Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Microsoft Apple

Bing To Become Default iPhone Search? 463

Posted by samzenpus
from the strange-bedfellows dept.
snydeq writes "BusinessWeek reports ongoing talks between Apple and Microsoft to make Bing the default search engine for the iPhone. The discussions reflect an accelerating rivalry between Apple and Google, one that some believe will be the most important rivalry in tech in the years to come. 'Apple and Google know the other is their primary enemy,' says one person familiar with Apple's thinking. 'Microsoft is now a pawn in that battle.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bing To Become Default iPhone Search?

Comments Filter:
  • Big Battle (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:42AM (#30842260) Journal

    Even more than just Apple vs Google fight, this is serious battle between Microsoft and Google. MS has actually made their search engine better than Google (the different categories and combining them together shows this, and it's greatly improved over Live search).

    Immediately when Bing was released Google tried to answer back with its sidebar options. But it never really got where Bing is. And now Bing keeps gaining marketshare faster than ever before [slashdot.org]. It is actually a good product, and actually something MS has left alone from their other marketing efforts (for example, they use flash instead of silverlight, because flash is installed on so many machines, and do not try to promote silverlight on cost of their search engine).

    I hate microsofts business practices as much as the next guy on slashdot, but Bing is something they're actually done really good. Yesterdays news about Bing deleting user data in 6 months [slashdot.org] just shows that bitter battle with Google is getting even better and better. Bing keeps gaining market share every month, faster and faster. Google pulls out from China market. Google CEO says privacy doesn't matter [slashdot.org]. This is something to watch while drinking cola and making some popcorns - two giants fighting to death.

    This shows competition is good. It surely leads to innovations.

    • Re:Big Battle (Score:4, Insightful)

      by kregg (1619907) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:49AM (#30842322)
      the thought of using bing makes me cringe
      • Re:Big Battle (Score:4, Interesting)

        by contrapunctus (907549) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:13AM (#30842528)

        I know what you mean.
        I hate this one person who works for subway (just a nasty personality). The thought of her preparing my food makes me ill.
        I once went in and saw that she was working and walked right out.
        That's how I feel about bing. (she would be microsoft)

      • Re:Big Battle (Score:4, Interesting)

        by DerPflanz (525793) <bart@fr[ ]oft.nl ['ies' in gap]> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @04:06AM (#30843406) Homepage

        the thought of using bing makes me cringe

        What happened to judging products on their merits? Has Microsoft really damaged you so much that whatever they do meets so much resistance that the sheer *thought* of using a product would make you cringe? And on a related note, what should Microsoft do to regain your respect?

        On a social analogy, is a thief always a thief, even when he shows remorse and changed his ways?

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

          by NF6X (725054) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @04:26AM (#30843488) Homepage

          Has Microsoft really damaged you so much that whatever they do meets so much resistance that the sheer *thought* of using a product would make you cringe?

          Yes. I hate everything about their software products. I will not use them unless I have no viable alternative, and I will go out of my way to use not-quite-viable alternatives instead if I have to.

          And on a related note, what should Microsoft do to regain your respect?

          Nothing. My respect is not available to them.

          On a social analogy, is a thief always a thief, even when he shows remorse and changed his ways?

          He may no longer be a thief, but I still won't trust him. There are plenty of other people who have not already demonstrated their untrustworthiness, so I can get by without that former thief just fine.

          • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

            by FreeUser (11483) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @07:31AM (#30844300)

            He may no longer be a thief, but I still won't trust him. There are plenty of other people who have not already demonstrated their untrustworthiness, so I can get by without that former thief just fine.

            Exactly right. As a middle-eastern friend of mine once said: "If someone steals from you, forgive them. But tie up your camel." Or put in more familiar terms: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Microsoft has fooled everyone at least once. Let them do it to you again, and you have only yourself to blame.

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

          by node 3 (115640) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @04:42AM (#30843566)

          On a social analogy, is a thief always a thief, even when he shows remorse and changed his ways?

          The thief will have always done the thieving, regardless of what he does later in life. In order for the thief to regain trust, he'll have to admit to that. Has Microsoft done that?

          Microsoft hasn't "shown remorse and changed their ways". And this is all assuming one accepts the premise that corporations deserve forgiveness or a second chance in the same way a human does. I'm not convinced they do. Not so readily or so easily, at least.

