Does Bing Have Google Running Scared? 560
suraj.sun alerts us to an anonymous-source story up at the NY Post, not what we would normally consider a leading source of tech news, claiming that Microsoft's introduction of Bing has alarmed Google. "...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, The Post has learned. Brin, according to sources..., is himself leading the team of search-engine specialists in an effort to determine how Bing's crucial search algorithm differs from that used by [Google]. 'New search engines have come and gone in the past 10 years, but Bing seems to be of particular interest to Sergey,' said one insider, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The move by Brin is unusual, as it is rare these days for the Google founders to have such hands-on involvement in day-to-day operations at the company, the source added." CNet's coverage of the rumor begins with the NY Post and adds in Search Engine Land's speculation on what the world of search would look like if Yahoo exited the field.
Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:4, Insightful)
And Seinfeld falls into this statement where exactly?
Uhuh (Score:5, Insightful)
Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is how market competition is supposed to work.
Evil or not, a Google without competition inevitably stagnates.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh that's so reliable (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing to worry about (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know, but it should (Score:5, Insightful)
Any self-respecting organization will take a close look at a competitor product, specially when such competitor happens to be one of the world's largest player in the industry.
Bing will certainly snatch a fraction of the market share owned by Google; modern top management theories demand that Google determines whether the market share lost to the rival will be a single user or a more considerable fraction.
It is not about Sergei pissing his pants, but about him and his company designing a solid strategy to respond to their competitor's move.
Re:They probably should be scared (Score:2, Insightful)
I must admit I myself have done the same thing. I realised my reliance on Google a few years ago and tried to use alternatives more most of my search needs, and then in a fix compare against Google results. The problem I found was that Google presents a single view of the web that while it may seem accurate isn't the whole picture. People would say to me "If Google can't find it then it dosn't exist", and then be surprised when I said I found it using Yahoo, Gigablast or Live.
Bring on more competitive search engines. If nothing else it will force Google to innovate because I don't see their current interface being the best view into the web.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketing
but but... that's exactly what the advertisement business is all about! It hasn't been about "search" in a long long time (not since maybe 2003 or so when Google's search results started to suck).
Re:Have any of you actually used bing? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is all well and good... (Score:1, Insightful)
Except that Bing sucks... Once the novelty of it wears off it will quickly relinquish it's temporary market share.
"Microsoft knows what the consumer wants" (Score:4, Insightful)
What M$ has going for it is consumer inertia, monopoly business practices, and a big installed base. Your belief in their genius at understanding consumer wants is faith-based. The list of M$ marketing and tech failures above is a long way from complete.
That said, I use Bing occasionally when I don't find what I want in the first couple of pages of google hits. It isn't better, but sometimes, different is what's needed. As for their translation setup... the dual window thing might be useful for a professional language translator who's trying to clean up the translator's output, but if one doesn't speak the language, google's straightforward translation interface that simply throws the translation on a page works better.
While google should watch them as they do any other competitor, they have no reason for concern. At least not this year.
Re:Have any of you actually used bing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe bloggers and link aggregators will find how to game bing in the future, but for the moment i find it's the better search engine, which really leads to your next statement which is pretty unbelievable - do you really think quality doesn't matter?! i don't ever want to hear you bagging microsoft products that have high market share or that are poor quality then, because according to you it doesn't matter.
for the rest of us, the quality of the results DO matter, and google would be stupid to ignore such a product.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft does marketing better than everything else they do?
Yes. They're a marketing company that has some tech leanings - it's been this way for as long as I've been into computers (the early 80's)
I don't buy it. Embrace Extend Extinguish comes to mind for starters.
You mean the marketing thing they need to do because they're incapable of engineering something good themselves?
I'd say their ability to control the markets they are in is also more effective than their marketing.
Umm, marketing is how they control their markets.
I'm sure there's more if i cared to keep going
Maybe you should, because the examples you gave only undermined your point.
Re:hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:4, Insightful)
Yup, that explains their pitiful market share and the general dearth of resources, so easy to observe in what goes on over there. They are as good as gone...
Rumor started in the NY Post? (Score:4, Insightful)
Rupert Murdoch's NY rag (the WSJ being the other)? Then it's scurrilous and almost certainly not true. Google isn't worried about Bing. The whole thing smells of astroturf and paid shills operating under cover of darkness.
