Using Bing for Search? You're getting Google Search Results!

[Marc]

Google has run a sting operation that it says proves Bing has been watching what people search for on Google, the sites they select from Google's results, then uses that information to "improve" Bing's own search listings. Bing doesn't deny this.

So - If you're using Bing for searches and you think the Bing results are superior to Google's, it's an illusion.

 

[SteelMaiden]

Color me a skeptic, but when Bing was first introduced I figured we'd eventually hear this.

 

[Statistical Steven]

Is it possible they take Google and improve it?

 

[Marc]

There are a lot of people who are saying that Bing is taking Google results and improving upon them. Then again, Google could do the same thing using Bing's results, but if they did where would that leave things? Any of us could potentially do the same thing - Start a new search engine but just get search results from doing a quick search on Google and say we are making "improvements" on Google's algorithm.

I might also throw in that if Microsoft relies on Google search results to "improve" Bing searches, that indicates to me Microsoft has a weak search relevancy algorithm. Undeniably it is a tacit admission that Bing is not as good at ranking results as Google, and needs Google's help to rank results effectively.

I can say that the server log files here have been showing a steady increase in people finding this site on Bing over the last 3 to 4 months or so. That makes sense to me now because in this Bing's focus has been on improving their "long tail" searches which is how this forum often comes up in searches. Before I read this I really thought Bing might be improving their algorithm in such a way that this forum showed up more (a good thing for me). Over the years the different Microsoft search engines have never before listed this forum very often, but they are now. Still nothing like Google in providing traffic, but better than before where it was rare for a Microsoft search engine to list anything in the forum.

 

[Jen Kirley]

According to a news story I heard this morning, Google's search results of a series of Jeopardy! questions returned 69% of the answers, while Bing returned about 63%.

So if Big is improving on Google it doesn't seem to be by much...

 

[hogheavenfarm]

remember that Bing is bundled with updates and software as well. so there are many users who don't 'choose' Bing specifically but end up with it through default settings.
I had to make a concious choice to make Google my search engine, which was quite different than 'accepting' the default 'installs' that the software tried to make for me.
fortunately I have locked out my defaults, so either way I would be okay, but unless you are a bit computer savvy, you could easily replace your default with Bing any time you installed new software. My H&R block tax software just tried to install Bing as my default, but I look carefully at all these things and prevented it.

 

[Statistical Steven]

The truth is a search engine is a search engine. We can talk about relevency or SEO but if you type in something you get results. It still amazes me that people put a premier on one search engine over another.

 

[bbarbee]

The truth is a search engine is a search engine. We can talk about relevency or SEO but if you type in something you get results. It still amazes me that people put a premier on one search engine over another.

Yeah, but which results? Bing is the default on my work machine and I can't change it, so I use it sometimes. It seems like I get a lot of results for eHow and other "content mill" sites using bing that I don't have to put up with on google. Then again, google returns a lot of industrial style links the same way. The problem I see is there's too much SEO going on to get ad revenue to the detriment of the user.

 

[Statistical Steven]

Yeah, but which results? Bing is the default on my work machine and I can't change it, so I use it sometimes. It seems like I get a lot of results for eHow and other "content mill" sites using bing that I don't have to put up with on google. Then again, google returns a lot of industrial style links the same way. The problem I see is there's too much SEO going on to get ad revenue to the detriment of the user.

That is exactly the problem. Searching has become a revenue stream instead of an information stream. Imagine if you went to the library to search for a book on George Washington. You type into the search engine the words George and Washington. The results were prioritized by the publisher that paid the most....would that be objective? Nobody will create a search engine that returns results that are just the closest to the requested words.....oh well....Bing me up Google I see a Dogpile.

 

[Marc]

The biggest problem is the number of sites they have to wade through, many of which are not even maintained any longer.

When I put QS9000.com (which is now this site) online in Jan 1996 there were "only" an estimated 100,000 web sites online. Today there are estimated to be over 300,000,000 web sites online (and growing exponentially) of which over 100,000,000 are thought to be "active".

Google or Bing, it's no surprise that getting "good" results is challenging to say the least.