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Nikker (749551) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @04:43AM (#30843574)
          Just because Microsoft might actually get off their collective asses for once in their lives doesn't get them a cookie in my book. You are talking about a multi billion dollar corporation that has done nothing but hinder an entire industry. There will always be competition where large sums of money are involved and Microsoft while being an extremely 'innovative' and cunning business wise they have coasted happily when it has become the path of least resistance product wise. The entanglement of these three massive companies so directly will evolve some amazing solutions across the board but thanking Microsoft for getting up for Google after they were pissing on their lawn doesn't get them any more from me then before. Microsoft is like a world heavy weight boxing champion that won't get off their chair to dance in the ring, sure they win but they put on a really shitty event. Now Google comes along and they finally have to get off the chair to connect a punch and we all become enthralled but we are supposed to thank a boxer for boxing? I don't think so.
          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by liquiddark (719647)
            What entire industry has Microsoft hindered, exactly? The IT industry, where they've delivered software and service as a package deal at a level that has made them ubiquitous based on their merits? The software development industry that uses COM and descendants (and DDE before it, even) to implement technologies in self-organizing ways that are occasionally just shy of magical? The tech industry in general, where Microsoft has often driven innovation through both positive (advanced APIs to cover difficul
        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

          by pydev (1683904) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @05:11AM (#30843684)

          What happened to judging products on their merits? Has Microsoft really damaged you so much that whatever they do meets so much resistance that the sheer *thought* of using a product would make you cringe?

          Every single product I have ever bought from Microsoft has sucked to some degree (some more than others), so, yes, I do cringe.

          I gave Bing a serious try since I don't like all my data going to Google. And? Same thing as with other Microsoft products: it sounds good in theory, it has lots of features, but it doesn't do its primary function very well.

          See, people hate Microsoft not because of business strategy, they hate Microsoft because they don't like their products and Microsoft is using business strategy to force them to use those products anyway.

          I dislike Microsoft a lot less since their monopoly has started crumbling and I don't have to use them anymore.

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Informative)

          by EzInKy (115248) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @05:55AM (#30843890)


          What happened to judging products on their merits?

          It is quite common to judge products based on the manufacturer's reputation.


          Has Microsoft really damaged you so much that whatever they do meets so much resistance that the sheer *thought* of using a product would make you cringe?

          Absolutely, and their EULAs are even worse today.


          And on a related note, what should Microsoft do to regain your respect?

          Honestly it would take quite a lot, but acknowledging that using software has no greater relationship to copying than using a book does would be a good start.


          On a social analogy, is a thief always a thief, even when he shows remorse and changed his ways?

          Once a whore always a whore is probably the better analogy, particularly considering who Microsoft is in bed with. They make it well known that they continue play for sure.

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

          by BasilBrush (643681) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @07:05AM (#30844212)

          What happened to judging products on their merits? Has Microsoft really damaged you so much that whatever they do meets so much resistance that the sheer *thought* of using a product would make you cringe?

          I'm not the original poster, but for me, yes. It absolutely does matter what relationship I have with the company I buy products from. And I won't buy anything from Microsoft.

          And on a related note, what should Microsoft do to regain your respect?

          25 years into their dirty habits, they are beyond redemption. Hopefully they'll take a gradual fade into oblivion.

        • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Bert64 (520050) <bertNO@SPAMslashdot.firenzee.com> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @09:07AM (#30844780) Homepage

          Yes...
          Microsoft have done a huge amount of damage to their customers and the industry as a whole...

          They have stifled innovation for years (for an example see IE6 - allowed to totally stagnate once it had a dominant marketshare, only updated again once its share was threatened several years later).
          They have locked thousands of individuals and businesses into their products, removing those peoples freedom to choose the best product for the job. Even worse is that the lockin extends to those who aren't their customers, it's common to send proprietary microsoft format files around and people are expected to open them.

          In many markets we are unable to judge products in their merits precisely because of microsoft. A competing product may be cheaper (or free), do everything you need better, but lacks compatibility with some proprietary microsoft technology therefore ruling it out.

          To regain any level of respect, they need to undo all of the underhanded anti-consumer actions they have taken, and start competing purely based on the merits of their products in all the markets they operate in.

          As it stands, although they may be trying to compete on merit right now, history has shown that once they gain sufficient market share they revert to their usual underhanded practices of locking people in and allowing the product to stagnate and/or using one product to forcibly push another. Don't forget all the "embrace, extend, extinguish" stuff from a few years back...

