
Bing design = retro Google? - ericelias
http://www.bing.com/search?q=bing+%3D+retro+google%3F&go=&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=bing+%3D+retro+google%3F&sc=0-9&sp=-1&sk=
======
simba-hiiipower
I really don’t see this as a move towards trying to become a ‘retro Google'...
Looking at where MSFT is heading with a unified design across all its products
and properties, it looks to me like a natural evolution of the page becoming
more ‘Metro’ (simple, clean, intuitive). And there are really only so many
ways to display text/links in a 'minimalistic' fashion while keeping the basic
functionality people expect...

I’d guess though that this is a first in a series of small, gradual, changes
to the site geared toward 'metrofying' it. I bet we’ll soon see Segoe replace
Arial as the predominant font next.

------
moconnor
Bing styles itself as a retro Google, to capture people who long for the old
days.

Chrome OS styles itself as an old Windows desktop (compared to forthcoming
Win8) to capture people who long for the old days.

Business as usual.

~~~
shpoonj
How does Chrome OS resemble old Windows?

here's chrome os: [http://cdn.techpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/chrome-
os-a...](http://cdn.techpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/chrome-os-aura.jpg)

here's windows 7:
[http://www.techfuels.com/attachments/windows-7-2000-nt/28356...](http://www.techfuels.com/attachments/windows-7-2000-nt/28356d1328782271-windows-7-practical-
tips-windows-7-netbooks-windows-7.jpg)

Do you mean to say Chrome OS looks like Windows because the toolbar is on the
button like Windows and not on the top like *nix?

~~~
munchor
Why do you think nix has a toolbar on top? There's no "nix interface". There
are thousands of them. And most of the interfaces allow you to change the
location of the panels. I laughed out lout at what you said.

Either way, IMHO those two desktops look similar.

~~~
shpoonj
The most popular *nix UI is the one you get with OS X and it's toolbar is at
the top. So is the standard toolbar on Ubuntu.

And there are not thousands of linux interfaces. Having the ability to
customize does not mean there's a new interface every time you adjust
something. Leave the hyperbole on 4chan.

~~~
Stwerp
Can we just not call it _nix? I think that is what is confusing. Maybe its
just the most popular desktop linux format (at least currently) or something
else. It is kind of weird to talk about a standard_ nix interface that isn't a
terminal (at least it seems that way to me). Every linux box I use always has
different desktop/X-environment from the next. There may not be thousands of
X11 desktops, but there are quite a few (cde, enlightenment, gnome, kde, xfce,
just off the top of my hdead) that all have their differences. I would agree
more with the other guy, but acknowledge its pedantic details.

------
EwanToo
You can't see this unless you're set to United States in your preferences, but
it does look extremely like old Google, which is no bad thing.

~~~
tzaman
I'm not in US - screenshot please?

~~~
bitsushi
[http://www.bing.com/search?q=bing+%3D+retro+google%3F&se...](http://www.bing.com/search?q=bing+%3D+retro+google%3F&setmkt=en-
US)

~~~
mladenkovacevic
Whats that weird strip at the top? It looks like some image that's been cut
off.

~~~
panacea
I'm sure there were enumerable back and forth discussions about that. Bing
differentiated itself in the beginning with the large background image on the
homepage as opposed to the simple colourful logo on white background that
defined the Google experience.

Then Google copied the background image idea.

Now Bing has gone minimal, but there's obviously still some residual
pull/desire around using imagery.

That little strip is a remnant. Like a human appendix it's a residual organ
that wasn't completely eradicated as it evolved into the current design.

~~~
shpoonj
Do you have a screenshot of Google with a background image? I don't recall
ever seeing one.

~~~
panacea
Google added it as a "feature" and made it a default for a short amount of
time to market the background customization option:

[http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/09/google-adds-a-background-
im...](http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/09/google-adds-a-background-image-to-its-
homepage-by-default-at-least-for-24-hours/)

------
splatterdash
Forgive me for being too blatant, but I'm puzzled by their reason of doing
this. Do people really switch search engines because of the UI? I understand
that some people might prefer the less cluttered version, but when it comes
down to it, the way it looks is secondary to its primary function: giving you
good results. After a while, the look becomes less important.

I don't think it also serves their interest well, too, when their UI is a
reminder of their competitor (the retro look of their competitor, to be
precise). Google succeeded with a minimalistic UI because it made them look
different from the rest and no one did it before. When Bing does it now, it
makes them look like Google.

~~~
panacea
>the way it looks is secondary to its primary function: giving you good
results.

I'm honestly not trying to be mean, but I'm not sure you understand human
psychology in this area. Humans are _very consistently_ swayed by looks over
intrinsic value.

People aren't necessarily doing quantitative A/B tests between search engines,
they're just plugging the latest search terms they want answers to into the
search field and (in many cases) getting a search result that seems to fit the
bill.

If the search engine displays results in an visually uncluttered (seemingly
authoritative) way then that would seem like a good search engine choice.

There was that blog post the other day where someone updated and improved
their site design and was lauded by users for all the new features they had
introduced, when all they'd done was refresh the design.