Re:Crap comes from people learning to Game Google (Score:3, Insightful)
parent is lying (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent got rated "+5, insightful"...really? More like "-1, full of shit".
See for yourself. http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=hardwood+suppliers&btnG=Google+Search [google.com]
I'm no carpenter, but I looked at all of the first 20 links and only one of them was a link farm. The rest were either actual vendors of hardwood floor supplies or legitimate lists of suppliers (like the ones magazines often have). In nearly every case there was an actual physical location or an online store where I could purchase wood.
If you're going to troll for Microsoft, go do it somewhere where people are too dumb to verify your claims.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
Does "marketing" have a strict definition that could not be construed to include those things? I don't know the answer to that. I honestly thought that controlling or at least influencing the market was the primary goal of all marketing efforts and that the main difference between MS and other companies is that MS is more willing to engage in "questionable" marketing practices. I'm being careful how I say that because there are many things they do which may or may not be illegal (don't ask me, ask a lawyer) but in my mind are clearly unethical. I always saw embrace-extend-extinguish and their various forms of vendorlock as essential components of their marketing strategy, which is actually one of the primary reasons why I dislike them.
I think it's a great triumph of their marketing efforts that they remain so profitable despite the widespread disdain towards them. You may hate their guts but if you continue to buy their products they are not going to feel very hated. As the goal of a corporation is to produce a profit, and they are indeed profitable, it would be quite difficult for me to make the case that their marketing is inherently flawed. They have cash reserves which are the envy of many other companies. You could in fact say that their marketing is so effective that only the government was able to do anything to place some limits on it.
As others have said, I cannot prove but suspect that this is sort of like the "automobile recall" situation described in the movie Fight Club. If they know that the profit they will make from engaging in illegal activities is greater than the fines they will have to pay when they are caught, they don't really have a business reason not to engage in them. In that case, while I have no problem saying that they are a bunch of despicable bastards who would probably sell their first-born for a nickel, I must admit that in purely business terms, their strategy is sound.
I'll try to say this in a way that doesn't cause a flamewar. If you disagree with this, I accept that, but understand that at least the perception of this is quite real. Another reason why they are considered a marketing company more than a software company is that, with a few exceptions, it is not difficult to find higher-quality software than what they produce. That's a fact of which the general public is unaware, which is probably also marketing. When Win98 was the most popular desktop OS, Linux users everywhere realized the general public thought that computer crashes and frequent reboots were a normal, inherent part of operating a computer. They were not, and Linux proved that, but there is/was widespread ignorance about these things and the general public continued to buy Windows and learned to accept its problems because it did not occur to them to demand better until years later.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not personally convinced that the Google engine is really that good, in fact by design it's all but worthless for certain types of query. Originally it was designed to be fast and to not need to be able to comprehend the content of the page. Over the years they've had to change that because of the gamesmanship that inevitably occurs when you're at the top. And for the queries that I like to make, it doesn't do any better job of finding things than the older MS search did.
It's a sad state of affairs, but right now we should all be cheering on MS in their endeavor this one time, they are the only company right now that's even trying to bring Google into a more reasonable share of search queries.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:5, Insightful)
No, Microsoft is not good at marketing. What they do well is business. They have the sharpest business techniques you will ever see a company run. They originally got in the door by convincing IBM to give them the deal. All the way along, they've been making deals that somehow turn out best for them. With windows, they started by playing nice with IBM as long as possible, even promoting OS/2 for a while, until the precise moment when they needed to backstab them. With Netscape, Wordperfect, they kept on pushing their average products until the other companies made a mistep, and they were ready to pounce. If Google ever DOES make a mistake, they will be ready to pounce.
THAT'S what Microsoft does. They are always waiting and ready when their competitor stumbles.
Re:Yes, who can forget MS's great marketing (Score:3, Insightful)
"Yes. They're a marketing company that has some tech leanings - it's been this way for as long as I've been into computers (the early 80's)"
Sure, who can forget the famous 1984 commercial and the 16 page insert in Newsweek magazine for Windows 1.0 .. oh wait.
Correct, because the best defense from an allegation is to find an example of someone else doing something similar to the allegation.
Cf. Republicans brining up Clinton whenever Bush is being criticized.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes, who can forget MS's great marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, for a more recent example, Democrats bringing up Bush whenever Obama is being criticized.
One involved 8 years of prosperity and stabilization around the globe with a blowjob wedge issue.