          To give an example, the vast majority of MS products are tied to windows (forcibly pushing)..
          By contrast, google simply promote their products, if you use their sites from some non-chrome browsers you will see advertisements for chrome, but the sites will not refuse to work in other browsers and aren't tied to chrome-os etc... This is promotion as opposed to forcibly pushing.

          So that's what MS can do, give us the ability to judge all their products on merit and we will be more likely to judge them all that way.

          • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Insightful)

            by IICV (652597) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @11:27AM (#30846302)

            They have stifled innovation for years (for an example see IE6 - allowed to totally stagnate once it had a dominant marketshare, only updated again once its share was threatened several years later).

            This is what's really insidious about Bing. What happens if Microsoft wins the current search engine wars, like they did the browser wars or the operating system wars? Will they keep on innovating, or will search stagnate for a decade?

            Whenever Microsoft wins, everyone else loses.

        • by Lorien_the_first_one (1178397) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @10:13AM (#30845314)
          To put this post in context, check out this video to see what I mean: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YExl9ojclo [youtube.com]

          In Microsoft's fantasy world, everyone uses Windows, Microsoft development tools and there is no competition. What could they do to regain my respect? Stop lying about their competition (especially Linux), drop their patents and lawsuit threats, embrace and support open standards without extending them with proprietary lock-in. Put customers first before the egos of executives and shareholders. Quit trying to embrace, extend and extinguish FOSS.

          Oh, and they could try making better software instead of spin.

          I know. They have a business model they are trying to support, and shareholders to satisfy. But their all-encompassing, over-arching, take-no-prisoners attitude has gotta go.
    • by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:50AM (#30842330)

      I like competition as much as the next guy.

      However, I am really suspicious of Bing's marketshare numbers. Has no-one else noticed that many of those demonic hoverover underline word links pull up Bing now? How much of the increase is because people lingered a little too long over a word on a web page?

      Furthermore, anything with a small marketshare can easily post impressive percentage gains quickly...

      Bing's results are as you say pretty decent, however I really don't like the super-heavy home page with the ginormous image. It's cool once but I just can't have that for a page I pull up so often... even if cached, the image is just too annoying over time. Goolge has the simplicity aspect right.

      • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:52AM (#30842350) Journal

        I never see either Bing's or Google's homepage. I just search using my browsers search bar. Actually I was surprised to see Google's fade-in homepage manually after friend told about it.

        • by derGoldstein (1494129) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @02:32AM (#30842978) Homepage
          Ditto. Whenever I hear (usually reported somewhere) that google is pushing something, or they've added new features/options, I'm surprised even though I used it almost exclusively. This goes for youtube and google news as well. They'll occasionally throw something on one of the front pages, even though most users that are even moderately experienced will dispense with those entry/landing pages as soon as they figure out how. The same goes for Wikipedia -- if I want to find something, I'll just prefix the search term with "wikipedia", I won't actually go to wikipedia.org. I didn't know where *was* a beta interface until someone mentioned it to me (though to be fair, there's a small "try beta" link on every wikipedia page now).
      • by jhol13 (1087781) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:08AM (#30842480)

        Goolge has the simplicity aspect right.

        I *really* hate Google for destroying the right-click copy-link-location. Maybe I'll change to Bing, it does not do that.

        • by sopssa (1498795) *

          Goolge has the simplicity aspect right.

          I *really* hate Google for destroying the right-click copy-link-location. Maybe I'll change to Bing, it does not do that.

          This is because they want the data on which result you click. What, you though they didn't do that? When you're clicking any Google link, theres subsequent javascript request being sent to Google on what link you clicked. Completely invisible for user, but good data for Google.

          • by derGoldstein (1494129) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @02:40AM (#30843032) Homepage
            Have you looked over the hacks that Google Analytics uses? You think that click tracking is an issue? They make the browser effectively "watch you back" with that stuff. If you go over the source, you'll see a nice sliding scale of technology: The first options are always basic HTML, often with deprecated tags, for old/slow machines. As you progress upwards, more and more layers of interface interaction are added, along with huge amounts of data collection. After browsing through enough of their page sources, I'm starting to think that the privacy nuts aren't as nuts as I used to think.
            If you want to try this yourself, download Firebug, and add a bunch of monitoring add-ons to it. You'll be amazed at how "chatty" google pages are.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by denmarkw00t (892627)

            I started noticing this as I link my friends to things quite often, and its annoying. So, what do you do? Double-click the plain-text URL under the result, Ctrl+C and Ctrl+P - ta da! And if I'm not sharing links, I'm using Google to go to Wikipedia or look up code references. I certainly don't go to or xxxxxxxx.xxx from Google, I know those URLs by heart.

