14 ms·

Eric Schmidt testifies: Bing could eclipse Google by next year

41 points by sytelus 15y ago

Retreads 15y ago
Good testimony. The comments seem like a pretty smooth way for Google to: -(As the writer identifies) try not to seem like a monopoly -try to simultaneously reassure investors. It sounds like parody on purpose...nobody can take it seriously except an official record -acknowledge that any tech is ripe for disruption, even in the face of giants. Google, especially, knows this. edit:formatting (I'm a noob here!)
xtacy 15y ago
I am curious, how would you compute market share of Bing when Yahoo! uses Bing as its backend? Combined with Yahoo, Bing _powers_ 35% of the searches.
- Retreads 15y ago
  Good point. Where else do they provide the backend?
  - thematt 15y ago
    Baidu...soon -- at least for English searches.
- acangiano 15y ago
  In my experience with a variety of sites, Google's market share is easily 80-85% (according to the stats for each of these sites). And I don't mean technical sites, for which it's rarely below 95%. Whether you consider Bing alone, or you consider Bing and Yahoo, I don't buy for a second that they have anything over 15-20% market share at the moment.
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    This is probably a more interesting metric, which is seeing the referrer lets you know how someone found your site. And Google consistently scores higher numbers here on my personal web site. However, that statistic says more about ranking too, since sites higher in the ranking in Google's results will get more referrer hits, if the same site was lower ranked in Bing's index it would get fewer hits from Bing. In the ideal case one could compare the relative referrals from a site which falls in the same spot (preferably #1 for best sampling) on both indexes.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
simonbrown 15y ago
Clicky's stats show Google at around 90% on desktop and 96% on mobile. http://getclicky.com/user/#/marketshare/global/search-engines/ http://getclicky.com/user/#/marketshare/global/search-engine...
- icebraining 15y ago
  That URL gives you a login page. Direct link: http://getclicky.com/marketshare/global/search-engines/ http://getclicky.com/marketshare/global/search-engines/
petercooper 15y ago
The other article on CNN about this shows Schmidt taking oath. Could some of these statements, founded on inaccurate information, be considered perjurious?
- sp332 15y ago
  No, I think it's expected that he's going to put the best possible face on everything. He won't get called on it unless he manages to actually harm someone, which is very unlikely since he's on the defensive here. Edit: Note that he called her a commentator, not an expert :)
- pork 15y ago
  There was nothing false about what he said. His statement was prefixed with "some commentators note...", which is absolutely true. Unfortunately, the word "commentator" has mistakenly been conflated with authority and accuracy in popular culture, even though a "bored Mashable reporter with a journalism degree and Excel" is technically a "commentator". Any sort of analysis, such as the questionable linear extrapolation used by the Mashable reporter, is also treated as authoritative and accurate and amplified through the echo chamber of the popular press. That failing is not Schmidt's, but our own. For his part, Schmidt was doing what hired goons are hired to do -- mould the truth, but never to the point of (detectable) perjury. You can bet your life that there is an army of lawyers with sweaty brows in Mountain View poring over every possible response to every possible question.
joebadmo 15y ago
It seems clear to me that what Schmidt meant with the comment is that the industry is volatile enough that some commentators predict an upset. This is obviously to counter claims that Google is too big or too powerful, which is also obviously what the hearings are really about. That's not a "bald-faced lie." Saying Schmidt lied to Congress is the bald-faced lie.
- Permit 15y ago
  Has the search engine been volatile at all over the last five years? It seems to me to be extremely stable compared to other areas of the web. Eric Schmidt knows that Bing isn't going to be eclipsing Google any time soon, I think that's what the author was getting at.
  - joebadmo 15y ago
    I don't know what you consider volatile, but Bing launched in 2009 and now has over 30% marketshare. Yahoo also quit search. Other challengers keep popping up too (Wolfram Alpha, Blekko, Duck Duck Go, etc.). Anyway, I found it clear that Schmidt wasn't saying that he thought Bing was going to beat Google. He said there are others who think that. You can call that misleading or slippery, but it's by definition not a bald-faced lie.
    - barista 15y ago
      Most of that 30%was bought. Organic growth is incredibly slow. Google has an incredible stringhold on this market and more so on the mobile.
      - Steko 15y ago
        If Bing: (1) gets another 4% from Google over the next year due to IE defaults and advertising; (2) gets another 2-4% from the FB deal; (3) signs a deal with Apple to become default on iOS (2/3 of mobile = 5%+) and desktop Safari (4%+). That could potentially put them around the same market share as Google. None of those propositions are crazy either.
jroseattle 15y ago
It's ironic how similar the commentary from Schmidt compared to Gates from the MS investigation. There are plenty of competitors, technology moves quickly, customers can switch...yada yada yada. To this day, I find the chief outcome of the MS anti-trust trial is this: gov't now feels it has the discretion to investigate/disrupt/control any technology firm with decent market size. Looks like Google is going to have to start innovating in the areas of lobbying and campaign contributions.
wslh 15y ago
Just imagine if Microsoft gives a good boost ($$$) to Firefox to be the first search engine in the box?
nathanwdavis 15y ago
I've lost a little respect for Schmidt with this news.

