text: bing raped google | Acorn UK Domains Forum - Domain Name Forum UK
  bing raped google
  Discussion in 'SEO Search Engine Optimisation' started by julian, Jun 30, 2009.
  I think bing is first decent contender purely from an SE point of view. I think it has some good features that g will find hard to follow especially being pre-installed on pcs etc - about time someone mixed it up a bit - any thoughts...?
  When they compete with adsense and then we have compeititon for domain owners that would be a good thing imo.
  At the minute they are missing a trick in not taking them on in that field, that's where the cash is.
  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.
  Bing seems to give much better results for a lot of local searches. Google far outstrips them on general searches. That's my experience so far, anyway.
  I've noticed that since it's launch that I'm getting referrals to one of my sites for single generic word searches (in a competetive market) so that's good news fish,
  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.
  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.Click to expand...
  GrahamWellingto
  I think Google will remain the top search engine.
  GrahamWellingto,
  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.
  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.
  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.
  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