            As much as I don't care for their data mining business, I don't care who knows that I'm fervently trying to find that Gizmodo article I read five days ago

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by bjourne (1034822)
              If you are talking about the green address line, then that is more often than not truncated in some way. The only (simple, non-technical) way to get the address is to click the link, let the page load and copy the url from the address bar.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by nmg196 (184961)

            > When you're clicking any Google link, theres subsequent javascript request being sent to Google on what link you clicked

            Nope. That's not even possible. Once you've gone to another site, no javascript events on the original site can fire. It's not even physically possible. Don't make stuff up please. They could do it using the Google Toolbar, but not using javascript. The closes thing they do is to use a 302 http header redirect, but again, that's got nothing to do with javascript.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by linumax (910946)
          This concern was also raised here [slashdot.org]. The behavior appears to be browser dependent. I get the proper URL in clipboard using Chrome/Safari/Opera but the modified Google URL using Firefox.
          • by Em Ellel (523581)

            This concern was also raised here [slashdot.org]. The behavior appears to be browser dependent. I get the proper URL in clipboard using Chrome/Safari/Opera but the modified Google URL using Firefox.

            Sounds like maybe it was either a temporary issue or FUD. Works fine for me on FF. Or maybe original reporter have some ad-ware on their machine.

            -Em

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by hairyfeet (841228)

              Well to add my exp I have just tried it using Firefox on both WinXP and Windows 7 HP x64, and both seem to be working fine. The only search where I noted the supposed behavior was when I did some Google shopping for Zoom Bass Pedals [google.com] (my old one is just about had it and I love their fat compression) and that is to be expected since it IS Google shopping.

              I tried the same shopping search on Yahoo and found the same redirect behavior [yahoo.com]. So maybe the person was shopping via Google? Because I just couldn't get t

        • Blame Firefox (Score:2, Informative)

          by SuperKendall (25149)

          I *really* hate Google for destroying the right-click copy-link-location. Maybe I'll change to Bing, it does not do that.

          Google didn't do that. Pretty much any browser except for Firefox copies the REAL link just fine.

          Firefox instead tries to go the extra mile by looking at the href, noticing there's an onclck(), and following that to figure out what URL will be called when you, well, click. So it copies some URL you are never meant to see, much less copy. The fact is that Firefox is NOT copying the visi

          • Re:Blame Firefox (Score:5, Informative)

            by causality (777677) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @02:13AM (#30842898)

            The fact is that Firefox is NOT copying the visible text, and I don't think it's fair to blame that on Google.

            Have you used Firefox? It has two options: one is "Copy" which copies the visible text; the other is "Copy Link Location" which places the URL in the clipboard. In this case, Firefox is not copying the visible text because the user is not telling it to do that.

            • Re:Blame Firefox (Score:5, Informative)

              by shutdown -p now (807394) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @03:40AM (#30843278) Journal

              Have you used Firefox? It has two options: one is "Copy" which copies the visible text; the other is "Copy Link Location" which places the URL in the clipboard. In this case, Firefox is not copying the visible text because the user is not telling it to do that.

              You still misunderstand. For Google result pages, the href attribute of the links is actually the original URL (which can be trivially checked by looking at the source HTML). However, the page also has some JavaScript which intercepts clicked links, and redirects you via Google so that they detect the click. The problem with Firefox is that its "Copy Link Location" command does not copy the value in a/@href (as all other browsers do it), but tries to be smart, looks for said associated script, and sees where it will forward you to.

          • by KiloByte (825081)

            So Firefox is the only one not vulnerable to false links. It tells you where the link actually leads instead of where it claims to.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by xigxag (167441)

            I think it is fair to blame it on Google. Look at the status bar. Hovering over the link shows the actual link. But as soon as you press right-click, regardless of whether you actually copy anything, the link changes to a referrer. If I had to guess, I'd say it was done as part of the collaboration between Google and Firefox. Firefox is paid for by Google, and so this is simply another way for the browser to make itself valuable to its benefactor.