~~~
splatterdash
> I'm honestly not trying to be mean,

Hey, no problem :), I'm just here for the discussion.

> but I'm not sure you understand human psychology in this area. Humans are
> very consistently swayed by looks over intrinsic value.

I do understand that looks matter _to a degree_. Some website redesigns does
make them much more appealing. But I feel like at best the effects are only
temporary. It doesn't take long before the user gets bored and thinks about
how ugly it looks, _unless_ the redesign comes with added
functionality/feature (which I fail to find in this case).

Moreover, I mentioned earlier that it doesn't seem beneficial for Bing that
its redesign is a reminder of its competitor. So I still find their decision
puzzling.

~~~
panacea
>unless the redesign comes with added functionality/feature (which I fail to
find in this case).

The redesign, in-and-of-itself likely provides added f/f in terms of reduced
cognitive load in parsing the search results page. It's simple and easily
grokked.

>a reminder of its competitor.

I don't think anyone is definitively and quantifiably testing Google search
results in their day to day lives, but I suspect there's a nagging sense that
they're not really as 'good' as they used to be.

I speculate that it's because the results have become more cluttered. Very few
people would consciously compare Bing 2.today with Google 2.yesterday.

I think it's a clever play. It will probably not pan out as it's difficult to
turn a ship as large as "Default Search" in another direction but we live in
interesting times.

------
dfriedmn
if bing is interested in optimizing its 15% search market share, this is a
nice move (and don't get me wrong, 15% of search is a pretty big business).
BUT, if they're interested in upending the market and really doing something
interesting, they should have a chat with duckduckgo to see what the future of
search might look like.

my hunch is the former is their goal...

~~~
latch
DDG is my default search engine, i quite like it.

But, you and I live in different galaxies if you think DDG is Bing's key to
gaining market share. DDGs value of privacy and no filter bubbles, is not a
compelling (or even understandable) concept to an overwhelming majority of
users. Facebook proves this.

~~~
agscala
Even to those who understand it, the value of DDG is variable. I tried DDG for
a few weeks, but switched back to google simply because I was actually having
to sort through more results than the specialized results that google gives
me.

I like feeling that my privacy is preserved on DDG but I'm still debating
whether or not it's an acceptable trade-off for search result relevancy for
me.

------
gee_totes
Is porn the 7th result down for anyone else?

Screenshot: <https://twitter.com/#!/gee_totes/status/197695446821519360>

At least, I think that's a porn link. Don't dare click on it because I'm on a
work computer.

~~~
MichaelGG
Nope, it's far worse. It's just a spam link to another search engine that does
a search for "Vintage Xxx Tube". SFW so long work doesn't consider search
results containing descriptions of porn sites to be unsafe.

------
ableal
A word of appreciation for the highlighting of the search words in the cached
page, such as Google had and lost.

(Having to bulls-eye a dinky little triangle to click 'cached' in a single-
item drop-down ... not so much appreciated.)

------
lupatus
Does this mean that Bing is on its way to being a billion dollar website? See
number 1 here: <http://www.paulgraham.com/ambitious.html>.

~~~
nextparadigms
It is a billion dollar website considering it loses billions every year. That
means they are investing billions in it.

Also being a copycat doesn't work too well unless you have a completely
different strategy than competing head-on, which Bing doesn't.

~~~
Produce
It's a good strategy when your competitor is consistently making changes which
long terms users hate.

------
AznHisoka
Very smart, and spooky.. I was using Bing yesterday and noticed how it was so
cluttered. Nobody likes to see so much text squeezed so close together. Glad
they got rid of the left hand text. Great stuff. I was close to switching to
Bing, and this may have sealed it for me.

~~~
mladenkovacevic
Weird. I use those tools on the left side almost every day.

Finds something posted within the last 24 hours --click-- Find only forum
discussions with your search term --click-- (This is especially valuable since
I get the most information about damn near everything from reading people's
discussions on that thing) Get a map of that restaurant I just searched
--click--

The only thing that's bothering me on Google's search is that right column
with the social stuff, especially if my search generated a lot of it. But my
eye just doesn't tend to go there anyways so it doesn't bother me that much.

------
forgotAgain
I like it but why couldn't they go all the way and leave out the dropdown
image on top? It's jarring to the otherwise clean and enticing page. Put a
non-intrusive link instead.

The above rant aside, I think it's a good move on their part.

------
glesica
It's not that different from the default look and feel of DuckDuckGo. Just
sayin'...

------
gouranga
It's what people want. I think they nailed it.

