Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bing Gains 10% Marketshare

Comments Filter:
  • Who would've though? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

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

    • by MyLongNickName (822545) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:54AM (#30142674) Journal

      I said the same thing about "Slashdot" ;)

      • Surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Gription (1006467) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:29AM (#30143068)
        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!!!
        • Re:Surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MrNaz (730548) * on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:31AM (#30143102) Homepage

          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.

          • Re:Surprising... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by gstoddart (321705) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:51AM (#30143466) Homepage

            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

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by sarhjinian (94086)

            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

    • by 2.7182 (819680) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:54AM (#30142680)
      Yeah. They should have named it 10^1000.
    • by Z00L00K (682162)

      Especially since Bing [bingcarburetor.com] are mostly known for small engine carburetors.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Vintermann (400722)

        No, Bing [wikipedia.org] 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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by shoemilk (1008173)
      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.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sopssa (1498795) *

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

  • Is it trickery? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Joce640k (829181) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:54AM (#30142684) Homepage

    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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rogerborg (306625)
      And given that, it's astonishing that Microsoft can still only bamboozle 10% of "Darren Defaults" users into eating their dogfood.
    • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:04AM (#30142792)

      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.)

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by poetmatt (793785)

        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?

        • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:14AM (#30142908) Journal

          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).

        • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by MyLongNickName (822545) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:14AM (#30142914) Journal

          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"?

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by poetmatt (793785)

            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

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ArsonSmith (13997)

        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.

    • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jonadab (583620) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:13AM (#30142890) Homepage Journal
      > 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.
      • by Joce640k (829181)

        >Don't be an idiot. ...the bulk of the 10% we're talking about here consists of people using the IE8 UI.

        Um, that's what I said.

      • by Dystopian Rebel (714995) * on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:26AM (#30143036) Journal

        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!!!

      • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by sukotto (122876) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @11:06AM (#30143674)
        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)
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Blue Stone (582566)

        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

      • Re: (Score:3, 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.

    • Re:Is it trickery? (Score:4, Informative)

      by jambarama (784670) <jambarama@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:24AM (#30143016) Homepage Journal
      All the obvious product placement [tvbythenumbers.com] and subtle placement in trashy reality shows ("lets 'bing' it") probably haven't hurt either.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:54AM (#30142686)

    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.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:07AM (#30142824)
      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.
      • by jefu (53450) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:33AM (#30143116) Homepage Journal

        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.

        • Re: (Score:3, 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 [ieaddons.com]. 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.

  • Well (Score:2, Insightful)

    by MistrX (1566617)

    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.

    • by jimicus (737525)

      True, but how the mighty have fallen over the years.

      Twelve years ago AltaVista was king.

  • by guruevi (827432) <evi.smokingcube@be> on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:56AM (#30142706) Homepage

    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.

  • Defaults.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dartz-IRL (1640117) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:57AM (#30142712)

    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?

  • Shocked (Score:5, Interesting)

    by whisper_jeff (680366) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @09:57AM (#30142714)
    I'm shocked - *SHOCKED* - I tell ya. I find it hard to believe that ComScore [cnet.com] 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.
    • Re:Shocked (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ant P. (974313) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @11:37AM (#30144182) Homepage

      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%.

  • 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.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @12:01PM (#30144568)

      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.

  • Market Share Gains (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheFlannelAvenger (870106) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:02AM (#30142770)
    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.
    • by gbjbaanb (229885)

      Yeah but just imagine how many of those machines also have the Yahoo toolbar installed too!

    • Re: (Score:3, 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 the

  • by CoffeePlease (596791) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:07AM (#30142820) Homepage
    When I look at AWstats for my site: [thedesignspace.net]
    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.
    • by sopssa (1498795) *

      You can't really compare traffic source percents in to how many users actually use what search engines. Your site may and most likely does rank differently in each search engine, and like you said the democracy of your visitors also affects.

      • by lawnjam (885035) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @12:47PM (#30145226)

        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.

    • by dingen (958134)
      It's funny you put it like that, because looking at the current NetCraft stats [netcraft.com] it seems like IIS is back to about the market share it had in 2006.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by WindBourne (631190)
        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
  • "two big percentage points"? No, all points are the same. Please don't try and editorialize or sensationalize.

    And also, these stats put another way say that Google et al have 90% marketshare. Windows also has a 90% marketshare and we refer to that as a monopoly.

  • I just got mine from the laptop I purchased a while back. That's a pretty nice incentive...

  • by mccalli (323026) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @10:27AM (#30143052) Homepage
    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
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by csartanis (863147)

      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.

  • With the Google top 1000 sites being theoretically offered massive cash handouts for abandoning Google it's obvious why consumers would switch to Bing. After all, regular consumers work just like the stock market and adjust their behavior based on any rumor, right?
    • Re: (Score:3, 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./ [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 attentio

  • I use it (Score:4, Interesting)

    by the-matt-mobile (621817) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @11:08AM (#30143710)

    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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by eulernet (1132389)

      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 [google.com]

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

  • I'm not surprised (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nerdposeur (910128) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @11:13AM (#30143786) Journal

    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.

  • by Pojut (1027544) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @11:24AM (#30143950) Homepage

    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?

  • by ByzantineAlex (1327353) on Wednesday November 18, 2009 @03:44PM (#30147682)
    • 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.

"Text processing has made it possible to right-justify any idea, even one which cannot be justified on any other grounds." -- J. Finnegan, USC.

Working...