Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Microsoft Launching Bing.com on June 3

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 12 comments

Over the last week or so we’ve been hearing about Bing, Microsoft’s latest search effort formally known as Kumo. Today sees the Redmond company unveiling the ‘decision engine’ which will be online for American users on June 3.

Given that we’re not allowed to use it for another week, it’s hard to know if the new search engine, with all its nifty new tricks to give you smarter search results, is actually any better than Live search or even plain old Google Suggest. Previous reports that said Microsoft was endeavoring to cut down on clicks and rumors about sorting results into subcategories were all true.

Guardian UK cites Alex Hoye, chief executive of Latitude, a company that specializes in search engine marketing and pay-per-click advertising, as saying: "This is the first thing we've seen in a long time that has things Google doesn't have. That's nice to see."

Right now, there’s little to go on but like we said before, we can’t wait to see what Microsoft has come up with. We just don’t know if it’ll be worth leaving Google for.

Display 12 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 4 Hide
    jhansonxi , May 28, 2009 5:46 PM
    According to the Urban Dictionary:

    1. bing: prison or jail

    Perhaps this will be used as a platform to promote ActiveX technologies and more lock-in. This in turn will increase malware developer interest in the platform which will result in more OneCare/Morro subscriptions.

    1. morro: A verb, meaning to borrow with absolutely no intention of paying back. An underhanded way of taking advantage of a good soul.
  • 0 Hide
    rubix_1011 , May 28, 2009 6:55 PM
    Microsoft...you make it sound like you are surprised with your findings...?
  • 2 Hide
    gimpy1 , May 28, 2009 7:02 PM
    It will be tough to replace Google. It's hard to break into a market when the verb/phrase that describes what your product does is the name of your competitor. If what I said is not clear, my point is we don't say, "I am going to look it up on the internet." We say, "I am going to google it." Once a product has been verbed, it is hard to compete with it.
  • 0 Hide
    fwaits , May 28, 2009 7:09 PM
    What if Bing isn't meant as a noun in and of itself, and instead is supposed to be a play on Being? ("B"-ing) That would seem to take on a bit more relevance to me. Either way, we'll see if the engine is useful as that will ultimately be the real measure of its success.
  • 1 Hide
    fooldog01 , May 28, 2009 8:11 PM
    gimpy1It will be tough to replace Google. It's hard to break into a market when the verb/phrase that describes what your product does is the name of your competitor. If what I said is not clear, my point is we don't say, "I am going to look it up on the internet." We say, "I am going to google it." Once a product has been verbed, it is hard to compete with it.


    Its ESPECIALLY true in a market where the products are free. Sure, we all say Band-Aid for bandage, Kleenex for tissue and such, but those actual brand carry a premium price tag. In the world of search engines, Google becoming a verb seems to have solidified it as the standard for who knows how long.
  • 1 Hide
    curnel_D , May 28, 2009 8:47 PM
    If they settle for a simple and efficient interface similar to google, I'll give it a try. If not, then I'm sticking with what loads the quickest.
  • 0 Hide
    ta152h , May 28, 2009 8:49 PM
    Bing is also a type of sweet cherry, although, it's being widely replaced by Lapins, which is self-fertile, and at least as high quality.

    Probably Microsoft's Bing isn't self-fertile either, and they'll need to cross-pollinate with Yahoo.

    Microsoft should know by now they really have no business making anything where there is competition. They can't make a good product, and never could, and they need to stop lying to themselves about it. They CAN leverage monopoly situations to grow related products, like they did with MS-DOS/Windows and Microsoft Office, but without a lot of leverage, they can't really compete with real software developers.

    The X-Box does OK though, despite being unreliable junk. So, give them credit there. But, Zune? MSN? Anyone remember Microsoft Bob? How about Microsoft Money? The reality is, they fail unless they can leverage their existing position, almost all the time. Their compilers are even inferior to Intel's, and that's embarrassing considering one is a software developer, and the other a hardware. When you need the best performance, it's got to be Intel's compilers. They generally have better performance even with AMD processors, even with Microsoft optimizations.

    Don't get me wrong, Microsoft has been a huge asset to the hardware community - you've always needed modern hardware to run their bloated, incredibly slow, software.

    But, expecting them to compete with Google is unrealistic. They can't leverage their existing monopolies effectively enough to gain a big enough advantage, and competing on the merits of innovation has never been Microsoft's strong suit.
  • 1 Hide
    apache_lives , May 28, 2009 11:18 PM
    bing must be the sound one billionaire hears when he beats another billionaire in business - BING!
  • 3 Hide
    eddieroolz , May 29, 2009 12:09 AM
    ancientnoob, seriously, GTFO of this place already. You ever wonder why you get rated down every single bloody time?

    Start acting like a respectable hardware enthusiast should. Otherwise, like I said before, GTFO.

  • 0 Hide
    apmyhr , May 29, 2009 10:51 AM
    Up to now, in these articles about Live search v. Google Search, I have been defending Live search. But recently I have been taking a second look at Google and comparing the two more. I'm sad to say that Google definently wins. Just two minutes ago I had to type the word Kiopractor. You type K-i-o and then google knows you want Kiopractor. You type K-i-o into Live and it stops right there, with no suggestions. In my book, the biggest improvement Bing could do is improve their spelling suggestions and search results. But then again, that means Microsoft would just be playing the same old game of catch up with Google.
  • 0 Hide
    coolkev99 , May 29, 2009 1:15 PM
    google = 6 char
    bing = 4 char

    bing = 33% faster!!
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 3:51 PM
    When I saw the name the first thing that popped into my mind was Chandler, and then I saw the photo XD

    Seriously, though, I hope that bing.com turns out to be good enough to switch to - or at least provide more competition. However, Google is bloat-free, and I really don't need more than a list of results sorted by relevance. Google's search database is also more extensive.

    One benefit I could see would be in regards to privacy. I currently use an anonymous scraper for Google. Microsoft seems to be the lesser of two evils when it comes to spying on you. If they can make a low-bloat version and expand their database, I'd be all for it.