41 points by sytelus 15y ago

Good testimony. The comments seem like a pretty smooth way for Google to: -(As the writer identifies) try not to seem like a monopoly -try to simultaneously reassure investors. It sounds like parody on purpose...nobody can take it seriously except an official record -acknowledge that any tech is ripe for disruption, even in the face of giants. Google, especially, knows this. edit:formatting (I'm a noob here!)

xtacy 15y ago

I am curious, how would you compute market share of Bing when Yahoo! uses Bing as its backend? Combined with Yahoo, Bing _powers_ 35% of the searches.

Retreads 15y ago
Good point. Where else do they provide the backend?
- thematt 15y ago
  Baidu...soon -- at least for English searches.
acangiano 15y ago
In my experience with a variety of sites, Google's market share is easily 80-85% (according to the stats for each of these sites). And I don't mean technical sites, for which it's rarely below 95%. Whether you consider Bing alone, or you consider Bing and Yahoo, I don't buy for a second that they have anything over 15-20% market share at the moment.
- ChuckMcM 15y ago
  This is probably a more interesting metric, which is seeing the referrer lets you know how someone found your site. And Google consistently scores higher numbers here on my personal web site. However, that statistic says more about ranking too, since sites higher in the ranking in Google's results will get more referrer hits, if the same site was lower ranked in Bing's index it would get fewer hits from Bing. In the ideal case one could compare the relative referrals from a site which falls in the same spot (preferably #1 for best sampling) on both indexes.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

simonbrown 15y ago

Clicky's stats show Google at around 90% on desktop and 96% on mobile. http://getclicky.com/user/#/marketshare/global/search-engines/ http://getclicky.com/user/#/marketshare/global/search-engine...

icebraining 15y ago
That URL gives you a login page. Direct link: http://getclicky.com/marketshare/global/search-engines/ http://getclicky.com/marketshare/global/search-engines/

petercooper 15y ago

The other article on CNN about this shows Schmidt taking oath. Could some of these statements, founded on inaccurate information, be considered perjurious?

sp332 15y ago
No, I think it's expected that he's going to put the best possible face on everything. He won't get called on it unless he manages to actually harm someone, which is very unlikely since he's on the defensive here. Edit: Note that he called her a commentator, not an expert :)
pork 15y ago
There was nothing false about what he said. His statement was prefixed with "some commentators note...", which is absolutely true. Unfortunately, the word "commentator" has mistakenly been conflated with authority and accuracy in popular culture, even though a "bored Mashable reporter with a journalism degree and Excel" is technically a "commentator". Any sort of analysis, such as the questionable linear extrapolation used by the Mashable reporter, is also treated as authoritative and accurate and amplified through the echo chamber of the popular press. That failing is not Schmidt's, but our own. For his part, Schmidt was doing what hired goons are hired to do -- mould the truth, but never to the point of (detectable) perjury. You can bet your life that there is an army of lawyers with sweaty brows in Mountain View poring over every possible response to every possible question.

joebadmo 15y ago

It seems clear to me that what Schmidt meant with the comment is that the industry is volatile enough that some commentators predict an upset. This is obviously to counter claims that Google is too big or too powerful, which is also obviously what the hearings are really about. That's not a "bald-faced lie." Saying Schmidt lied to Congress is the bald-faced lie.

Permit 15y ago
Has the search engine been volatile at all over the last five years? It seems to me to be extremely stable compared to other areas of the web. Eric Schmidt knows that Bing isn't going to be eclipsing Google any time soon, I think that's what the author was getting at.
- joebadmo 15y ago
  I don't know what you consider volatile, but Bing launched in 2009 and now has over 30% marketshare. Yahoo also quit search. Other challengers keep popping up too (Wolfram Alpha, Blekko, Duck Duck Go, etc.). Anyway, I found it clear that Schmidt wasn't saying that he thought Bing was going to beat Google. He said there are others who think that. You can call that misleading or slippery, but it's by definition not a bald-faced lie.
  - barista 15y ago
    Most of that 30%was bought. Organic growth is incredibly slow. Google has an incredible stringhold on this market and more so on the mobile.
    - Steko 15y ago
      If Bing: (1) gets another 4% from Google over the next year due to IE defaults and advertising; (2) gets another 2-4% from the FB deal; (3) signs a deal with Apple to become default on iOS (2/3 of mobile = 5%+) and desktop Safari (4%+). That could potentially put them around the same market share as Google. None of those propositions are crazy either.

jroseattle 15y ago

It's ironic how similar the commentary from Schmidt compared to Gates from the MS investigation. There are plenty of competitors, technology moves quickly, customers can switch...yada yada yada. To this day, I find the chief outcome of the MS anti-trust trial is this: gov't now feels it has the discretion to investigate/disrupt/control any technology firm with decent market size. Looks like Google is going to have to start innovating in the areas of lobbying and campaign contributions.

wslh 15y ago

Just imagine if Microsoft gives a good boost ($$$) to Firefox to be the first search engine in the box?

nathanwdavis 15y ago

I've lost a little respect for Schmidt with this news.