• Bing Uses Google's Search Results, and Google Figured it Out
    75 replies, posted
[url=http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/microsofts-bing-uses-google-search.html]Source[/url] [quote]By now, you may have read Danny Sullivan’s recent post: “Google: Bing is Cheating, Copying Our Search Results” and heard Microsoft’s response, “We do not copy Google's results.” However you define copying, the bottom line is, these Bing results came directly from Google. I’d like to give you some background and details of our experiments that lead us to understand just how Bing is using Google web search results. It all started with tarsorrhaphy. Really. As it happens, tarsorrhaphy is a rare surgical procedure on eyelids. And in the summer of 2010, we were looking at the search results for an unusual misspelled query [torsorophy]. Google returned the correct spelling—tarsorrhaphy—along with results for the corrected query. At that time, Bing had no results for the misspelling. Later in the summer, Bing started returning our first result to their users without offering the spell correction (see screenshots below). This was very strange. How could they return our first result to their users without the correct spelling? Had they known the correct spelling, they could have returned several more relevant results for the corrected query. [img_thumb]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_7ZYqYi4xigk/TUiOiyWDA7I/AAAAAAAAHes/YbVfOrQCP6E/google.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_7ZYqYi4xigk/TUiOjC7GOII/AAAAAAAAHe0/gmbIcJKJc6w/bing.jpg[/img_thumb] [/quote] Bing, you sneaky bastards. Google, you savvy bastards.
Hahahahahahaha, microsoft, you silly billy.
The only thing that matches are the top result so how is that copying?
[QUOTE=Ratboy14;27802637]The only thing that matches are the top result so how is that copying?[/QUOTE] Did you read the whole article? Google was deliberately tagging obscure websites with unusual search terms, which subsequently appeared in Bing. The only way this would have happened is if Bing was copying the results Google found.
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;27802773]Did you read the whole article? Google was deliberately tagging obscure websites with unusual search terms, which subsequently appeared in Bing. The only way this would have happened is if Bing was copying the results Google found.[/QUOTE] Is that how I got an F on my last research report...
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;27802773]Did you read the whole article? Google was deliberately tagging obscure websites with unusual search terms, which subsequently appeared in Bing. The only way this would have happened is if Bing was copying the results Google found.[/QUOTE] Oh okay. I didn't click on the source.
Bing. The decision engine that decided to plagiarise.
Wow. Can Google sue for this? Both companies sell ad space. I'm excited to see how this pans out.
Thats embarrassing.
I can't believe my friend still supports MS.
But... If it was using Google's search results, why was it still so rubbish?
Wow, that's just a stupid move on bing's/M$s' part.
[quote]For the query [juegosdeben1ogrande] we inserted a page of hip hop bling jewelry:[/quote] Was I the only one that laughed at "hip hop bling jewelry"? It sounds so professional everywhere else.
LOL I HAET M$. *Use Windows operating system while making this post*
Google should make a fake word that brings up fake results, and see if bing copy.
[QUOTE=gman_beeman;27803010]Google should make a fake word that brings up fake results, and see if bing copy.[/QUOTE] That's kind of what they did here. Did you read the thread? They used a obscure mis-spelling/ word that a user wouldn't, linked it to some real results (with the mis-spelling warning) and Bing managed to get the exact results without the mis-spelling warning, meaning it just copies what Google returns.
Since people can't read here's another informative picture [img]http://images-20110201.searchengineland.com/figz/wp-content/seloads/2011/02/The-Bing-Sting-300x619.jpg[/img]
This will be very interesting...
So, I take it their code basically amounted to: -accept entered terms -google it -display results -profit And I can't be the only one who thought the early bing commercials were stupid as fuck. "Oh! It's a choice engine! It lets you clarify if you mean a travel plane or mathematical plane! Or other!" Which, of course, it didn't. Besides adding in that one extra word. So... it was the exact same as Google. Well, I guess now we know it IS the exact same as Google.
BAHAHAHHAHAHA No way!
[QUOTE=amcwatters;27802958]LOL I HAET M$. *Use Windows operating system while making this post*[/QUOTE] LOL I HAET M$. * uname -a Linux porygon 2.6.37 #4 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jan 30 11:31:03 CET 2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux * :colbert:
so i tried to stop using google but I'm still using at AHHH
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;27803662]LOL I HAET M$. * uname -a Linux porygon 2.6.37 #4 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jan 30 11:31:03 CET 2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux * :colbert:[/QUOTE] nobody cares
[img]http://www.ken-welch.com/Reports/graphics/Busted.gif[/img]
Microsoft you sneaky bastards
That's fucking awesome. Also, the only reason I'm not using Linux is because I don't have enough space on my old-ass hard drive to fit it.
Jesus fuck stop calling them Micro$oft. You aren't super edgy and cool. If you're trying to be funny then you don't understand humor.
Bing fucking sucks, it's a lame attempt from Microsoft to be like the next Google. It has not caught on yet and it never will. :colbert:
[QUOTE=Pasalaqcua;27804285]Bing fucking sucks, it's a lame attempt from Microsoft to be like the next Google. It will has not caught on yet and it never will. :colbert:[/QUOTE] What's wrong with Bing if its essentially Google?
[QUOTE=Samiam22;27804329]What's wrong with Bing if its essentially Google?[/QUOTE] slower
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.