Bing nipped at Google’s heels last month

Microsoft’s re-branded and improved search engine has been out for nearly a month now. So, how has Bing been doing against Google? Not too badly, says Reuters, which got hold of data showing the new "decision engine" has actually made some headway.

According to numbers from StatCounter, Microsoft’s U.S. search engine market share averaged 8.23% in June, up from 7.81% immediately before the June 3 re-launch and 7.21% in April. Bing drew in even more users shortly after its debut, reaching a 9.21% market share peak. StatCounter says the site also went on to capture 8.45% of the market during the last week of June.

To put these numbers in perspective, Yahoo’s market share stayed practically stationary last month—Reuters quotes a rise from 10.99% to only 11.04%.

StatCounter CEO Adohan Cullen’s comment to the news agency says it all: "At first sight, a 1 percent increase in market share does not appear to be a huge return on the investment Microsoft has made in Bing but the underlying trend appears positive."

Comments closed
    • sigher
    • 10 years ago

    When I first saw bing I thought my browser was hacked and I was redirected to some shady advertisers part of the internet.

    The ‘hacked’ part was not true it turned out, as for the shady advertisers corner..well..

    • Chrispy_
    • 10 years ago

    Oh wow.

    IE8 goes “critical update” and installs itself on over a hundred million PC’s and whaddayaknow, a month later it has an increased market share over last month

    Hell, it’s almost like IE replaces your existing search engine with Bing or something.

    Hang on, Captain Obvious is phoning me, brb.

    • blitzy
    • 10 years ago

    #39

    amen.

    although to be fair, sometimes popularity can be helpful. the problem we have now is, if something is not popular it just won’t be found. which isn’t really good enough

      • vikramsbox
      • 10 years ago

      yes. if i want to see posters of any sexy pop star, these work. but if i’m looking for some relevent academic content, or for a low profile institute, these don’t.
      Thing is- search engines should operate on the ‘pull’ principle where the context of the search pulls the user to the target site.
      But now the search engine wars are taking it to the ‘push’ by pushing the most hit sites to the user. We know the most popular sites for most of oour interests, we don’t need these idiots to tell us that.
      Bring back the pull searches. Don’t push it.

    • vikramsbox
    • 10 years ago

    bing, yahoo, google, whatever. All the search engines offer different flavors of cream toppings for what is basically the same underneath- hit counters for sites- end up providing the user with a popularity vote rather than a context search.
    I’ve been using google since it was used when yahoo adopted their early algorithm in 2000 (?). How nice the results were. Use of a slightly extended context search string often led us to lesser ‘hit’ but more context relevant sites.
    But over the last few years, since google started the linking of search results to the google-analytics applet, many lesser known, but very helpful, and relevant sites just disappeared.
    Many times, I couldn’t locate the websites even after entering the institutions’ names in the search, but when I directly entered the site address in the browser, the site opened.
    We don’t need popularity votes, but context relevant searches.
    Oh! And how did I get hold of the site addresses i couldn’t loacte in teh first place? I ‘boxed’ them! It means asked my friends by word of mouth! Maybe that would give google and ms something to think about; or maybe they’ll bask in the statistical glory of success.
    My analysis of the 3 is as follows-
    Google- popularity vote
    Yahoo- more relevant but algorithm far from satisfactory, many irrelevant and outdated results. But love their experimental context sorting. Its helpful at least.
    Bing- used only the video preview and pic search after reading about the thubnail preview feature. Hogs bandwidth as it caches the images and videos in the search result window. Lowest preference in searches also.

    • eitje
    • 10 years ago

    Idea: bingle.com, to mix results from google & bing together.

    • thermistor
    • 10 years ago

    I just can’t get past the “White Christmas” song when people talk about Bing…

    • juampa_valve_rde
    • 10 years ago

    i still dislike the way bing shows results… seems like msn search, wasting space on the screen, the results are ok, but i felt it unconmfortable

    • StashTheVampede
    • 10 years ago

    What’s the guess of the year’s domain name? Microsoft is on a bi-annual “re-vision” of their search to drive users there.

    MSN.com has failed.
    Live.com has failed.
    (what else am I missing?)

    Bing.com hasn’t failed, but time will tell.

    I’ll also point out one thing: every programmer friend I have uses Google.com to search Microsoft’s Technet for answers.

      • Flying Fox
      • 10 years ago

      Even Microsoft employees (especially devs) use Google. Not sure if Bing can change that though. Those guys are like us enthusiasts and they do try new things.

      • iatacs19
      • 10 years ago

      Very interesting, I never end up picking google, always bing or yahoo! and I use google exclusively…

    • Corrado
    • 10 years ago

    I’ve been using Bing myself since launch… and its really very good. Its taken over as my normal default search engine.

      • Meadows
      • 10 years ago

      My main problem with Microsoft’s engines is that they don’t put Wikipedia high on the list unless you explicitly include it in the keywords.
      Well, they still do actually, but not in as many cases as Google would.

