flamewarOn 11/28/2012 5:17 PM, Ram wrote:

I see point in Microsoft’s ad. Do No Evil now is 100% Do Evil by pushing paid customers first. Microsoft ads deride Google as bad place to shop

Don’t get scroogled.com. I like it.

Sent from Windows Mail

Doug Simmons:

Sorry Ram, just tuning in here.. so let’s see, you found a Google Shopping (aka froogle.com) bashing website promoting Bing and you’re all excited. First thing that comes to mind about Bing and screwing is the way they sort of totally ripped off Google Search’s math guys and got caught red handed with definitive proof but let’s move on from that.

I want to see for myself right now how evil — or helpful — Google Shopping is versus Bing. I’ll liveblog it too right here.

I want… I want, … an RC helicopter with camera, and I want the best deal damnit, and I want the best deal aggregation outfit to hook me up, okay, so here goes (let me google Bing Shopping)…

Here’s Google’s results, here’s Bing’s results.

Looking at the Google page, Google’s showing me which heli people tend to buy the most, okay, they’ve also got listings from over fifty stores for some of these choppers, here’s one of those blown up which lets you see that I might be better off with B&H Photo (good store, knew that already) as 29,924 Google Shoppers voted them five stars versus a lower and less popular Fry’s Electronics, good stuff. Google knows where I am so what’s closest, Google breaks down the price by the listed price, tax and shipping.

Let’s see Bing… elegant, got the choppers in a grid formation, got a search narrow-downer thing on the left like Google except less comprehensive, not bad, but what about visitor/shopper feedback, I’ll click the first listing. Hmm only three stores? And what’s this, no feedback?

So on Google I have data (in part because Google is popular) like this shopper feedback stuff, I have a much larger selection of stores from which to choose (and therefore a more efficient market of helicopter sellers fighting for my business), and on Bing I don’t have that, but I have a merry reminder that they, unlike brand X, are trustworthy.

I’m going with Google, Ram. Sorry. Not buying a chopper but I do have some Christmas shopping and most of it will go down right here on Google not Bing and having just seen Bing’s answer to Google Shopping I can add BECAUSE IT DOESN’T CLEARLY SUCK IN COMPARISON to the list of reasons I’ll be using Google Shopping — right next to BECAUSE I HAD UNTIL NOW NO IDEA BING SHOPPING EFFING EXISTED YOU DEE-BAG BUT NOW THAT YOU POINT IT OUT I THINK MAYBE THEY SHOULD SORTA YOU KNOW GIVE THE HECK UP AND LET GOOGLE RUN THE SHOW. You fairy.

But let’s get someone known more for levelheadedness than I am for a verdict about which thing is better: Marti or Jim, could you please settle this, either with the helicopter thing I offered off the top of my head or whatever product you want?

Jim Schneider:

What is with the insults pointed at each other lately in emails?  Shouldn’t this be reserved for trolling forums to see who has the bigger genitals?  Seriously what does that add to anyone’s point.  I know we’re all passionate about our ecosystems but why abuse each other to get a point across?

Colby:

im sure doug is just having fun. right doug? no hard feelings towards anyone? lol.

Matt Anderson:

Because Simmons is Simmons. Throw it right back. He’s a redhead so its not like he has a soul to worry about.
Sent from my Windows Phone

Marti:

M’kay.

Before we start: We’re all Very Passionate about our OS of choice. We’re all friends here, and some leg-pulling is expected, as long as it doesn’t get out of hand.

 

Okay, first consider the source of the article: msn.com. NOT exactly biased. J

Second, Google’s historic stance: Don’t Be Evil, and (shall I say) Fair & Balanced Searching. HOWEVER, Google has also never claimed to be a search, software, or hardware company – they are an advertising company and make absolutely no bones about that.  EVERYTHING they do has that in mind!  Gmail? Data mining about you, to serve you targeted ads. Voicemail? Same. Search engine? Ditto. It really was inevitable that Don’t Be Evil and Fair Searching would be compromised to advertising.

Third: We’re not exactly comparing apples to apples.  If that were the case, we’d be comparing Google search to Bing search. Google Shopping is a pay-for-results subset of Google search. As a consumer, what that tells me is that I’d rather use Google search if I’m looking for all the best deals: the best deal may not be paying Google to appear on Shopping, so why use it? Lame, if you ask me.

 

Okay, I’m going to start with Obscure: Rosencrantz & Gildenstern are Dead on DVD.
Google Shopping: Hmm, never used this so I’m unfamiliar with the UI. So it shows the item, brief abstract, reviews underneath. On the right, as low as $7 from “50+ stores, 25+ nearby stores” (although I’ll bet “nearby” means online as well. Very conspicuously absent from the list of online stores selling this item is Amazon! Although B&N has it for $6.60! Dang, I should tell my folks for Christmas…

Bing: First on the list is Amazon. No surprise here. Then eBay, B&N. Looking at the Amazon link, hey! I can buy it for Prime instant video for $5.99. And evidently they have some affiliated store selling it used for $4.68.  There’s the best deal so far, and I’ll assume that it didn’t show on GS because Amazon didn’t want to pay. (Makes me wonder if this is a selective-item contract, or blanket items, or number of items. Amazon, if they decide to pay for GS would probably only do it for highly popular/in demand items in that case.)  Looking at eBay, eh. Things that look like real copies, things that look like bootlegs, listings for the book.  B&N link took me to the same place as GS.

remotely-funnyGoogle search: Amazon, IMDB, Wikipedia are the first 3.

 

Okay okay, something “popular.” Hmm. I’ll use Wii U.

GS: okay, first 3: 32G in black, 8G in white, system w/Batman Arkham City & Scribblenauts for $350, $300, and $419.97 respectively.  I kind of like that it lists the item, then you drill down to lists of who’s selling it. But in the back of my mind will always be: is this really the best deal?

