|
|
Google vs Bing
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status:
Offline
|
|
For years now, I have predominately used Google as my search engine. I had taken on faith the Google slogan "do no evil". I have also embraced Google Mail and Google Analytics. Then I came across this Article: Lawrence Solomon: Better off with Bing - FP Comment
I am starting to reevaluate my relationship with Google.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Wow, although I was not under the (d)elusion that Google was one of the "good guys", this is really fu*ked up.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status:
Offline
|
|
I’m not entirely sure why I should take the opinion of some climate‑change denying nut‑job seriously, but what the hell, Orion, you have every right to be as stupid as you want to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
His evidence is rather poor. The fact that one search engine is finding more results on a given topic is not necessarily evidence of anything sinister — popular topics are very often used by the automated Web page makers employed by spammers. This could simply mean that Google is filtering spam better than Microsoft. In fact, his number of pages containing the word "Googlegate" on Bing is so huge that I have to suspect something is wrong there. Can he show that actual, prominent Web sites covering these topics were being penalized? Are the results for these terms on Google worse than the corresponding results on Microsoft? Does anybody actually look at the 69 millionth result of a search term?
Incidentally, try Googling "Googlegate" on Google and Bing — try it yourself. On Google, you will find news stories, blog posts and opinion pieces about the topic. On Bing, you will find (as the first three results) the front page of JR Salzman's blog, www.google.com/ig/gateway and the front page of a blog called Talking About Weather (like Salzman, it wrote about the topic, but the link to the article is well buried), as well as some apparently unrelated article from 2007. If you wanted to inform yourself about Google's "evil," you'd have a much easier time using Google rather than Bing.
(
Last edited by Chuckit; Jan 18, 2010 at 09:15 PM.
)
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by dedalus
I’m not entirely sure why I should take the opinion of some climate‑change denying nut‑job seriously, but what the hell, Orion, you have every right to be as stupid as you want to be.
All you have to do is compare search results between the two and compare hits. Here's some further reading on the Global Climate Models used by the CRU; American Thinker: Climategate: The Truth Hurts When It Hits You in the Head
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuckit
His evidence is rather poor. The fact that one search engine is finding more results on a given topic is not necessarily evidence of anything sinister — popular topics are very often used by the automated Web page makers employed by spammers. This could simply mean that Google is filtering spam better than Microsoft. In fact, his number of pages containing the word "Googlegate" on Bing is so huge that I have to suspect something is wrong there. Can he show that actual, prominent Web sites covering these topics were being penalized? Are the results for these terms on Google worse than the corresponding results on Microsoft? Does anybody actually look at the 69 millionth result of a search term?
Sure, that may be true. Your argument did cross my mind as well. I put article out there to see how others felt. I think we should be concerned how searches are or not censored. As I said, I am evaluating more closely my search results and will compare them to Bing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2009
Status:
Offline
|
|
I did some further research:
v
As you can see, Google China has 59,400 more results than Google US.
Now, compare this to Bing:
v
Bing China has 47,000 fewer results than Bing US.
Hmm.
(
Last edited by ThinkInsane; Jan 19, 2010 at 11:42 AM.
Reason: Potty-mouth language in the images)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status:
Offline
|
|
But Bing China’s search button seems to say “Search” rather than “搜索” for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|