Why Bing sucks

2»

Comments

  • FelixDeSouzeFelixDeSouze UK New
    edited October 2009
    Google ftw, I've never even used Bing apart from a fresh install tried to force me to use it... so I Binged 'google' and proceeded ;)
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Google ftw, I've never even used Bing apart from a fresh install tried to force me to use it... so I Binged 'google' and proceeded ;)

    I think that mentality is dangerous. If someone else did effectively innovate, how would you ever know? You gotta dabble in different things from time to time, give it a fair shot you know? Right now I am trying IE8 on my new windows 7 install, I can't say I'm in love with it, I'm really missing firefox and chrome, but it deserves a look just like bing does. I'm not saying bing is a great search engine in comparison to google, but it does do some things well in its UI and like I said I think bing maps beats googles tool, its doing some things right and you owe it to yourself just to poke around there a little bit.

    My massive dependance on Google for all my online services is actualy starting to alarm me. One company, all that share, its bad for long term innovation when other companies don't even get a fair shake because of Googles dominance. It's like Windows, its the accepted standard to the point that nobody even dares to compete with them and while I love what Microsoft has done with Windows 7, I think the world would be better off with more realistic alternatives to choose from. I don't want a web services landscape with only one significant player, it may seem great right now but long term, maybe not so much?
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    j wrote:
    I asked a little baby about Brian Ambrozy and it said nothing...because it's a baby. Conclusion...don't use babies for internet searches. Use Google it's better

    If someone wanted to know what specious reasoning was, here's a perfect example.
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    My massive dependance on Google for all my online services is actualy starting to alarm me.
    I read an article on Wired yesterday that estimated that Google accounts for 10% of all Internet traffic.
    it may seem great right now but long term, maybe not so much?
    Long term? On the Internet? How long exactly do you think it would take to move to different email/RSS/search/news/map/docs/video services? Maybe a full day on the outside? On top of that, Google has a special department that continues to improve how easily you can cart your info out of Google apps.

    Is it stranger to trust 1 company with all that data, or to trust so many small companies with pieces of it?
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Lincoln wrote:
    I read an article on Wired yesterday that estimated that Google accounts for 10% of all Internet traffic.
    Long term? On the Internet? How long exactly do you think it would take to move to different email/RSS/search/news/map/docs/video services? Maybe a full day on the outside? On top of that, Google has a special department that continues to improve how easily you can cart your info out of Google apps.

    Is it stranger to trust 1 company with all that data, or to trust so many small companies with pieces of it?

    I don't think its strange that you trust them, or wrong that you do, I just think everyone should keep an open mind to other options that are available, thats all.
  • ardichokeardichoke Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Kwitko wrote:
    If someone wanted to know what specious reasoning was, here's a perfect example.
    Or perhaps sarcasm?
  • KwitkoKwitko Sheriff of Banning (Retired) By the thing near the stuff Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    Jeff doesn't know sarcasm. Everything he says is sarcastic to others, yet perfectly logical in his head.
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited October 2009
    It was 6%, Linc - and even that blows everybody else out of the water.
  • edited February 2010
    Bing commercials imply their site actually understands what you are asking. This is of course false. Bing doesn't even care what order the words are in. Bottom line: search for "catcher hit by flying bat". No matter what site you search at you will get flying mammals not flying Louisville Sluggers. Search for "brass jacket" and you get an obscure cover band followed by jackets with brass zippers. Everyone knows that a "brass jacket" (in that order) is an ammunition specification.

    The fact that bing claims to be better is just typical Microsoft arrogance!
  • chrisWhitechrisWhite Littleton, CO
    edited February 2010
    So I've been using Bing as my default for over a month now and so far I love it, especially the image search. I find I still do a few power searches in Google once in a while but the more attractive UI is great and 95% of the time it finds what I'm looking for.

    I'm no MS nut but I think this is shaping up to be a nice product and considering I've played with Bing two times before this and dropped it instantly I think Bing is continuing to improve fast.
  • trent1trent1 Wherever the money's good.
    edited December 2010
    I searched Google images for "Tom Selleck".

    Here's the breathtaking image I found:

    tom-selleck.jpg



    I then searched Bing images for "Tom Selleck".

    The result, was slightly different:



    0.jpg


    Despite the fact that both images clearly and accurately show Tom Selleck, I found the entertaining 'gif' of Joe Pesci teabagging a Horse on Bing's front page a lot more useful - And relevant to my needs as an independent bean picker.
  • AnnesAnnes Tripped Up by Libidos and Hubris Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited December 2010
    TIL Tom Selleck makes thread necros SO much better.
  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited December 2010
    Yes and yes.
  • trent1trent1 Wherever the money's good.
    edited December 2010
    Annes wrote:
    TIL Tom Selleck makes thread necros SO much better.


    Woah!

    Has this thread died? ;)

    I guess I'll have to find another thread! In which I can 'lampoon' Selleck's poor career choices more publicly.

    Not that I'm personally opposed to Tom Selleck :rockon:

    He still has his questionable merits. And his facial hair...
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited December 2010
    Is amazing?
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx :KAPPA: Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited December 2010
    Few pull off the 'stache better.
  • mas0nmas0n howdy Icrontian
    edited January 2011
    Seriously. Only about 0.0001% of the population can wear a mustache without looking like a pedophile ... those who can should be legally obligated to do so.
Sign In or Register to comment.