The second involved 8 years of chaos, global instability, pockets of illegal prosperity with a Trust me and God bless America sock puppet hopin' to get a blow job for his wedge issue and not Torture, Massive Debt, Hate from Allies around the Globe, on and on and on.
I'll take a guy gettin' his nut off and doing the job over that douche of an alternative.
Nice try... but nothing to scare Google (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:5, Insightful)
But these are just your examples. Microsoft has exhibited marketing excellence throughout its existence from choosing to offer discounts to computer manufacturers who do not sell systems with alternative OSes to MCSEs and Microsoft Solution providers who are provided with primarily marketing resources rather than technical resources. Apparently, much of what you think is just "business" is the particular subset of business known as marketing.
Re:Yes, who can forget MS's great marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you forget all the google chrome ads and promotion of it in youtube? And how they pay firefox and opera to include google as the default search engine. That counts as marketing aswell.
Re:"Microsoft knows what the consumer wants" (Score:4, Insightful)
"and Windows 7 blows Snow Leopard out of the water"
I didn't know Microsoft made crystal balls that foretell the future. Fascinating the things you learn on /.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
NO, embrace, extend, extinguish has nothing to do with this.
Embrace, extend, extinguish is what they did with browser technology, with java technology, with Open GL, etc.
They would, say in the case of Java do this:
1) sign license
2) create virtual machine for windows
3) alter the java VM to add the ability to do some new and different things in Windows that you can't do in other OSes, such as Linux or Unix,etc.
4) after the momentum is enough then declare Java (as Sun designed it) dead and that everyone should be using Microsoft's technologies.
5) discontinue it because it potentially has the ability to undo the actual OS market.
That's what happened. That's embrace, extend, extinguish.
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:5, Insightful)
Your example is not Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. It has nothing to do with it. The idea of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish in example is:
Java was developed by Sun as an open standard for programming applets that were OS independent.
Microsoft licensed that technology under the terms that they not modify it to make it platform specific.
Microsoft ignored those terms making their VM extensions specific to Windows. They did this so that developers would develop for their VM/implementation thus failing to support the open standards/platform. This training of Developers Developers Developers to the Microsoft way was the extend portion of that business tactic.
Sun saw this and sued Microsoft. Microsoft was ordered to remove the VM from Windows as it was a violation of the terms of the license. Essentially they embraced Java, then extended it, then attempted to extinguish it but Sun go the upper hand. Then end result was close to a multi-billion dollar judgment against Microsoft.
That's embrace, extend, extinguish. You are talking in terms of proprietary vendor lock in.
Re:about marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
The paradox with parent is that any new engineer, no matter how qualified, will have to do things "the Microsoft Way". This because of limitations that Microsoft itself created: Patents, licensing and over-marketing all built around a dysfunctional software core immobilised by the same.
It took some real b*lls for apple to scrap their own proprietary core for Unix's - that is what making computers that work better is all about.
Microsoft, on the other hand, owes its fortune to the fact that it managed to "guinea-train" an entire generation of first-time computer users - with an OS core that wasn't even of their own making - by their deal to having it shipped "for free" in every new computer. Turn a computer on, first-time user, and what's the first thing you'll "learn" to use? What you see in front of you.
Even though Microsoft could use their massive profits for researching something better or even new, they've spent so much time on protecting a system based on patents and marketing techniques that they've basically stifled any means for real innovation. Their error is refusing to change from their present path.
Because of Microsoft's history, I can't hide that my first impression was one of doubt (about the efficiency of the Bing algorithm over Google's), but you never know. The thing about search engines is that 99% of what happens in a search isn't visible to the searcher - it is not a function-laden gui - and the chain of operation is simpler, so who knows? If the algorithm *is* better and users get better results, it will be the better product.
Just a reversed PR by proxy. (Score:3, Insightful)
This must be the most transparent desperate try at getting good PR i have seen in a long time. Its pretty obvious Microsoft wants to distribute a picture of Google "putting their best" at finding out what new wonderful things has come from the name change Microsoft did. Everyone knows its just a rebranded Live Search with hand tweaked results.
Bing is just as bad as Live Search unless you stumble upon a very limited set of handmade search results. Bottomline, its still Live Search and the algorithm still sucks. No amount of PR will change that.