Bing: First up is an add for scroogled.com LOL. Next News about Wii U, Wikipedia article. So for shopping, maybe not the best.

Google: Nintendo’s site, Best Buy, Target. The links for the items on GS are on the right. Still not the best, but meh.

 

So mixed results? Well, I kind of expect that from the Internet anyway.

Ram:

Matt,

You are right Simmons is basically Simmons. I just want to pull his legs whenever and wherever possible. Just try say something nasty about Google, you will notice his reactions. .

Simmons

Ok, I did read your entire supporting post about Google, boy it is very lengthy and I suggest to whoever is reading to have a relaxed mind before you start reading. I am serious.

Now coming to the point, basically you are saying it is ok as long as you get an RC Helicopter from Google suggested sellers. What if Company A is paying heavy $ to Google to shove their RC Helicopter for say $100, and at the same time a company, which never did business with Google to list their site is selling the same for $80 and they are also present in the cyber world, and you are not aware of it because you are so much into Google? Wouldn’t that be cheating practice by Google to its users? I am not saying consumers, I am saying users. In this case you as a buyer. You want to know why it is cheating. Google is cheating there because, they are taking money from Company A and are not telling you about the existence of Company B at all.  What happened to your beloved lord Page’s mantra, Do No Evil – It is not good practice to take money and adulterate the search results. He only said it would be harming the user’s request, in this case yours? Just asking.

–Ram–

Sent from Windows Mail

Evan aka The Fight:

Nice try Simmons.  You use Google shopping results for one example and DON’T use Bing shopping for the other.  http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=rc+helicopter+with+camera&qpvt=rc+helicopter+with+camera&FORM=HDRSC6
Try one more time.  Better yet, don’t.  I expected the Fox News approach from you and I got it.  Carry on.

Van:

Thanks Evan. That’s a very good response.

Sent from Windows Mail

Doug Simmons:

Evan, sorry, Bing Images came up first, I copied that one, but everything I wrote is true about the Bing shopping link you posted because that’s what I was critiquing. Okay? Copypasta fail on my part. I’m not an expert on copypasta, next time I’ll ask Kristofer or Smith for help.

Google delivers the better product/service for consumers, and this shopping thing is no exception. It’s plain as day, I don’t see much room here for disagreement.

Regarding name calling, Van you break my balls frequently firstly, secondly I do it to just about everyone here except Marti because she’s a lady and Old Man Jimski because he eventually indicated he didn’t appreciate it, and I think he’s a prized asset here and when I go on other Microsoft sites like microsoft-news and see him commenting there it makes me nervous that I could drive him away with another old age joke.

And regarding my getting flired up when someone talks trash about Google, I’m basically surrounded by Microsoft enthusiasts. So sort of like how you proud Microsoft mobile patrons are extraordinarily outnumbered by everyone else, that you’re still “other” in the charts, you people likewise get fired up too.

For example: Molly Wood’s Windows Phone Induces Facepalm’s [sic] across the Tech World by Murani.

By the way Murani, though your instinct was in the right place to put a preposition in lowercase, across gets capitalized as it is of five or more letters. As for the apostrophe in facepalms, leave it in there, sort of adds an ironic touch.

Nancy-boys.

Image credits: Google Images

14 COMMENTS

  1. I’ll have you know, Ram, that a lot of work on my end goes into these MobilityLeaks bits. First I have to identify an email thread of potential, then I need to apply the Simmons fire, then I need to let it run a bit so that I don’t appear to be driving it in one direction or another, then I need to decide when we’ve hit a coda, then I need to determine whether or not it’s too incendiary in some way for Smith to handle, then I need to figure out what to call it (in this case Nancy-Boys was my runner up), then I need to start dumping the email into a more blog-friendly format, sorta half email half chat room, need to filter out certain last names, boldface the names but not the colons (personal touch), ditch the line-crossing profanity and all the political and ethnic humor in which we engage, then I have to comb Google Images for the right array of pictures, if necessary I have to crop the pictures so that they will work on our squarish thumbnail and wide featured article slideshow, then I embed my hotlinked 1×1 blank gif so that I can watch the traffic on my server, then finally when I hit the button I’ve got to go back into the email thread and get you guys to start posting, then Murani responds to the email thread so I have to steer him here and look up in wordpress the email he uses and whether or not he uses his last name on the site so that I can post as him (note that he probably doesn’t use Linux and Swiftfox, woops),…

    Then I load the post and see that all the text is in a light grey, too hard to read, so I have to dig up Smith’s email to me containing my ftp account, figure out which theme is live, figure out which css is responsible for the excessively light grey, then I’ve gotta google some html color code site, pick a better grey, back up the css in case whoever tweaked this theme other than me throws a fit, put the code in, save it, drop it back on the “server” and so forth.

    Then I realize we have two Jims so I’ve got to slap a last name on one and refer to the other as Old Man Jimski when I spoke about not joking about his age too much.

    Tl;dr, I’m awesome and I usually don’t point that out explicitly. And the reason I never ask any of you to dump the MobilityLeaks bits is because there’s no way you can pull it off with the proper finesse.

    Oh, and you notice how your IE10 logo is a little more badass than the white E on the light blue that you used to have (which you had to begin with only because I looked up the official logo and uploaded it to the right spot)? Yeah that was me touching it up for a good fifteen minutes trying to find the right color combo for you people. And I’m not even an IE guy. But I did that.

    • Doug (Simmons). I like the new logo. thanks for doing it. You don’t have to be a particular technology guy to do this. Only thing is interest. I always tell my teams that, they need interest in a thing to achieve that. Good work. :)

Comments are closed.