        • by Em Ellel (523581)

          I *really* hate Google for destroying the right-click copy-link-location. Maybe I'll change to Bing, it does not do that.

          Erm, ok, I'll bite - how so? I have no problems doing "copy link location" on Google or for that matter on Bing. If you are on a Mac, you might have to hold one of the keyboard modifier buttons to "right click" - but that's hardly Google's fault.

          -Em

        • by AuMatar (183847)

          What are you talking about? It may be my browser, but seamonkey has a copy link location, and it doesn't do anything different from any other website.

        • by TeXMaster (593524)

          Goolge has the simplicity aspect right.

          I *really* hate Google for destroying the right-click copy-link-location. Maybe I'll change to Bing, it does not do that.

          What's that? right-click copy-link-address works perfectly for me on Google search links in Opera

      • by LoverOfJoy (820058) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:09AM (#30842498) Homepage
        Another factor could be Club Bing [clubbing.com]. They allow you to earn prizes by playing their games. The games? They are games that do searches on bing.com. So for instance, every word you enter into a crossword puzzle gets a search on bing. If you click for a clue, it does another search. One game easily makes 45 searches or more even if you don't use any hints. Because of the prizes, people are always finding ways to set up bots on multiple accounts to try to get more and more points. Even if Microsoft catches them and invalidates their points, I imagine the searches done still count toward how often Bing is used. It doesn't matter that no one bothers to look at the search results (except briefly if they need a clue).
      • by lorenlal (164133) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:17AM (#30842546)

        The other thing that bothers me about the marketshare numbers is that Microsoft is working the Bing advertising to a point where I can't avoid seeing it. I also notice that somehow Bing seems to be popping up in places that I didn't even think they could. [weather.com] Notice what's powering the map on that page?

        Add in the $500 Bing agreement with Verizon. [slashdot.org]

        Add in the fact that Bing is really doing well taking share from their partner. [tomshardware.com]

        To me, it boils down to this: I don't trust many people.

        I hardly trust Google, but I have yet to see them engage in practices where they abuse their market share. Please correct me if I've missed something.

        I know what Microsoft does when they dominate market share... And right now, this product is gaining market share because MS is pouring money into it at a pace that they can't intend on maintaining. I don't know what their plan is, but I have a feeling that this one's not following the "embrace" part of their normal business model. I can't wait to see what they do once Bing closes in on 30% (assuming it keeps gaining). My guess is that they'll find a way to blend it with the desktop OS, and "integrate" it with the desktop search. I'm also sure that desktop search will extend to the general web.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I like competition as much as the next guy.

        Hi, I'm the next guy.

        Competition is generally good, but in this business there's not enough of it to make it all that great.

        Microsoft sucks. Security has always been a problem, but the thing about them that bugs me the most is that I can't but a nice (17") laptop without also buying a license for an OS I'm not even going to use.

        Apple sucks. I could go on and on about how much they suck, but I'll be brief. The worst thing about them is that they get away with more crap than Microsoft, thanks to their slic

    • What makes Google special isn't just its web search, it's the total value proposition. That little series of links across the top of the page. I can type a phrase and search the web. If that doesn't turn up what I want, I can just click "Images." Then "News." Then "Scholar." Then "Maps." I can search in a variety of well-sandboxed, semantically contextualized datasets for the same phrase, rapidly, without re-typing it, and at a single source.

      Beyond just searching, I have a single iPhone app (Google) that le

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by jim_v2000 (818799)
        >That little series of links across the top of the page.

        Bing has those.

        >lets me manage documents, my email, and my searching all with a single interface

        If you log into Bing, you also log into Windows Live, which gives you access to Email, Calendars, your 25GB SkyDrive, and (coming soon) online office apps. As far as being able to do those from the iPhone...I would expect to see that soon, if not already. There is a Bing app, but I don't know exactly what it does.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Totenglocke (1291680)

      MS has actually made their search engine better than Google

      ........really? You're the first person I've seen who likes Bing. Anytime I've used it, instead of actual useful links that I get with Google, I mainly get stupid ads for MS products instead.

      • by TheLink (130905)
        I don't like Bing that much, but it'll be no surprise to me if Bing provides better search results than Google.

