Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 2nd Oct 2009 17:41 UTC
Google "If the last two months should be interpreted as Microsoft suggests, with Bing's gradual ascent in usage share against Google as a sign of Bing's inevitably catching up, then a similar interpretation of September's numbers from live analytics firm StatCounter should be taken as a sign of Bing's ultimate demise. A sampling of five billion or more US page views from Web sites accessed by StatCounter in September reveals that, of the world's top three search services, Google's usage share has climbed back just above 80%, and is flirting with last November's peak of 81.14% -- meaning Google is back to serving four out of five US-based general queries. Bing's usage share in the US descended by 1.13% to 8.51% for the month of September, while Yahoo's dove 1.1% to 9.4%. Google's share among the top three has now climbed above where it stood in May (78.72%), when Microsoft changed the name of Windows Live Search."
Permalink for comment 387450
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by izomiac
by izomiac on Fri 2nd Oct 2009 19:30 UTC
Member since:

While I still strongly prefer Google, Bing does seem to give pretty good (sometimes better) results, which is surprising since Google has my search history to go off of. OTOH, Microsoft is having to penetrate a market where the competitor's product name is basically synonymous with the action. It's quite similar to what Firefox and Macintosh dealt with, and Linux is currently dealing with. Microsoft will likely either need to sink tons of money into marketing or tons into development since I doubt they'll make much headway unless the common computer user perceives Bing to be significantly better than Google.

BTW, there's a typo in the summary that was copy/pasted from the linked article. The phrase "while Yahoo's dove 1.1% to 9.4%" makes no sense. It seems to originate from the original article, which states "Yahoo! which also declined, to 9.40% from 10.50%". The author of the linked article apparently moved the decimal place, then rounded. Not realizing his/her mistake the author then forgot the meaning of the word "from" and described the reduction as a "dive" when it's really more of a "decimation" if a 10% reduction needs emphasis. I'm not sure why the author didn't notice the misplaced decimal, a mass exodus (90%) of Yahoo!'s user base would be a far more significant story if it were true.

Reply Score: 1