IMC Intuition

Thinking out loud about all things IMC

Google or Bing?

with 5 comments

New York Times Editor David Pogue wrote a review this week comparing the features of the leader Google, with Microsoft’s new browser, Bing.  In many ways, Microsoft is the company we love to dis, but David points out the Bing has some very interesting features that outperform Google.  

Besides the photo of the day landing page, Bing serves results very quickly and works relatively well in their target search areas of travel, shopping, health and local business information, although not perfectly … not yet.

While Google continues to be the king of search and the most efficient search engine, Bing is worth a second look.  David suggests that the real benefit of Bing is that the competition can only improve both products.  If you would like to compare Bing and Google search results side-by-side, go to this link:  Try it and tell me what you think!

 What does this mean for B2B?  It means Bing had better be on your radar screen for Search Engine Marketing (SEM).  In fact, when I performed a search on an important keyword phrase in my business, “vacuum furnace”, the organic rank was better on Bing than Google.  Amazing.

 Time to put Microsoft back on my keyword report this month.

 Link to David’s article and video report:


Bing, the Imitator, Often Goes Google One Better
By DAVID POGUE, Published: July 9, 2009

Microsoft’s rechristened search engine, Bing, makes a concerted effort to organize search results in more helpful ways than Google, and often succeeds.

 Link to Bing:

 Discover Bing – take the tour:


Written by Beth Ryan

July 9, 2009 at 6:51 pm

5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Why does nobody ever comment on the real problem with search engines: the volume of results is totally unusable/ridiculous/overwhelming.
    I looked for Alan Turing (yes I’ve just read Cryptonomicon) on the “Bing or Google” site. Both gave me lots of references – Bing 1,190,000 and Google 2,450,000! So how would I ever find the one I really need? Experience says that with either, increasing the complexity of the search string has little or no result. However, suppose I get these numbers down to the 1 or 2 hundred thousand that seems to be the limit for a case like this. What do I do now? If I were to run through the whole of a 100,000 entry list at a rate of one every five seconds (this is impossible when you add in time for scrolling, changing pages and waiting for the result) I would sit here for 100,000 x 5 / 60 = 8,333 minutes or a few hours short of 6 days!! What is the point of this many results? I certainly can’t use them and if I’m looking to shop for a product how many of the poor suckers who think they are being advertised by the search engine will ever see the light of screen? Please can we have a more realistic approach even if I haven’t yet worked out what it would be.


    July 15, 2009 at 1:48 am

    • You make a very good point – Instead of Microsoft being a “Me Too” they ought to be thinking about the “Next Thing” which may be a completely different concept. Some people believe that we may see a return of content specific vertical portals to get people closer to what they want faster.


      July 15, 2009 at 3:50 pm

  2. We’re never happy with what we’ve got 😉 sometimes. Personally, I am just happy that Search exists at all. Yes, it’s changing our habits – both in terms of how buyers buy and in terms of how marketers market. But it’s also made like a lot more convenient for the average person. Yes, it could be easier, but remember what it was like without search, pre-wikipedia, pre-WWW, pre-browser? Remember libraries, not having product reviews at your finger tips? Semantic web may change a lot of this…but till then, I’m ok with wading through lots of replies from the convenience of my home.

    Carol Wolicki

    July 23, 2009 at 4:15 pm

  3. Search “request.applicatinpath” in these two search engines. The result differences are remarkable enough for you to chose which one you want to use in the future.

    Try this

    October 21, 2009 at 3:23 pm

  4. Well now “Try this” – I duly tried on both Bing And Google. Bing simply said “no results found” while Google said “did you mean request.applicationpath”. So far Google is winning because it did give me a reference to your reply in this very blog. I then tried request.applicationpath. Google goes first as I was already on the site. I got 79,800 results and I didn’t read them all (see my earlier reply on the blog) but I did observe that several of the top choices told me never to use request.applicationpath as it tends to have evil results. Back to Bing which gave “only” 12800 results. I didn’t read all of these either but my snapshot view showed that many of the top picks were the same as Google’s. What does this prove? Personally I don’t have the slightest idea why I should be looking for request.applicationpath in the first place so it’s a mystery to me. Please enlighten me.


    October 21, 2009 at 4:46 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: