Membership is FREE, giving all registered users unlimited access to every Acorn Domains feature, resource, and tool! Optional membership upgrades unlock exclusive benefits like profile signatures with links, banner placements, appearances in the weekly newsletter, and much more - customized to your membership level!
bing raped google
- Thread starter julian
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Posts
- 148
- Reaction score
- 1
Bing is not half as good as Google. You can not dare to compare Bing search result (which is irrelevant) to that of Google which is consistently improving its search result. But there is no denying of the fact that Bing has given a tough competition to Google.
I do not dispute the result might not be 'quite' as good as G yet, but we're nerds - to your average joe bloggs user bing is plenty good enough for them to consider binning G for a bit simply because its good enough.. and that is what is dangerous for G long term.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2009
- Posts
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Google
I think Google will remain the top search engine.
I think Google will remain the top search engine.
Last edited by a moderator:
Best search engine - depends what you want from a search engine -
Northern Light was the best general engine ten years ago, turned up what you wanted when Google didn't.
They sell NL for article searches nowadays, and keep promising that they will make the general engine available to the public again - but never deliver that promise.
I don't know how NL works. It didn't use spiders, but it beat Google for individual answers, and gave "deep web" results that beat every other engine into a cocked hat. The owners sold it to someone that didn't understand it, then bought it back when those people went to the wall.
What I do know is that Northern Light would uncover material that Google could not touch with crawlers. Seriously, you want to build minisites, you could copy deep web material unearthed with NL, and Google would never detect it as duplicate content.
25 years ago you had to pay for a decent search, and people made money from searches. I was using a Swiss company for scientific work, it cost £6 an hour to find the references, then I had to go to a good scientific library (University of Manchester) to look them up.
Observations:
Northern Light had search methods which were beating all the other engines 10 years ago;
Northern Light, apart from the couple of years it spent "in other hands", has been in action during the interim period, and is still functioning as a corporate entity. As I understand it, they still make their General Search Engine available to their Article Search subscribers - and I can't believe they have not improved it over the years.
Conclusions:
You can still get Northern Light's General Search, if you pay for a subscription to their Article Search service - and that is not cheap.
All the other major search engines use the same "crawler methods", so they are unlikely to differ radically in the quality of the results they give.
I have seen it said that "free search" is a "passing phase", and that tiny nominal charges will be needed in the future to monetize searches - which is understandable, even if it is somehow built into ISP charges.
I can see a situation where NL could invade the market, IF their technology is still sustainable and valid, and put other search engines into the gutter.
I don't know what the "search secret" is. I do know that the people that bought NL paid around $10m for NL, and then couldn't make it pay - and the man that founded the company paid about $2m to get the rights to what remained, and is still making money.
Northern Light was the best general engine ten years ago, turned up what you wanted when Google didn't.
They sell NL for article searches nowadays, and keep promising that they will make the general engine available to the public again - but never deliver that promise.
I don't know how NL works. It didn't use spiders, but it beat Google for individual answers, and gave "deep web" results that beat every other engine into a cocked hat. The owners sold it to someone that didn't understand it, then bought it back when those people went to the wall.
What I do know is that Northern Light would uncover material that Google could not touch with crawlers. Seriously, you want to build minisites, you could copy deep web material unearthed with NL, and Google would never detect it as duplicate content.
25 years ago you had to pay for a decent search, and people made money from searches. I was using a Swiss company for scientific work, it cost £6 an hour to find the references, then I had to go to a good scientific library (University of Manchester) to look them up.
Observations:
Northern Light had search methods which were beating all the other engines 10 years ago;
Northern Light, apart from the couple of years it spent "in other hands", has been in action during the interim period, and is still functioning as a corporate entity. As I understand it, they still make their General Search Engine available to their Article Search subscribers - and I can't believe they have not improved it over the years.
Conclusions:
You can still get Northern Light's General Search, if you pay for a subscription to their Article Search service - and that is not cheap.
All the other major search engines use the same "crawler methods", so they are unlikely to differ radically in the quality of the results they give.
I have seen it said that "free search" is a "passing phase", and that tiny nominal charges will be needed in the future to monetize searches - which is understandable, even if it is somehow built into ISP charges.
I can see a situation where NL could invade the market, IF their technology is still sustainable and valid, and put other search engines into the gutter.
I don't know what the "search secret" is. I do know that the people that bought NL paid around $10m for NL, and then couldn't make it pay - and the man that founded the company paid about $2m to get the rights to what remained, and is still making money.
