I was excited to see the new Microsoft Bing search platform ("Decision Engine" in MSFT vernacular). I envisioned an army of geniuses in Redmond toiling away in their secret labs to create something that would turn the search world on its head. As a company responsible for pioneering so many technologies I didn't think it was too much to expect something groundbreaking from the Microsoft search platform.
When I arrived at Bing.com I was hopeful, seeing the new Google-esque interface and the nice little rollovers on the home page image. This is the kind of thing I was hoping to see, something a little different but still simple and focused. I plugged in my first search and sat ready to be dazzled. When the results came back I felt my excitement drain immediately. I did a few more searches, just to be sure the results would look the same, of course they did. Wow, Google with a Bing header! To be fair, the results I received on Bing from a variety of searches were solid, usually relevant, contextually appropriate and easy to find. If Google hadn't already been delivering this same quality of experience I would probably be a lot more impressed.
Bing just seems like a Google imitation. I'm sure the technology under the hood is probably very impressive and if I were an engineer I might marvel more about what MIcrosoft has developed. I fully understand the primary focus of search must be utility. But this is Microsoft, a company known for some amazing, industry-changing technologies, staffed by some of the best and brightest in the technology world. How on earth could they make a big deal about a search experience that for the most part looks and behaves like Google?
What would I have done differently? For starters, I would include a more interesting data visualization strategy. Look at what they're doing at the New York Times Visualization Lab or at how applications like Grokker can organize and display information. Data visualization is a hot area right now for a reason, Microsoft could have spiced up their results with something more visually engaging.
How much work would it have taken to use different text or highlight colors on results pages? Something as simple as that could have at least made it appear there was some effort to not just duplicate Google. I do like the little rollover feature on Bing at the right of each search result, but it's hardly a marvel of modern technology or likely to skew my search behavior. So if anyone from Microsoft is reading this, Bing is OK, but I know you can do better.
I think they are offering intuitive design appeal, information appeal, hover for lengthy description to 'save a click' is great, etc..but...
They seem to believe that they are head to head with Google and they are mistaken. Google is all about ppl interaction and communication. NOT because Google is interacting so much as it is Googles people/supporters/users..if Microsoft haven't noticed, there have been large numbers of social media die hards loooong before the miracle of Bing. The most popular marketing communities have been keeping Google at the core of primary search discussions for quite some time. They pull in new users probably at the same speed as Bing commercials and other forms of advertising but their lack of social environments will mean a small percentge of users will remain faithful. They will eventually be sucked into the Google vortex by some social environment that looks exciting, fun and/or educational.
Its 4:53 am and I am in need of coffee and theres far more to write about their marketing skills but they just aren't gettin it. Basically, the solution for them is simple & unlikely. Microsoft is attempting to be found worthy on the sole concept of their engine. They are proving this silently as they dismiss followers..(no follow/no responses/minimal interaction) they are proving this by not allowing accessible community building. the community is also difficult to navigate. Usability..oy. Theres far too many travel blog updates, not enough community member posting, etc..Its all Bing vs Google.
Google thinks along the lines of "We are Gods. You will follow us." Bing is approaching social media in a similar fashion. Big mistake. Their motto should be "The user is the most important person. We care." Even if its bogus, it is what will not only attract, but maintain loyalty.
Posted by: kbock70 | July 02, 2009 at 03:38 AM
Just like you I was very excited for the start of Bing and just like you I was disappointed once it launched. In reference to your last statement, do you really think they can do better or do you just want a good (better) alternative to Google?
Posted by: Sara Kmiecik | October 07, 2009 at 03:31 PM
Bing doesn't really need to be better, just as good. Microsoft have said their studies indicate people won't change search engines. Their announced strategy is therefore "OEM deals" - their words. This means new machines will come with Bing preinstalled, and people won't bother changing back to Google because it's no better (or even that different). That's the whole point - if it's just like Google, and comes pre-installed, who's going to bother to change. It's Internet Explorer vs Netscape Navigator all over again.
For what it's worth, most sites find Bing visitors have a 3% - 4% lower bounce rate than Google, so Bing is a better ROI for PPC.
Posted by: Brandt Dainow | October 19, 2009 at 02:07 PM