Bing anyone?

danjmilos · 06. Aug 2009, 03:44 AM

Has anyone used Bing? A manager I work has been using it more and more, he likes the results more than the MSN Live searches. They seem to hit the target better. Next time I need to seach some I'm trying it.

Dan

Jojo Yee · 06. Aug 2009, 05:13 AM

See also Microsoft's New Bing Search Engine Now Launched.

chris.p · 07. Aug 2009, 04:40 PM

Well, I like it, as my site just got a 1,2,3,5 search result on Bing for a particular keyword

In some areas the results are OK, in others they are not so good. The fact is that Google usually has the best results, which is why people use it. However, they aren't always right about everything, of course, and occasionally - just occasionally - Bing results are better.

This applies in some small areas, and where the Google algo has a fault and has blocked one or more good sites from appearing high in the results. The idea that the Google algo is perfect is of course laughable. 90% of the time it is better than 90% of the others - but that is not perfection.

Which is why they make between one and two changes to it every week.

I don't like to criticise Microsoft search in any way because they have the most ethical and hard-working of all the the search engine managers (J Andrick), who is a veritable saint compared with some of the others who I shan't mention (and isn't that a nice change for MS?); but the fact is that in most cases Google has the best results. But there are still niches where others do better.

One factor is also the perennial swing between quality of resources versus number of backlinks. Out of the 200 or so factors they take into account, the relevance & quality of the page & site, and the number of links to it, are the two most important factors. The pendulum at any given search engine is always swinging between these two major factors. At any given time, one or the other will be given greater importance.

In late 2008 a big change happened at Google, they swung away from using quality of the resource as the main factor, and went more toward using the number of links a page has as the most important. Sites with a lot of spam links then started to appear in the results, and sites with good resources but few links dropped down.

At the same time, Yahoo went a long way in the opposite direction, with a massive swing away from the spammy link numbers that had previously been vital, toward quality resources. At the same time, they started to show relatively young sites with few links in the results, if their resources were good - previously such sites needed to be a year old. This was the biggest change I've ever seen in a search algo. Previously, to do well on Yahoo, you absolutely had to have thousands of spam links - but that changed. For the first time, we saw good pages with few links showing up in Yahoo results.

These changes are still with us and in general Google has very accurate results, but clearly misses some sites and pages with the best resources but which have few links. The Google algo also has some weird knots in it that mean one or two top sites are excluded for some terms, due to weird algo effects and not site faults. And Yahoo now shows some good resources with few links - a massive change from the past.

Bing is still an unknown quantity as there is so much in the mix at the moment - the change from MSN to LiveSearch, the change from LiveSearch to Bing, the incorporation of Yahoo at enterprise level. Bing's results are different from LiveSearch of 6 months back - but is that just due to the normal tweaking that is done every week to SE algos?

We are also seeing a lot more Bing traffic at many sites, compared to the past. Where 6 months back, Bing provided 3% of the visitors, it's more than double that now. And Yahoo has dropped away just in the last 2 months for the same sites.

Yahoo has always been a good bet if you are interested in celebs, music, stars, film, TV and so on. They really love that stuff.

Anyway, the same applies as it always has: try your search on Google first, and if they are poor in that particular niche, then give Bing a whirl. In one or two cases their results are clearly better, where Google's algo has got itself tied up in a knot.

Especially with my site of course

chris.p · 09. Aug 2009, 06:48 PM

Another couple of words on Bing.

They are a doing a lot better in many ways, now. For example try this search:

we make websites make money

Google and Yahoo have no result for this precise term - but it is a page title, out there. It's on a new site I just started, which only has about 3 links. Neither Google nor Yahoo can see it. But Bing has it all right.

This would have been impossible in the past as MSN only spidered 10% of the web resources that Yahoo did (or less). It used to rack up like this:

Yahoo -- 10
Google -- 8
MSN -- 1

...in terms of the number of web pages they spidered. But that's changed. Yahoo used to spider far more than the others, and Google covered about 80 or 90% of what Yahoo did. MSN only saw about 10% of what the others did so it had no chance of giving comprehensive results. I often wondered how they figured they could compete if they were wearing a blindfold.