        This is because lots of SEO spammers are targeting Google. If Bing and Google use different algorithms and they start having similar marketshare that might make it harder for the spammers. Anything that results in less spam in my results is good for me.
    • Re:Big Battle (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Darkness404 (1287218) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:16AM (#30842544)

      MS has actually made their search engine better than Google (the different categories and combining them together shows this, and it's greatly improved over Live search).

      Citation needed. Live search was crap, being better than crap doesn't make something great. And I've compared the search results, 80% of the time I prefer Google's results (there was this site that compared Bing/Google/Yahoo and had you pick your favorite and then told you what it was, don't know the URL at the time)

      And now Bing keeps gaining marketshare faster than ever before.

      And I would imagine that most of that growth is caused by people using the default IE search option which uses Bing.

      It is actually a good product,

      Again, Citation needed. Is there really anything that Bing does better than Google for the general user?

      and actually something MS has left alone from their other marketing efforts (for example, they use flash instead of silverlight, because flash is installed on so many machines, and do not try to promote silverlight on cost of their search engine).

      Isn't that how -all- Microsoft's products start? First as nice, good projects with open standards, etc. Then they release that one program that breaks the standard and suddenly that becomes the new standard and then close it off to non-MS products.

      Google pulls out from China market.

      Um, not exactly sure what you meant by this statement, but assuming its anti-Google, I don't really see your point. Basically Google said that they are sick of being the pawns of the Chinese government which is a -good thing-, I really don't think Microsoft would have the guts to say that.

      This shows competition is good. It surely leads to innovations.

      Competition is good, but corrupt competition is not. Both Microsoft and Google use software patents to discourage competition, both don't care about privacy, and both are willing to be tossed along and won't fight for their user's rights.

    • Flash vs Silverlight: don't worry, as soon as they feel the have enough traction, they'll do just that. I wouldn't know about the rest of you comment, I've yet to try Bing. It's good news if it's both a good and an ethical Search engine.

      The one thing that puzzles me: why doesn't Apple go their own way ? On the purely Search part, they have the money, and probably the know-how, to do it. On the linked advertising part, they may pull that off too. Or buy into either of both businesses.

      If I were them I would c

    • Re:Big Battle (Score:4, Insightful)

      by iVtec (1726212) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @02:39AM (#30843030)
      A 3% marketshare for Bing is hardly anything to get excited about. Bing is seriously terrible compared to Google. Try any other language than english and you're fucked.

      Also, Microsoft is terrible at privacy compared to Google. You may be too young to remember Google fighting off a subpoena to hand over user information, while Yahoo and Microsoft caved:

      http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39248192,00.htm [zdnet.co.uk]
      http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2006/01/19 [eff.org]

      Also, where was microsoft when Google was making a stand in China? Yup, nowhere...

      Lastly, you mention that microsoft is deleting user data within 6 months as if it's a policy used today. If you read their own announcement, what they're saying is that they'll remove IP addresses from queries after 6 months and remaining cross-session IDs after 18 months. But they plan to implement this policy a year to a year and a half from now!

      http://microsoftontheissues.com/cs/blogs/mscorp/archive/2010/01/19/microsoft-advances-search-privacy-with-bing.aspx [microsoftontheissues.com]
    • by oztiks (921504)

      Google maybe a good search tool but they are not a serious IT brand the Chinese Hacker incident is perfect example of this and why Google cloud services cant be a replacement over Office just yet (maybe one day but not today).

      Security, Google dunces out on, Marketing, Google suffers, creating apps that work for business Google still has a long way to go. Sorry if I'm being a bit one eyed on my last point, i purchased Google Docs the other day and was less than impressed.

      For me, unless Google employs Darth V

    • by Vicegrip (82853)
      I fail to see how pulling out of China counts as a boost to competition. Unless you think that Microsoft is rubbing its hands with glee at the opportunity replace Google there and kiss the censors asses in the hope to win market-share over Google. I search extensively all day long for my work and Google is my preference by far. Your reasoning that bing is better than Google is subjective and makes you sound very biased.
  • With apologies to a poster on one of the rumor sites, Bing is not a search engine, it is a decision engine.

    But in all seriousness, the only reason why Apple would even consider doing this, is if Google already abandoned them elsewhere, and there are no signs of that.
    I'm pretty positive that Steve hates Microsoft, what it stands for, and the way it does its business. Pretty much like many Linux folks do.
    If he should allow for this, I'll eat my shorts. (Figuratively!)

