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