1) Do you click the sponsored links in search results?
2) Do you run adblock?
Maybe you and I (and anyone else reading this board) are not the target market for Bing. I don't watch Wheel of Fortune either, but that seems to have a strong market.
The less links/buttons on a page to confuse my mother the more likely I'll send her to that page. As long as she can easily find what she is looking for (and is less likely to install another browser toolbar)
Here are some searches that worked perfectly fine for me in Bing and didn't need any sidebar filters:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=celtics+score (shows the box score)
http://www.bing.com/search?q=newton%2C+ma+taxi (same map/list of taxi companies as google)
http://www.bing.com/search?q=who+won+american+idol (I think Bing has better results than Google for this)
http://www.bing.com/search?q=movie+times (fandango outranked Bing's list of movies, while Google puts their list ahead of all search results)
I know some people like to hate on googles personalized search results too, but to me they are pretty much perfect.
I've got really tired of Google's cruft, and tried DuckDuckGo several times, but the results were just never as good (and I missed integrated image and news searches, both of which I use heavily). Bing's results seem much closer to what I expect.
I love DDG, and tried it out as my default search engine for about a month, but just got tired of how slow it was compared to Google and switched back to Google as my default (on DDG I found myself adding "!google" about 30% of the time anyway). If DDG was faster, I'd probably still be using it.
To illustrate my point, one of these is Bing and one is Google: http://d.pr/i/4KA5
Does this not cross an ethical line?
I work in game development, and this kind of thing comes up a lot. For example, if your going to make a console FPS, you should make damn sure your controls are as similar as possible to Call of Duty and when people make the user interface for an MMO these days, they should probably start with whatever WoW's UI is doing.
When you are looking at a decision like "What colour should I make these item rarities" you might think it's a good idea to change them just to be different from a competitor, but why change for the sake of change?
UI improvements can certainly be made, but you have to balance them against familiarity, which is a huge factor that shouldn't be discounted. Remember that in any product, the UI is a means to an end, not the thing itself. If Bing wants to innovate, they should do so by providing better search results.
they have related searches (in bold), search history & narrow by region down the left...
all but the last go in the "cruft" category imho,
google have the different search types, location, region, chronological stuff then "more", no idea how much customisation they do though ... i'm not a google-fanboy but at least they are all useful _to me_ & better designed
If Bing can do a better job with long tail queries, I could definitely see myself recommending to family to use Bing.
e.g. I searched for a GitHub repo I created. On Bing I got one results. A blog post I wrote about it. On Google I got 77 results including the GitHub project, GitHub Wiki, blog post, and tweets about it. I've also noticed in using Bing that when I type in programming questions I get blog posts. On Google I get StackOverflow which is what I'm usually looking for. I think I'm going to give Bing a try for a few days though exclusively and see how it really compares.
Competing on design is great especially as Google's search has got so cluttered but the results are still the most important thing.
The bingbot will respect msnbot permissions when it doesn't see bingbot, unless of course github has explicitly blocked unrecognized user agents too.
I guess I will stick with Google... I like the redesign though.
It cost them $5.5B between 2009 and Sep 2011.
55 f in c
1200 USD in JPY
25 liters in gallons
In Google these give me the answer. In Bing they give me links.
I must admit I also miss from Google the define: word but these little things are not enough for me to ever go back to Google!
2. User styles.
3. If you don't like the options Google gives you or it annoys you to see them on the side, okay. But blaming it on social search is disingenuous. Social search added a single toggle button that is off in the corner away from results.
The left search bar stuff is standard fare and has been there for ages.
So yes, appearance is an extremely good reason to switch search engines.
1. The results returned by Google and Bing are equally good, and so the only thing remaining is the "noise" on the page.
2. The "noise" in the column is so distracting that you are willing to go elsewhere regardless of the quality of the content that you are... "able" to see?
The search results themselves are formatted, basically identically. The only difference is Google has a bit more stuff up top and on the left side on Google. Just set the origin of your vision to be the div containing the search results.
Or take 10 seconds and install a user style. It will take a fraction of the time you spent flipping back to Google to redo a search. (At least that's been my own experience with trying to switch).
Additionally, in regards to visual bandwidth, the Google results are tighter (yet still comfortable), don't have "Related Links" shoved into the middle of search results, and the site (map) links under the result don't take up an enormous space like they do in Bing (they more than double the vertical height of the result).
(as a side note, it appears to be completely impossible to do an "advanced" (date/language-constrained) search with Bing. If you guys don't use these options on Google, you absolutely must try them. They are invaluable when doing any non-trivial query)