    • by bloodhawk (813939)
      Google are agressively trying to take Apples market, I am pretty sure Steve Hates losing money more than he hates Microsoft, At least his shareholders better hope so.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by derGoldstein (1494129)
        Before the Android/Schmidt/NexusOne business, Jobs would probably hate having an MS logo anywhere on the iPhone far more than losing some cash to Google. Now though, it's like you said -- they're seriously being aggressive about pretty much everything that Apple was aiming for from the moment they released the iPhone. Things like Chrome OS seem like vaporware now, but if some new netbook/tablet form factor takes off, Google is ready with their code. Their different "vectors of attack" include both MS *and*
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Lemmy Caution (8378)

      Microsoft saved Apple. [wired.com] Microsoft kept Apple viable in the workplace by continuing to release Office for Mac (indeed, Office on a Mac is much nicer than Office on a PC.) Apple produces great hardware to run Microsoft software, even their OS, on. And while Jobs is an avid competitor, I seriously doubt that the has any animus for Microsoft.

      Google, on the other hand, is threatening Apple in its biggest growth market: mobile devices. Google offers an alternate ecosystem to Apple, to .Mac and now iDisk. Google is

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Tibor the Hun (143056)

        good insight

      • I know corporations are essentially people, but I didn't know that they had feelings.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Lemmy Caution (8378)

          OK, that's a fair dig, especially because I'm criticizing that idea implicitly at the beginning. But it wouldn't be a stretch to say that the senior management of Apple might be cheesed at Google...

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Apple was not *SAVED* by Microsoft. Apple still had cash in the bank. The $150 million investment in non-voting stock and other agreements such as Office for 5 years where part of a very serious IP theft and patent suit Apple had against Microsoft related to Video for Windows. Steve turned it into an opportunity to get some positive press for Apple by spinning the settlement into a "vote of confidence" from Microsoft and Bill Gates.

        Google is pissing me off with the wild encroaching into all sectors (not

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by indiechild (541156)

        I think the whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. Of course Apple is going to negotiate with Google and Microsoft. They want to get a better deal, as John Gruber puts it:
        http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_google_bing_search [daringfireball.net]

    • by westlake (615356) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:38AM (#30842688)

      I'm pretty positive that Steve hates Microsoft, what it stands for, and the way it does its business. Pretty much like many Linux folks do

      Apple and Microsoft have had a mutually profitable - symbiotic - relationship for thirty years.

      Apple sells an upscale urban lifestyle.

      Microsoft solid middle class value.

      Both have a very clear notion of how to profitably leverage the other's platform. Windows gets iTunes. The Mac gets MS Office.

      Hate makes good theater - but rarely good business - and the geek needs to remember when he is watching a show.

    • But in all seriousness, the only reason why Apple would even consider doing this, is if Google already abandoned them elsewhere

      I'd have thought the only reason Apple would consider this is if Microsoft were offering them more money than Google. Assuming Bing is a suitably competent alternative Apple would be insane not to consider it as an option. Similarly Google would be insane to pin all their mobile hopes on Apple's platform.

      I think anyone trying to make this into some drama is missing the fact that

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by prockcore (543967)

      I'm pretty positive that Steve hates Microsoft

      Yes, but he absolutely *hates* Eric Schmidt. He hates how much the iPhone is beholden to Google. Notice how Google has basically been prevented from making iPhone apps now. Why would Apple kill Google Latitude, yet allow Loopt (even use Loopt in their advertising)? Of course we now know that Apple killed Google Voice, not AT&T.

      Google Goggles, Google Navigation, even Google Sky Map... all droid-only, and I doubt it's because of Google. The only thing com

  • by stimpleton (732392) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:53AM (#30842352)
    As the old saying goes...Adversity makes strange bed fellows.
  • by Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @12:57AM (#30842386)

    "Apple is also working on ways to manage ad placement on its mobile devices"

    What the hell is that line about. Apple better not be spamming the fuck out fo me when i'm paying for their fucking devices and software AND cell service.

    FUCK YOU APPLE.. Dont even try it.

  • It showed up after a software update, and for some reason doesn't have an entry in the Applications menu (where I can easily remove Google and other 3rd party apps if I want).

    What is really interesting about Bing on the Blackberry anyway if I accidently select it it (after a long time) loads a screen asking me if I agree to the EULA. I click the "I do not agree" button.