But they are covering more ground now. How much I haven't worked out yet.

danjmilos · 09. Aug 2009, 09:57 PM

Sorry I haven't posting cause family matters take precedence. Haven't even been able to stupid search with Bing yet. Only have a few minutes and I'm leaving again but "I'll be back!!!"

Dan

bk_7312 · 15. Aug 2009, 12:56 PM

Anyone tried infospace.com? I forgot how I came across this site but it uses the search results from google, yahoo, bing, ask and twitter when you search.

http://search.infospace.com/ispace/ws/index

It may prove to be useful as it searches using multiple search engines but I haven't experiment with it much yet.

tony · 17. Aug 2009, 08:27 AM

I used BING for 5min and threw it out!! The search was hopeless, it was a question I was searching for in a quiz and there was no real answer it gave me. I put it into Google and hey presto loads of info. So I won't look at it again for some while.

bk_7312 · 12. Nov 2009, 04:09 AM

Apparently, Bing had a security flaw...

Quote:

The security glitch, which is linked to a "cash back" system operated by Bing, potentially leaves users and retailers exposed to fake transactions. But despite an outcry online over the existence of the loophole, the world's largest company has responded to the issue by threatening legal action against the man who discovered the problem.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology.../bing-loophole

KL90 · 13. Nov 2009, 04:39 AM

I use http://www.bing-vs-google.com/ most of the time.

It's a good way to see both results side by side since sometimes one site might miss what the other thinks is more relevant.

deya · 13. Nov 2009, 08:07 PM

Bing has now been taken out of beta here in the UK;

Microsoft takes Bing out of beta in UK

06. Aug 2009, 03:44 AM	#1 (permalink)
danjmilos Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Steeler Nation Capitol Posts: 127	Bing anyone? Has anyone used Bing? A manager I work has been using it more and more, he likes the results more than the MSN Live searches. They seem to hit the target better. Next time I need to seach some I'm trying it. Dan

07. Aug 2009, 04:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
chris.p Foundation Editor Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Kent, UK Posts: 1,634	Is Bing Better ? Well, I like it, as my site just got a 1,2,3,5 search result on Bing for a particular keyword In some areas the results are OK, in others they are not so good. The fact is that Google usually has the best results, which is why people use it. However, they aren't always right about everything, of course, and occasionally - just occasionally - Bing results are better. This applies in some small areas, and where the Google algo has a fault and has blocked one or more good sites from appearing high in the results. The idea that the Google algo is perfect is of course laughable. 90% of the time it is better than 90% of the others - but that is not perfection. Which is why they make between one and two changes to it every week. I don't like to criticise Microsoft search in any way because they have the most ethical and hard-working of all the the search engine managers (J Andrick), who is a veritable saint compared with some of the others who I shan't mention (and isn't that a nice change for MS?); but the fact is that in most cases Google has the best results. But there are still niches where others do better. One factor is also the perennial swing between quality of resources versus number of backlinks. Out of the 200 or so factors they take into account, the relevance & quality of the page & site, and the number of links to it, are the two most important factors. The pendulum at any given search engine is always swinging between these two major factors. At any given time, one or the other will be given greater importance. In late 2008 a big change happened at Google, they swung away from using quality of the resource as the main factor, and went more toward using the number of links a page has as the most important. Sites with a lot of spam links then started to appear in the results, and sites with good resources but few links dropped down. At the same time, Yahoo went a long way in the opposite direction, with a massive swing away from the spammy link numbers that had previously been vital, toward quality resources. At the same time, they started to show relatively young sites with few links in the results, if their resources were good - previously such sites needed to be a year old. This was the biggest change I've ever seen in a search algo. Previously, to do well on Yahoo, you absolutely had to have thousands of spam links - but that changed. For the first time, we saw good pages with few links showing up in Yahoo results. These changes are still with us and in general Google has very accurate results, but clearly misses some sites and pages with the best resources but which have few links. The Google algo also has some weird knots in it that mean one or two top sites are excluded for some terms, due to weird algo effects and not site faults. And Yahoo now shows some good resources with few links - a massive change from the past. Bing is still an unknown quantity as there is so much in the mix at the moment - the change from MSN to LiveSearch, the change from LiveSearch to Bing, the incorporation of Yahoo at enterprise level. Bing's results are different from LiveSearch of 6 months back - but is that just due to the normal tweaking that is done every week to SE algos? We are also seeing a lot more Bing traffic at many sites, compared to the past. Where 6 months back, Bing provided 3% of the visitors, it's more than double that now. And Yahoo has dropped away just in the last 2 months for the same sites. Yahoo has always been a good bet if you are interested in celebs, music, stars, film, TV and so on. They really love that stuff. Anyway, the same applies as it always has: try your search on Google first, and if they are poor in that particular niche, then give Bing a whirl. In one or two cases their results are clearly better, where Google's algo has got itself tied up in a knot. Especially with my site of course Last edited by chris.p; 07. Aug 2009 at 04:50 PM.

