First thing I did as a good SEO nerd/startup CEO was to see how Bing treated http://www.dawdle.com - and I have to say I'm mildly impressed, but disappointed overall.
On the plus side for Bing, the hover-over shows the information we want the user to see, and manages to highlight our five most popular platforms. (Not the first five in our header, which is very impressive.) Google doesn't do the site links for us, even though we've obeyed their best practices. This is good for Bing.
But Bing doesn't do as well with restrictive searches - for example, Google does significantly better than Bing for a search on [dawdle.com] - Bing strips out the .com and treats it very similarly to a search on [dawdle], i.e. treating it as a dictionary term. The [dawdle.com] search on Google brings up a number of news/blog articles about the site.
Also, Bing utterly fails on e-commerce searching, even though they bought Jellyfish and are pushing Cashback heavily. I tried [dawdle zelda] on both, then clicked on "Shopping" for both. Here are the results:
I don't care what you say, a null set is just wrong. Now, yes, we do feed Google Product Search, but that's Microsoft's fault - they shut down the free feed test they had in favor of their paid Cashback search. Dawdle doesn't participate in Cashback, so they don't get a feed. But to fail on that search is crazy; it's on Shopping, and the user's inputted a product search term and indicated a store preference. Google gets this exactly right. (Bing should slurp the GPS feed anyway - the URL is indexable.)
On the plus side for Bing, the hover-over shows the information we want the user to see, and manages to highlight our five most popular platforms. (Not the first five in our header, which is very impressive.) Google doesn't do the site links for us, even though we've obeyed their best practices. This is good for Bing.
But Bing doesn't do as well with restrictive searches - for example, Google does significantly better than Bing for a search on [dawdle.com] - Bing strips out the .com and treats it very similarly to a search on [dawdle], i.e. treating it as a dictionary term. The [dawdle.com] search on Google brings up a number of news/blog articles about the site.
Also, Bing utterly fails on e-commerce searching, even though they bought Jellyfish and are pushing Cashback heavily. I tried [dawdle zelda] on both, then clicked on "Shopping" for both. Here are the results:
http://www.google.com/products?q=dawdle%20zelda&oe=utf-8...
http://www.bing.com/shopping/search?q=dawdle+zelda&mkt=e...
I don't care what you say, a null set is just wrong. Now, yes, we do feed Google Product Search, but that's Microsoft's fault - they shut down the free feed test they had in favor of their paid Cashback search. Dawdle doesn't participate in Cashback, so they don't get a feed. But to fail on that search is crazy; it's on Shopping, and the user's inputted a product search term and indicated a store preference. Google gets this exactly right. (Bing should slurp the GPS feed anyway - the URL is indexable.)