little sidebar which assumes you're looking for a movie:

            * Images
            * Trailer
            * Review
            * Quotes
            * Soundtrack
            * Cast

  • Re:Uh, evidence? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TropicalCoder ( 898500 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @12:53PM (#28252607) Homepage Journal

    For that, you would need to provide one or two examples of journalists being 'bought'.

    Why? Who says? Courts convict on circumstancial evidence all the time. When formulating my own opinions, I frequently find I need draw conclusions based on imprecise or sparse data. I think we all do, at some point or another. I don't think one can navigate through life if they are unable to make a decision without hard evidence. As indicated, I believe I have seen enough to come to my own conclusion on this issue. When we are dealing with a convicted monopolist, we need to be more critical and more sceptical of expiating evidence - it's just common sense. You seem to have a contrary point of view. Thank you for sharing that. Different points of view make this world a more interesting place to be. May you live long and prosper :-)

  • bing sucks: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by blind biker ( 1066130 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @02:13PM (#28253591) Journal

    I tried it out a couple of times, and it insists on offering me Finland-related search results. This made it completely useless for me. I guess it does the same for users from other countries - gives search results specific to the searcher's geographic location. Well, that's bullshit.

  • Re:Unlearn (Score:3, Insightful)

    by b4dc0d3r ( 1268512 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @03:10PM (#28254433)

    I wonder if we're just getting older.

    You see, back in the day, we had to learn assembler to write programs. Then they made C and other higher-level languages. And then interpreted languages. but even when writing VB.NET or C#, in my head I'm doing the equivalent of the original C++ to C translator, adding C to ASM on one side and OOP to C++ on the other side.

    I sometimes wonder that, back when search sucked (right around the time of Northern lights / AltaVista) I could find anything. It wasn't persistence - it was putting the right terms in. Think of what you want to see on the page, and let it do a simple look-up.

    google is not processing data that way any more. We have to re-learn how to do our specific searches. I don't have an answer for you tho, still figuring it out. Meantime, try just asking a question like the idiot users do. It works more often than I expect.

  • Re:Not really (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jmcbain ( 1233044 ) on Monday June 08, 2009 @04:22PM (#28255755)

    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 [bing.com]

    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.

  • Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wintermute000 ( 928348 ) <bender@plane t e x p r ess.com.au> on Tuesday June 09, 2009 @06:41AM (#28263427)

    There's merit to what you're saying but you're failing to take into account the scale of the difference.

    Internet penetration in the altavista/lycos (remember them lol) days was far less than now. The internet and google are intertwined in people's heads. Was altavista ever a verb?

    Now the first thing people do when they want to find something online is google. That's ordinary people, the kind who keep clicking on the blue E icon because it stands for interweb and that's how they've been wired. Google are forunate in that they've achieved overwhelming dominance at the 'critical mass' point of internet usage.

    I agree that if something is better then it may displace google. However the odds are now magnitudes larger than back in 1999.

    On a side note, I cannot believe how much money they make off advertising.... does anyone actually click on internet ads? (answer is obviously yes but personally I can't even recall more than half a dozen times in the last 10 years lol).

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...