<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Experience Planner &#187; Search Engines</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.experience-planner.com/category/search-engines/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.experience-planner.com</link>
	<description>on the art &#38; science of experience planning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:42:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Does Bing Stand a Chance?</title>
		<link>http://www.experience-planner.com/2009/07/01/does-bing-stand-a-chance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.experience-planner.com/2009/07/01/does-bing-stand-a-chance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[user research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Catalyst Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CollegeHumor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[funny video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nick Gould]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TechCrunch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wolfram ALpha]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.experience-planner.com/?p=121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Several alternate search engines have cropped up over the last couple of years, but every time I&#8217;ve been certain that they didn&#8217;t really pose a threat to Google. These alternatives might offer an interesting interface, but poor quality of results &#8212; like Cuil. Or they work so differently that they&#8217;re not really Google competitors &#8212; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Several alternate search engines have cropped up over the last couple of years, but every time I&#8217;ve been certain that they didn&#8217;t really pose a threat to Google. These alternatives might offer an interesting interface, but poor quality of results &#8212; like <a title="Cuil" href="http://www.cuil.com/" target="_blank">Cuil</a>. Or they work so differently that they&#8217;re not really Google competitors &#8212; like <a title="Wolfram Alpha" href="http://www.wolframalpha.com/" target="_blank">Wolfram|Alpha</a>.</p>
<p>When Microsoft first launched Bing, I was just about to dismiss it as another &#8220;also ran&#8221; search engine. But then the reviews came it saying that Bing is pretty good. Actually, really good. And some mainstream tech pundits (<a title="Bing on TechCrunch" href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/01/apparently-bing-is-something-of-a-hit/">TechCrunch</a>) wondered if Bing could be a real Google challenger.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;ve been trying it out over the last couple of days, and my verdict is that it&#8217;s fine. It&#8217;s a perfectly good search engine, and if there was no other competition, most people would be very happy with it. The only real problem is battling Google&#8217;s mindshare. It turns out that some research data backs this up.</p>
<p>The <a title="Catalyst Group" href="http://www.catalystnyc.com/" target="_blank">Catalyst Group</a> tested Google and Bing with 12 users, including focus group and eye tracking studies. They found that people preferred Bing over Google in a lot of ways, but ultimately they preferred Google because it&#8217;s familiar. This is how The Catalyst Group and TechCrunch sum it up:</p>
<blockquote><p>Catalyst CEO Nick Gould concludes that Microsoft “created something as good as Google and that is not good enough.” Overall, the test subjects “were not swayed.” No wonder Microsoft is spending up to $100 million on Bing marketing.</p></blockquote>
<p>Be sure to check out the <a title="Bing vs Google on TechCrunch" href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/25/study-suggests-people-prefer-bings-design-to-googles-but-still-wont-switch/">chart on TechCrunch</a> to get a good idea of how people rated both search engines.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s why this video from CollegeHumor is so funny. In a way, this is how Bing really should advertise.<br />
<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="520" height="292" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="AllowScriptAccess" value="true" /><param name="src" value="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1915736&amp;fullscreen=1" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="520" height="292" src="http://www.collegehumor.com/moogaloop/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1915736&amp;fullscreen=1" allowscriptaccess="true" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
<div style="padding: 5px 0pt; text-align: center; width: 520px;">See more <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/videos">funny videos</a> and <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/pictures">funny pictures</a> at <a href="http://www.collegehumor.com/">CollegeHumor</a>.</div>
<p>Have you tried Bing? And if so, would you switch?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.experience-planner.com/2009/07/01/does-bing-stand-a-chance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