The only thing i think Google is afraid of is Microsoft using its monopoly to crush any competition. Like, using an upgrade to change peoples search presets or pushing people towards bing no matter where they really want to go...
new headline sugestion. (Score:3, Insightful)
how about insted of "Technology: Does Bing Have Google Running Scared?" we try a more realistic "Technology: Google, still on top and willing to try and improve after Bing's release."
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
Bill Gates needing a Size 10 shoe instead of a size 9 = Vista needing a high end PC instead of a stripped down one.
I have a feeling you're reading too much into it. Moreover, even if that was their message the analogy is completely wrong. People for the better part of their life use the same number of shoes. It would make just a little bit of sense if they were showing some boy/girl (which have different shoe number every year).
But in any case you may have extremely subtle messages in a pile of junk but only 0,01% of the target population will understand it. But do you really want that? Why not send a hand signed mail to those 10 people instead of wasting millions on a production of one of the worst commercials I have ever seen?
Apple's commercials may be arrogant* or whatever, but people understand them and get their point completely. And that is the point of a commercial. If you don't want for your stuff to be understood, to be always confused, well one should stop doing commercials and write post modernism drivel.
First of all, people were talking about them.
I'm guessing that you are referring to the saying that there is no such thing as a bad publicity? The saying is generally true, but when one is producing material of questionable coherence against itself, people will say that the author is crazy. And that was precisely the point which was raised against those commercials. Nobody understood them, and that was probably because there was nothing to understand, and they were a complete failure. If they didn't spend millions on those commercials everyone would forget those the very next day. The problem was that they did spend a fortune on those commercials and people, completely predictable, talked about them. Not much about the message (as I said, there was none for the general population), but they talked about the waste of money and just reinforcing the image of completely clueless microsoft and his ex ceo. And that kind of publicity they certainly don't want.
* and that can generally be a good thing for a consumer because a lot of consumers was to buy "exclusive" products so they can feel special.
Re:about marketing (Score:4, Insightful)
Google became the best search engine by being better than the rest, which then created an audience for targeted advertising. Google is all about getting clicks on the adverts on its pages.
Now i'm not saying Bing is better at search than google, but if it is then it makes sense for users to use Bing if its bringing better search results, which is bad for google as it reduces the numbers of people clicking on its ads.
Google has a balancing act to perform, if Google is too good at finding what we want , we don't click Ads. Which is probably why google has remained the best search engine available for a long time.
Microsoft is in an interesting position they are not nearly as interested in targeted Ads in the shrort term as they primarily want users to switch from google. This should mean they will be trying to produce better search results than google which is what we want.
Google must respond by producing better search results and there are two obvious area's in which they could improve, location and quality. Google allows advertisers to target ads to users in a particular city but don't allow users to filter results based on location very easily. Google also lets some really bad results float to the top of its search results, parked domains, malware serving domains, wiki pages and price comparison sites which often don't even have the product your interested in to compare.
If i was going to improve search quality at google, i would leverage some of the tools currently used for advertisers, let users choose to search in a particular locale of their choice. secondly clean up the search results maybe semi automated by using bounce back, where users land on a page and then hit the back button almost immediately that should reduce a pages page rank and drop it down the results list.
I'd also give users the option to blacklist sites as preferences. We all have sites we don't find useful or companies we dislike. The tricky thing is our searches are not always the same, when you want to buy something , you dont want the same results returned as when your looking for information about something.
Just as firefox has prompted IE to become a better browser, Bing may well be doing a similar thing to Google. One things for sure better search will reduce ad clicks which will reduce revenue at google or increase advertising cost, or both.
Re:Yes, who can forget MS's great marketing (Score:2, Insightful)
Obama has spent more money and created a larger debt in 6 MONTHS that every other President before him. He has tossed out the law, dismantled private industry, and removing the rights of the individual and the States by expanding Federal control to unprecedented levels. Yet whenever I bring up those facts, I'm am retorted with "Bush lied, people died" or someother stupid catch phrase... you guys simply cannot let go of your irrational hate.
Well here is a new phrase for ya... "Obama Lied, the Republic Died".
I heard a rumor :o (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft is doing what it's best at - Marketin (Score:3, Insightful)
You're also making a stretch to consider vendor lock-in strategies to be marketing. Marketing is finding out what your customers need, and letting your customers know that you can provide something they want
Marketing is creating a market for your product. You can do that by filling a need, or by creating a need.