Comment by ubernostrum | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ubernostrum | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

the main message for me is that the Bing team has been doing something right

Judging based on the ads, I wouldn't agree. Bing's TV spots fall into two groups:

1. A litany of random obnoxiousness followed by some dude saying "BING". We don't see someone getting better results from Bing, we just see someone obnoxiously spouting crap and then associate that with the brand. Whoops.

2. People trying to answer a question, getting stressed and trying out Bing. Where... well, they don't actually search. They just stare at a background image of a Japanese garden or something, and we're apparently supposed to assume that this makes everything better. Again we don't see how Bing's search results are of benefit to a user, and the message here seems to be that Bing is all style and no substance.

Contrast with Google's Super Bowl spot: it consists entirely of showing someone using Google, and presents a coherent narrative of how Google search results are having a positive effect on the user's (off-screen) life. Best of all, the narrative it presents is a cute love story.

This is sort of like the contrast between the "iDon't" spots and Apple's own iPhone ads; the Droid spots all focused on bashing the iPhone to the exclusion of showing what was good about the Droid, while the iPhone spots just... showed how useful an iPhone is.

You're missing the point. Google feels a need to respond to Bing, which it hasn't before. However stupid you may think the ads are, Google is responding as if Bing is a (potentially) legitimate threat.

Of course it is a legitimate threat - if Bing started doing searches in any consistently better way than Google I'd use that. I have about as much loyalty to Google as a service as I did to Altavista: i.e. practically none.

I suspect others think this way and Google knows it.

Google's index is increasingly polluted. Let me give you an example, the other day I needed the exact address of an electronics store, I entered the name of the company and the street it was on. The top search results were "places to eat near..." - WTF? Who searches for places to eat near a named shop!? Similarly, if you search for "X review" you will mostly get pages that are just affiliate links to retailers and the text "Be the first to write a review of X!"

Right now Bing is a better search engine even if the only reason is that fewer people are trying to game it. The thing that makes Google most useful is searching other people's sites (e.g. adding +site:news.bbc.co.uk to your search terms). As a standalone service, they're going the way Altavista went.

We're both speaking in anecdotes, but this hasn't been my experience. I had my search box in Firefox set to Bing for several weeks, until it was just too annoying to re-do so many searches in Google and getting better results. For what it's worth, most of those searches tended to be technical questions, not local searches like you describe, but in my experience those are adequete on Google as well, and if something comes up incorrect my first backup is usually Yelp and not Bing.

I have quite a bit of loyalty to Google. I use them for RSS, Email, Calendar, Documents, mobile alerts, maps and phone service among other things.

I have no doubt that Google will improve and adjust to any threats Bing might one day bring. The cost of me moving all of my data and changing habits to another place would be high. That and there is no way in hell I'd trust Microsoft with my data.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com