Bing vs. Google: 'Judy Consumer' Can't Tell a Difference

All These Opinions Might Be too 'Expert' for Average Folks

Posted by Judy Shapiro on 07.09.09 @ 06:31 PM

We consumers seem to becoming pawns in the power struggle between internet behemoths Google and Microsoft. To Google, we are "products" to be sold to highest bidding advertiser and to Microsoft we have been reduced largely to a software license. The battle these two corporate superpowers are undergoing leaves me feeling awed, and puny.

So when I read the plethora of opinions the experts are spinning about whether Bing is better than Google, I wonder what "Judy Consumer" thinks. I suspect the subtleties of the technology are probably lost on her.

What the "Judy Consumers" of the world do know is that the new Bing advertising campaign promises that Bing is not only a search engine but a decision engine. I can imagine the agency/client meetings assessing this positioning vs. that one. I can hear the focus group comments that came from the testing that no doubt went into the creation of this campaign. And I can certainly feel the excitement (maybe even a little tension) as the agency reported on the research results in support of the recommended campaign. Been there, done that.

Clearly the Bing campaign is meant to communicate that people will get to the relevant information they want faster than Google. But this almost technical benefit (it's really about better filtering of search results) is lost in the grandiose promise of Bing as a decision engine. Maybe I am just too independently minded (and not the primary target), but I resist the notion that Microsoft technology will decide anything for me. What I really want is technology to give me the information I need to make the decision I want. But, hey, everyone's a critic.

So then I went to look at how Bing does deliver in its decision-making promise. I did the first search that came to mind: I searched my name. And Google did much better and was more accurate than Bing by far. In fact, I could compare results very efficiently via a site called bing-vs-google.com that David Pogue of the New York Times introduced to readers.

I tried again, searching the term "online trust." The results were no more satisfying this time. True, Bing does have a few nifty features like the related searches and the excerpt from the site without having to click around, but beyond that I could see no perceptible difference.

Maybe I am not looking hard enough and I certainly did not put it through its paces as David Pogue did. Or just maybe the differences are too subtle for "Judy Consumer" to notice. Or maybe most people don't care enough about search to look for these extra features. And this is where Bing is at a distinct disadvantage: It takes a lot to overcome inertia.

I don't proclaim to know how this war will end but I hope "Judy Consumer" makes up her own mind and doesn't rely on either Microsoft or Google to make her decisions. Or the pundits either for that matter. They know too much.

~ ~ ~
Judy Shapiro is senior VP at Paltalk and has held senior marketing positions at Comodo, Computer Associates, Lucent Technologies, AT&T and Bell Labs. Her blog, Trench Wars, provides insights on how to create business value on the internet.

13 Comments

By nickntime | LA, CA July 9, 2009 07:51:42 pm:

I could not agree more. This is a classic example of how a big company tells consumers what to think. Decision engine is a promise that would be nearly impossible to deliver.

A classic case of advertising promise over reach.

Permalink

By Rodney33 | FRISCO, TX July 10, 2009 01:48:14 am:

Bing was off to a good start as the 13th most visited site on the web its first month. It had 49.57 million unique visitors in the US per Compete.com. Google was #1 with 145,948,025 unique US visitors for the month.

Perhaps Bing's "decision engine" positioning isn't too off-putting or confusing? Or, maybe the curiosity to try was just too big to resist, no matter what the positioning projects.

Whether the audience stays around, grows or falls off, remains to be seen. One thing does seems certain, when you use Bing, it isn't substantially inferior to Google in speed or performance. That sometimes is OK for a challenger. Especially since Google hasn't had a new search challenger for some time.

A look at who's between Bing and Google in audience size is interesting, as Microsoft has three sites in the top 13 - MSN with 114M unique US users, Microsoft 55M and Bing 49M. The three collectively have more traffic than Google or any other combined group.

Unique visitor traffic may not mean so much, because Google is still dominate in search and its unique users return to the site frequently.

But just standing back and looking at the numbers, one could surmise Microsoft's strategy isn't necessarily to knock Google off it's search perch. Perhaps its strategy is to surround Google with strong, sizable competitors.

1 google.com 145M+, .37% for the last month and 7.45% for a 12 month period.

2 yahoo.com 142,338,604, +5.12%, +7.12%

3 Facebook 122,559,672, +8.45%, +248.17%

4 msn.com 114,126,744, +17.26%, +46.81%

5 youtube.com 78,295,008, +2.37%, +31.78%

6 ebay.com 73,188,762, -6.12%, +4.40%

7 amazon.com 65,793,981, -0.70%, +20.53%

8 wikipedia.org 62,892,414, -5.50%, +17.97%

9 myspace.com 60,973,908, +7.19%, -5.65%

10 microsoft.com 55,565,572, +3.14%, +9.28%

Rodney Mason, CMO
Moosylvania
The Great State Of Design
www.moosylvania.com
www.twitter.com/rodmoose
www.twitter.com/moosylvania

Permalink

By Rodney33 | FRISCO, TX July 10, 2009 10:03:17 am:

One correction to the thought above - Google and youtube combined have slightly more unique visitors than the Microsoft clan. But given Bing's meteoric rise the first month, it's possible Microsoft will have more next month.

Rodney Mason, CMO
Mooyslvania
The Great State Of Design
www.moosylvania.com
www.twitter.com/rodmoose
www.twitter.com/moosylvania

Permalink

By HarveyMasser | oakland, CA July 10, 2009 11:01:40 am:

Without sounding like I am from the 1970's -- "right on Judy". When will agencies learn how to market technology to consumers. Any technology should empower -- not overpower.