I just went to look at Northern Light's website - looks like they have changed direction and moved into the "corporate custom search" market - which means that there is no affordable way for small businesses to buy in to their paid-for search technology any more. And a brief look at their literature says that they are using spiders these days.
Maybe I'm wrong - perhaps they've moved into a niche because they aren't competitive any more. But I still remember the days when they would give a direct hit when no-one else could.
Maybe I'm wrong - perhaps they've moved into a niche because they aren't competitive any more. But I still remember the days when they would give a direct hit when no-one else could.
Average punters love all the google maps, news, vids in results etc why bring out something half done which only half works...? Mmmm sounds like most windows products….
Might be better from seo point of view (but doubt it). No ones going to use it at present? A bigger issue with a lot of people is privacy about there searches and companies storing all that info, But that did not stop cuil.com being crap either. Anybody who thinks the next Google killer is going to come along is banking on something that's unlikely but it don't stop people spending a fortune trying
Might be better from seo point of view (but doubt it). No ones going to use it at present? A bigger issue with a lot of people is privacy about there searches and companies storing all that info, But that did not stop cuil.com being crap either. Anybody who thinks the next Google killer is going to come along is banking on something that's unlikely but it don't stop people spending a fortune trying
Last edited:
yes but I think you have to remember 'we' know the score with what to use. Each day a new wave of plebs (ahem.. I mean users) come home with their PC World Advent special, connect to some wank dialup ISP there will probably be a high chance that that computer no matter how much you hate them with have IE on it, which will mean Bing
thats because MS neglected the whole search thing early on. The user experience was shite with msn.
It seems they have finally realised that to even begin to compete with G they needed to wipe the slate clean, move away from the corp feel and start again. I still think G is still say 20% better 'purely' as a search engine at the moment but given how new Bing is its doing quite well - its not goign to be perfect overnight and still has lots of scope to improve.
I feel yahoo is making a small resurgance at this time also, so perhaps G will only have 70% of the SE market in years time
It seems they have finally realised that to even begin to compete with G they needed to wipe the slate clean, move away from the corp feel and start again. I still think G is still say 20% better 'purely' as a search engine at the moment but given how new Bing is its doing quite well - its not goign to be perfect overnight and still has lots of scope to improve.
I feel yahoo is making a small resurgance at this time also, so perhaps G will only have 70% of the SE market in years time
Possibly but they shipped windows before with msn then livesearch etc and who used it then ?
Perhaps one day search engines will deliver the most suitable result you were looking for every time. But doubt it will be microshit…..
Google has more going for it than any other search in many ways - one of their big "selling points" is their autotranslation tools, which are better than products you pay for! The Germans, French, Italians etc. use Google extensively to translate web pages - and then they go on to use Google for other searches.
When I was a student (before the flood) there was a bar that one had to frequent on Saturday night to find out where there was a party going on. I hated the place, the beer was awful and it was standing room only, but nobody I knew was going to be anywhere else ...
I hate the lack of diversity that has resulted from the convergence of the search engines, but I still use Google - I don't like it, but it is the best available way to find things (like that bar I disliked).
When I was a student (before the flood) there was a bar that one had to frequent on Saturday night to find out where there was a party going on. I hated the place, the beer was awful and it was standing room only, but nobody I knew was going to be anywhere else ...
I hate the lack of diversity that has resulted from the convergence of the search engines, but I still use Google - I don't like it, but it is the best available way to find things (like that bar I disliked).
Acksherly, the Yahoo PN is available in Europe via an agent - several people have taken advantage. They all reported that it was better than Adsense initially, but dropped down to "similar to Adsense" levels after a few weeks.
Thanks for the "Chitika tip"!
Thanks for the "Chitika tip"!
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Posts
- 148
- Reaction score
- 1
Bing is obviously generating different search result which is pretty good. There should be an ideal alternative of everything otherwise;we will have to forget the concept of open market. It is good to have some competition which encourage us to punch above our weight.
- Status
Similar threads
The Rule #1
Do not insult any other member. Be polite and do business. Thank you!
Premium Members
Upcoming events
-
Jun 252025
-
Sep 12025Domain Summit Europe - London 2025September 1-3, 2025
New Threads
-
Selling a domain with matching car registration, numberplate etc
- Started by DomainAnt
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Domain Forum Friends
Our Mods' Businesses
There are no messages in the current room.