        • conlusio
        • 10 years ago

        Huh – I should check out Bing then. I hate the fact that google puts wikipedia so high. I’d rather spell it out when I want to ensure I have the latest political slant or inaccurate information.

    • herothezero
    • 10 years ago

    q[

      • PeterD
      • 10 years ago

      Fling will receive much aclaim, because it basically is aimed at people who want to buy something, not at people who look for information.
      That means sales persons will like Kring, and so companies are going to push it, which means advertorials will start to spread the word.

      • ssidbroadcast
      • 10 years ago

      From your mother’s basement in Wyoming…

        • PeterD
        • 10 years ago

        Buy why do they compare with Google, if Google is the real big one and Ping is only a minor player?
        It’s like comparing an amateur soccer player with a professional player.
        I think MS thinks: “Let’s link our name to Google’s, that’s going to give us lots of free advertising space in articles and blogs.”
        I think they also think: “Let’s attack Google. It’s a monopolist. People don’t like monopolists. They’ll start to like us again. Like we did once when we attacked IBM.”
        It’s all about marketing.
        I use AltaVista or Google, depends on the situation.
        I’ve tested Pling, and it wasn’t anything better than Google. Actually, Google gave the best results.

        By the way: only people living in their mother’s basement, by regularly via Internet.
        So, basically, Flong is aimed at the basement population.

          • Meadows
          • 10 years ago

          Did you deliberately dodge the Penny Arcade joke, or are you genuinely ignorant of that one?

            • Grigory
            • 10 years ago

            He stabbed at thee.

            • ssidbroadcast
            • 10 years ago

            I liked how he never got the name of the product right. Good show.

            • ludi
            • 10 years ago

            I think that was a subtle crack at the earlier comments about Microsoft rebooting their search engine’s name and marketing angle every two years.

          • d2brothe
          • 10 years ago

          They compare to google because they’re playing the same game.

      • sigher
      • 10 years ago

      Like their home page better? Seriously you must be either paid or in some institution for the dangerously weird 🙂 the main page is so ugly and unpleasant
      It looks better when you do searches though, but they show too little info to help you to quickly pick results IMO, to see picture dimensions for instance you have to mouseover, but that’s a silly hassle
      Seems they are trying to mimic google by going more minimalistic but they don’t quite get the concept behind it.

    • ludi
    • 10 years ago

    That’s some incredible spin. A small one-month increase, one month after a re-launch accompanied by advertising and promotions, is not a lot of data from which to divine an “underlying trend.”

      • SubSeven
      • 10 years ago

      Don’t worry about that… statisticians can divine anything you want from any set of numbers, trust me on that. Like Disraeli’s famous quote goes, “there are lies, damned lies, and statistics”.

    • eitje
    • 10 years ago

    q[

      • axeman
      • 10 years ago

      Yeah, I think that figure of speech is misused in this case.

        • mdk77777
        • 10 years ago

        They said nipping at heels, not tearing into flank. Think annoying toy dog….not wolf…..

          • poulpy
          • 10 years ago

          I just love the image 🙂

          • PeterD
          • 10 years ago

          Buy why do they compare with Google, if Google is the real big one and Ping is only a minor player?
          It’s like comparing an amateur soccer player with a professional player.
          I think MS thinks: “Let’s link our name to Google’s, that’s going to give us lots of free advertising space in articles and blogs.”
          I think they also think: “Let’s attack Google. It’s a monopolist. People don’t like monopolists. They’ll start to like us again. Like we did once when we attacked IBM.”
          It’s all about marketing.
          I use AltaVista or Google, depends on the situation.
          I’ve tested Pling, and it wasn’t anything better than Google. Actually, Google gave the best results.

      • nerdrage
      • 10 years ago

      q[

      • d2brothe
      • 10 years ago

      Yahoo’s share went up very slightly, (effectively stayed the same I suppose). It did not go down, thus bing did not steal marketshare from Yahoo, only from Google.

    • ChrisDTC
    • 10 years ago

    Its just from their advertising blitz, and the free money Microsoft is giving away with the bing shopping thing.

      • Lane
      • 10 years ago

      And? That’s the whole point. You’re stating the obvious.

        • ludi
        • 10 years ago

        Grouch much?

      • Sargent Duck
      • 10 years ago

      You mean I’ve been using Bing for a month (and liking it?) for a whole month and I could have gotten money? Where do I sign up?

      In all seriousness, I like Bing. I like their maps better, and their home page is nicer.

        • d2brothe
        • 10 years ago

        The homepage has a pretty picture on it, but that makes it slightly more cluttered than google’s home page. Look on search.yahoo.com for an exactly copy of the google page. I suppose MS wanted to try something a little different, hard to say which is better.

        For their maps, I have to say, honestly what were they thinking. I mean, I love the data, and the birds eye view, but what moron decided it was a good idea to steal a centimeter of space from the bottom and from the sides of the map to display…what…NOTHING. I mean….its a small nitpick but its a totally pointless waste–makes the map slightly smaller and slightly less nice to use. Little things like that are the kind of things that make google and apple products seem much more polished. Its tiny and it hardly matters in real life, but its just stupid.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This