13. Nov 2009, 08:07 PM	#10 (permalink)
deya Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,518	Bing has now been taken out of beta here in the UK; Microsoft takes Bing out of beta in UK Last edited by deya; 13. Nov 2009 at 08:11 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06. Aug 2009, 05:13 AM	#2 (permalink)
Jojo Yee Maestro di Search Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 7,957	See also Microsoft's New Bing Search Engine Now Launched.

09. Aug 2009, 06:48 PM	#4 (permalink)
chris.p Foundation Editor Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Kent, UK Posts: 1,634	Another couple of words on Bing. They are a doing a lot better in many ways, now. For example try this search: we make websites make money Google and Yahoo have no result for this precise term - but it is a page title, out there. It's on a new site I just started, which only has about 3 links. Neither Google nor Yahoo can see it. But Bing has it all right. This would have been impossible in the past as MSN only spidered 10% of the web resources that Yahoo did (or less). It used to rack up like this: Yahoo -- 10 Google -- 8 MSN -- 1 ...in terms of the number of web pages they spidered. But that's changed. Yahoo used to spider far more than the others, and Google covered about 80 or 90% of what Yahoo did. MSN only saw about 10% of what the others did so it had no chance of giving comprehensive results. I often wondered how they figured they could compete if they were wearing a blindfold. But they are covering more ground now. How much I haven't worked out yet.

09. Aug 2009, 09:57 PM	#5 (permalink)
danjmilos Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Steeler Nation Capitol Posts: 127	Sorry I haven't posting cause family matters take precedence. Haven't even been able to stupid search with Bing yet. Only have a few minutes and I'm leaving again but "I'll be back!!!" Dan

15. Aug 2009, 12:56 PM	#6 (permalink)
bk_7312 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: 3rd largest island, smallest country there. Posts: 229	Anyone tried infospace.com? I forgot how I came across this site but it uses the search results from google, yahoo, bing, ask and twitter when you search. http://search.infospace.com/ispace/ws/index It may prove to be useful as it searches using multiple search engines but I haven't experiment with it much yet.

17. Aug 2009, 08:27 AM	#7 (permalink)
tony Foundation Editor Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Lincolnshire (unfortunately) Posts: 153	I used BING for 5min and threw it out!! The search was hopeless, it was a question I was searching for in a quiz and there was no real answer it gave me. I put it into Google and hey presto loads of info. So I won't look at it again for some while.

13. Nov 2009, 04:39 AM	#9 (permalink)
KL90 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 6	I use http://www.bing-vs-google.com/ most of the time. It's a good way to see both results side by side since sometimes one site might miss what the other thinks is more relevant.