I don't know but I think Bing is really starting to gain some ground in terms of relevancy and fresh content. For example, I wrote an article targeting a new product that was released in August. Almost no one wrote about this product and Google ranked only 1 or 2 of these sites on the first page of it's results. My article was found at the end of the results on page 30, which was behind about 300 sites which had various keywords scattered throughout their pages, but none of the pages themselves were related at all to the product or the search query. It took about 2 months for my page to finally show up on the first page of the Google results and there was still barely anyone writing about this product. So the new products and my monthly promotions for the month of August show up 2 months late... Bing on the other hand listed my article within two days on the first page of their results along with a much greater list of other competitors who wrote about the same product. This is the true definition of RELEVANCY. It seems that Google tends to like older pages and domains. There are a few examples of major problems with this idea. First of all, I've noticed Google listing forum threads from many years ago which are irrelevant today. They also tend to list old products and models before newer ones, usually because the page is older and this seems to be important to Google. For example, I tried looking up anything from military enlistment standards, current news, university courses, new products, monthly promotional products and offers, ect. and Google brings up results from ranging from dates in 1999 to 2005 when they SHOULD be listing results from 2009. Bing on the other hand gives me the correct information. This is just another huge flaw with Google ranking sites only because they are old... Now for a newer and smaller site like my own, Google takes forever to list my pages and articles, even for a product that not too many people know about. Bing on the other hand tends to list my articles very quickly and also tends to rank newer and fresher materials first while Google lists the "old news" first. It seems that Google is just ranking sites solely because they are old and have lots of inbound links rather than relevant and fresh content. To make matters worse, Google seems to have just slacked off with it's Pagerank update for the visual toolbar. Again, this is just another blunder by Google's part by giving such credit to old sites while neglecting the newer and fresh sites with new content. Quite honestly, Bing has surprisingly been pretty good at bringing in traffic to my site and also displaying newer and more relevant results. I used to dread the live.com search engine from MSN, but Bing is really starting to pick up the pace. Personally, I am starting to use Bing more and more often since they have been right on par with getting my new articles and fresh content out to web users quickly even though my site is newer, doesn't have as many links and hasn't been sitting around for years and years.... Google seems to have given up with my site while making me wait years just to make my site "aged" and "worthy" of showing up with my other competitors, rather than listing fresh and relevant content that I've written about, even topics that have virtually no competition. Not to mention the gross neglect of not updating the PageRank display that shows up in everyone's toolbar and in directories, which is just as irresponsible as DMOZ leaving a bunch of "link rot" laying around while refusing to update anything new. Google has some serious issues the keep piling up. Also, I hear that the Google caffeine update is supposed to cut search time in half right and make search queries more efficient? So you would think that with all the freed up resources, Google would now be able to index sites faster and update PageRank faster. Well, it seems the opposite happened.
So you like 'em because they like you. I see your logic and endorse it. For some reason Google does not index any image from my site. But Bing is neck and neck with me. They have 99% of my images... and as I write this they prolly just added the last 1%
There is a deeper meaning to this logic. My rankings and number of indexed pages have remained constant with Bing for awhile now. The only difference is I've been getting more traffic from Bing. The logic here is that more and more people are starting to use Bing instead of Google and Yahoo. This increase in traffic has been quite sudden over just a period of a few months, as if MANY people were waiting for better search tools than Google and Yahoo and they suddenly found it.
I guess we all tend to favor the search engines that favor us, it is human nature. But you may have some valid points about relevency.
Just as another example, I was just now searching for a cached version of a month old page created on someone elses site (PR 4 Homepage, PR N/A on the month old page). Google could not find it but sure enough, it was right on top of Bing. I know the internet is big, but if Bing can find what I'm searching for and Google can't, that just shows you something about the two search engines doesn't it?
The people will not shift to Bing... Google is too well entrenched in peoples minds... Most people don't even say their going to search for something.. they say their going to Google something...
Bing dont index the home page of one of my blog, though the inner pages are getting indexed and ranked and i am getting traffic too. Very strange.
I was just in another thread similar to this one and as far as Bing goes, I think the term "Google it" has become embedded in our heads. The Yahoo,MSN merger looks really promising and I think they have something up their sleeve, but Google still leads the way. Leapfish was something I was hopeful for. I really like the ability to search any search engine via hyper-threading but then its more a matter of Leapfish is as good as the others are since it serves their results.
i get traffic from bing but just can't get into them much. they are a rip off of google if you ask me
People should just accept that Google will, and will always be the most widely used search engine around. It's more about consumer psychology and brand loyalty, than how much of a good search engine it is. Even if Bing does produce more relevant results, people will still use Google. We know Google, we love Google, and it has been embedded in our minds that, subconsciously or not, it's the best search engine to use should you have a query. Google is here to stay, and Bing isn't even slightly close. Move on people.