[CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

Tony, I tried your suggestion, one percent own wealth Google said: No results found for one percent own wealth., Results for one percent own wealth (without quotes): Then all ten hits on the page were germane. - Bing said: We did not find any results for one

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

I never use bing, but I couldn't resist on this one. I searched for one percent own wealth and all of the first 15 links given were germane. All of them. http://www.bing.com/search?q=one+percent+own+wealthgo=form=QBLHqs=n Perhaps we need to start a site 'let me bing that for you' since some

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

On Aug 1, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Alvin Auerbach wrote: Bing had NO meaningful results! Did it not say... Other resources that may help you: Google That would be a terrible oversight. * ** List info, subscription

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

Google said: No results found for one percent own wealth., Results for one percent own wealth (without quotes): Then all ten hits on the page were germane. - Bing said: We did not find any results for one percent own wealth. Your search shouldn't have been

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

Tony did not suggest: one percent own wealth. He suggested: one percent own wealth. So that's what I used as a search term. Note that Google, on its own, tried the search without the quotes when it didn't get results with the quotes, whereas Bing did not do that, or even suggest that.

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

But that doesn't change the fact that the original search was incorrect... The test is not to see which person can parse his search in the most efficient manner for the search engine. The test is to see which search engine can respond in the most efficient manner for the person, even if

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

Well, we all knew today's searches are personalized, didn't we? Long gone are the days of one index with an identical set of results for all of us. I thought it would go without saying you wouldn't include the quotes. :) Agreed the engine should have known to try it with and without quotes. A

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

The test is not to see which person can parse his search in the most efficient manner for the search engine. Well, I don't think the decision to quote or not relates to phrasing a search in the most efficient manner for the search engine. This is some pretty basic stuff; it's not some arcane

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

On Aug 1, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Alvin Auerbach wrote: The first person reports back, Yes, they have onions. The second person reports back, Yes, they have onions, and they're $1.00 a pound; and they have 5 lb. bags for $4.00. Bing's advertising implies that Bing comes back with a delicious

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

Quoting Alvin Auerbach alvin.auerb...@verizon.net: Tony, I tried your suggestion, one percent own wealth Tried the original search on Yahoo! It *suggested* these as search terms: top 1% own 1% ownership richest 1% own top 1% own 90% 1% owns Now if you go with the original, you get useless

Re: [CGUYS] Tony's Search [Was Google: 2nd hit. Bing: Not in 100 hits}

On Aug 1, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Reid Katan wrote: Gotta go with Tony on this one. It's not a good search term. Or as M$ would say... 00x2351000 rg=A601749071084-2 vq=h609124650458-12 za=73q4r98072186 qw=5123451564415 Press CTRL-ALT-DEL to continue...