This decision engine thing from BING is an agency idea meant to promote trial. But in its sweeping overpromise, it makes us all look bad.

Keep up the good fight Judy.

Permalink

By Joseph | Baltimore, MD July 10, 2009 11:52:20 am:

The agency did what all great agencies do -- create a campaign that got people to try BING.

The ultimate success will of course be end user driven -- but the agency's campaign is a success from a that perspective.

Permalink

By JudyGShapiro | new york, NY July 10, 2009 01:12:49 pm:

Joseph – I disagree.

Agency's job is to give people a reason to try a new product or solution based on an honest representation of the offer – not hyperbole.

Often, the creative used to launch new technology is long on promise and short on giving consumers some credit for how they understand technology.

Another example of a campaign that misrepresents technology IMHO is the Apple MAC campaign. One of their strategic platforms centers on the MACs "superior security". That promise really burns me. MACs are safer ONLY because they have not received the attention of the hackers given their share of the PC market – not because they are technologically speaking safer.

It is this type of over promise that I think agencies must be smarter about. That is all I am advocating.

Permalink

By rmesquenazi | Miami, FL July 11, 2009 11:56:59 pm:

In my opinion, Microsoft can spend all the money in the world, trying to convince me to use bing! but GOOD MARKETING KILLS A BAD PRODUCT.
I blog I read recently I think responds well to this article because it says that YOU EITHER HAVE IT OR YOU DON'T... http://brandingmumbojumbo.com/wordpress/?p=525&cpage=1#comment-170
And it is very true, Microsoft does not even know who they are and what they stand for, so how can they try to tell me about bing!?

Permalink

By Robertrbarnet | los angeles, CA July 12, 2009 10:26:57 am:

This article was picked up by Fortune and CNN and the comments ranged from "Atta girl" to "Judy is dumb"... Wow – I guess anyone that dares to question the big guys must be willing to take a little heat.

I agree with Judy on one key point – The promise does not seem to be inconsistent with what the actual technology delivers. Microsoft simply knows how to spend a lot of money on ads – but they have not a clue about how to create meaningful communication that connects with their customers.

BING as a decision engine – no way! BING as an alternative search engine – sure. But whether consumers will know or care is yet to be seen.

Permalink

By JamesFaison | Chicago, IL July 12, 2009 10:36:55 am:

There is an unusual challenge with creating messages around new technology since the benefit of a new technology is often experiential and not intellectual. So creating cogent messaging for new technology launches requires sensitivity to the frustration most people feel with current technology and how the new technology can help.

In the case of BING, they were latching onto the observation that search can often deliver ridiculous, off point results. The spots they created and the accompanying tagline is appropriate and worked. It got people to try BING. Then "Judy Consumer" can decide on hew own.

That's how it supposed to work – isn't it?

Permalink

By JudyGShapiro | new york, NY July 12, 2009 10:56:45 am:

Getting technology marketing right is a tough beast if my experience over the past 20+ years is any indication.

But I was trained in the techno-marketing world of AT&T, and in their day they mastered the formula of technology marketing. They understood that the technology is a means to an emotional end, to an emotional benefit. Their iconic campaign "Reach out and touch someone" worked because it understood that the point was NOT the phone or the network – but making connections. (Remember, they spun that benefit a million ways, e.g. – For the Long Distance campaign, they had "It's the next thing to being there".

I think the current BING over shoots its promise and lost sight of true way people want to use this technology. For me it is antiseptic and predictable, lacking in any emotional tie.

And as I said in my article, "Hey – everyone's a critic". In the end, the marketplace will decide I suppose.

Permalink

By nickkinports | Chicago, IL July 13, 2009 10:38:37 am:

When I reviewed Bing I used search terms that one may use when trying to make a "decision". The results were clear: Google had the more relevant content to make a decision.

Decision Versus Search - Bing Challenges Google In Search Engine Duel
http://admaven.blogspot.com/2009/06/decision-versus-search-bing-challenges.html

Nicholas E. Kinports
Digital Integration Manager
Blog: http://admaven.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/admaven

Permalink

By neiludavis | Atlanta, GA July 13, 2009 02:35:11 pm:

I think that Microsoft could do a better job explaining what Bing is all about that's for sure. It's not really a question of if Bing is better than Google overall, but rather, does it provide more relevant results for four very specific categories - in this case, shopping, local search, health and travel. This is what Bing is built around and I suppose why they call it a 'decision engine'. For example, for shopping, you can look at reviews in one place for a specific category or product and see how much money you're saving from merchant to merchant. For travel, it supposedly gives you the best results, based on price and what time of year it's best to travel, etc. And so on and so on.

Below is an interesting article that NY Times wrote about more relevant search. Basically it's saying that instead of finding as much information as possible for your search query, next-generation search engines will help you explore relevant possibilities related to what you're really interested in. And it will do so in a way by combining the search results in a way that's readily digestable for the end user.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/technology/internet/23search.html

So I think that for general searches, perhaps Bing is not effective. But I think for very specific things related around their four major categories it might be worth people's while.

Permalink

By aelwynljg | Ottawa, ON August 4, 2009 09:21:06 am:

FOUND IT! I tried following the ad, and added "Price Predictor". Bing has a special travel site http://www.bing.com/travel, but the price predictor only works between certain cities. So I can't predict flight prices btw Ottawa and Osaka (which is what I want to know).
Still, pretty nifty. Don't ask me why they made it so hard to find!
Damien

Permalink