    It loads anyway.

    It's like a shoe that fits so tightly that I can't get it off my foot (maybe that was what Jerry was talking to Bill

  • by RevWaldo (1186281) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:07AM (#30842474)
    Apple and Microsoft working together - mass hysteria!
  • by WindBourne (631190) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:10AM (#30842504) Journal
    Apple should realize that once MS comes on strong with Bing in this space, that they will use it on their phone. The issue here is that MS is composed of total idiots, HOWEVER, they like to throw money and their already established monopolies at other ones. As such, MS will go after Apple's iphone. And they will slowly eat away at them. OTH, if Apple either works with a different company, or even with Google, they will still remain the leader.
    • Excuse me, but I think that you are misreading this. The more likely scenario is that Microsoft is enlisting Apple's help in its battle against everything Google. Apple has been a niche market player for most of its existence and it wasn't until relatively recently, with the development of the iPod and later the iPhone, that Apple captured a franchise position in a new market (namely mobile audio and video distribution). Google, on the other hand, is the biggest threat that Microsoft has faced since its fou
  • No, no, not what you think, more like "Who're we dealing with today"

    You know, like Where do you want to go today. Really.

    P.S. And not because of the earlier item re MS siding with AT&T vs. Tivo.

  • by NoPantsJim (1149003) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @01:37AM (#30842680) Homepage
    Sure. The corporation with the $271.6 billion market cap is the pawn in the battle between two corps with market caps around $190 billion. That makes sense.
  • Whether or not the two companies are talking isn't really as relevant as who it was that brought up the possibility. Did Apple approach MS (in which case it's all but assured to happen) or did MS approach Apple as a potential vehicle for marketing Bing to people? Semantics, maybe, but the origin of the push will make a big difference to the outcome of any talks.

  • This rumor is correct in a way, but is missing crucial details. The iPhone's search will be powered by a Bing... but it will be Bing Crosby.
    • by Itninja (937614)
      But in time that engine will become obsolete and then it will be powered by Denise Crosby. But we all know how that will end: less than a year and the engine will demand a more prominent role and probably just up and quite altogether. Only to come crawling back a few years after that to play it's own hybrid offspring from another time-line. Bitch.
  • by Fished (574624) <amphigory@gmaCOMMAil.com minus punct> on Thursday January 21, 2010 @02:28AM (#30842968)
    1. First, they ignored us.
    2. Then, we declared war on them.
    3. Then, they ignored us.
    4. Then, we took the webservers. And they kind of noticed us.
    5. Then, they ignored us.
    6. Then, we took the netbooks. And they really started noticing us.
    7. Then, they ignored us.
    8. Then, we took the mobile phones. And they started to worry.
    9. Then, we ignored them. And they stopped ignoring us. Kind of.
    10. Then, came the next big thing. And it didn't say, "Microsoft," but came from Google or Apple.
    11. Then, we ignored them completely. And it ran Android and OSX/FreeBSD.
    12. And then, we won.
  • calling bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @03:26AM (#30843208) Homepage Journal

    I'm calling bullshit on this one.

    Apple goes for "sexy" in everything it does. Tell me where Bing is sexy? It has no appeal whatsoever to anyone I know. Heck, 80% of the people I know probably don't even know what the heck it is and would guess it's a new clothes shop or something.

    I also think Apple got into bed with MS once and still feels somewhat sorry about it. After initial great support (IE on Mac is said to have been far better than the windos version) MS did to them what they do to everyone: Let them hang. I doubt that brings them much love from Apple.

  • by Solandri (704621) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @06:06AM (#30843928)
    Some past companies who partnered with Microsoft (or tried to):

    IBM [wikipedia.org]
    Spyglass [wikipedia.org]
    Stac Electronics [wikipedia.org]
    Sun [wikipedia.org]
    Sendo [wikipedia.org]
    OpenDocument [wikipedia.org]

    Good luck, Apple!
  • Bias in results (Score:3, Insightful)

    by polyp2000 (444682) on Thursday January 21, 2010 @06:43AM (#30844106) Homepage Journal

    Search
    "switching to ubuntu" on bing ,
    and then try Google.

    Googles first result is "switching to ubuntu from windows"
    Bings first result is "switching to ubuntu from OSX"

You scratch my tape, and I'll scratch yours.

Working...