...is that users are still scanning Web pages in the F-shaped pattern already well-known in the design/usability community. There's just a small difference in what Bing and Google place under that F-shaped area.

> The news will likely please Microsoft, who's done what Microsoft does best

Uhh, wait until another company develops an excellent product, create a poorly designed copy, start the huge marketing engine, and claim it's a new innovative product?

Hyper-V > VMWare ESX

Defrag > Norton

IE > Mosaic

.. the list goes on

I can't wait for the predictable media hype, it's going to be so much fun i might just sleep through it

Bing is working quite well for me.....I haven't searched for something there that it couldn't find.

So what the article is really saying is that Bing's adverts are more annoying as you can see them more easily?

you turned off 'safe search'

pray tell why?

That's exactly what I thought too mate.

If you've seen Google results a hundred times, you know which parts are advertising and related search nonsense. You also know that you can ignore them.

If you've never seen Bing before then you don't know where to look on screen. You might even be interested to see what the related searches are (the first few times at least).

That would explain the results perfectly.

M$ continues to be blind to languages like Esperanto, Google on the other hand provides full support... http://www.google.co.uk/advanced_search?hl=eo

Paris, ĉar ŝi uuuuuumas ĉiulingve.

Mine's the one with cynic on the breast pocket, and pedant on the rear.

"Does little for the user but lots for MS' paying freinds."

Did you mean : fiends?

jesus, what a boring bloody job....oh and pointless research as bingo is new so people will tend to look around more on the page.....

next..

I Binged "What is bing" on Sunday. It told me Bing was a crooner, it told be Bing was a production company, it told me Bing was an organisation representing the polyurethane industry and that Bing was part of Bada Bing in Wikipedia.

Google started to answer my question within 2 results. Not sure what it proves other than Bing is Not Google

Yes, but can it find "your arse" *without* using "both hands"?

The only suprising here is that it didn't need "a map" as well.........

yep I was gonna say that.

eesh that titles all a twitter..

It doesn't matter whether Bing is better than Google or whatever, the only purpose for this research is to advertise User Centric's services. Notice that they tested a whopping total of 21 people [just enough to come up with a headline-grabbing conclusion]

..surely this is more to do with people knowing the layout of Google and knowing where to look for what they want?

I can tell you my eyes lingered for a few more seconds on Live Se...bing, because it's new.

Won't be going back though..

lol I betcha these guys are kicking themselves

http://web.archive.org/web/20040828134017/http://www.bing.com/

Since I try to avoid looking at advertisements, which I consider as the first step to brainwashing and mind control.

When by chance I see an ad which does interest me, I google the product rather than clicking on the link. I do not want them to know their ad was effective :-P

Yup. My first thought too.

Google is very familiar, you know what's there and where to find it. Bing is new.

If this research had any validity the obvious answer would be to constantly randomize the layout of your search results page, so that users had to scan the entire page to find things.

However, I'm not expecting Microsoft to embrace this conclusion half as much as this half-assed interpretation that Bing is 'better'.

Been playing with Bing for about a week and it seems to both return results faster and do a lot better at phrases than Google. I'm one of those fluff-headed twits that can't remember song titles or artists, but can often remember the hook or chorus, and Bing just finds the songs every time whilst Google fails. So, if M$ can find a load of fluff-headed song chasers that also have lots of money to spend on clickable ads.....