Comments on: Google and Bing trade blows on ‘copying’ saga http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2011/02/02/google-and-bing-trade-blows-on-copying-saga/ Where media and technology meet Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:48:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: somewhere1234 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2011/02/02/google-and-bing-trade-blows-on-copying-saga/#comment-386565 Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:25:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=24333#comment-386565 @Ian_Kemmish
“Bing would have had to return the decoy result the very first time it saw the search term.”

Really? I’m a web developer and my experience with Search Engines, is that it generally takes a few weeks for the pages they crawl to end up in user-end searches. I would expect that it would also take a few weeks for information it took from Google search to have an effect on user results.

]]>
By: Ian_Kemmish http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2011/02/02/google-and-bing-trade-blows-on-copying-saga/#comment-386559 Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:14:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=24333#comment-386559 Sadly, the “scientific experiment” is not scientific. The phrase “after a couple of weeks” strongly implies that the first time they typed the search term into Bing they got no results whatever. So Bing had already been exposed to the search term by the time the decoy result got returned. In order to support Google’s hypothesis, Bing would have had to return the decoy result the very first time it saw the search term.

While it may be questionable practice for a search engine to “sub contract” a search term which is repeatedly entered in a short period of time and which returns no results, this is not what Google is alleging, yet it’s not ruled out by the experiment.

]]>