Interesting choice of headline, both by submitter and the article. Actually, the three things listed are, in their words, "three ways the new audience’s demands differ from the early adopters."<p>At the end of the first item, the author even says "I’m not convinced yet that Bing is better or faster at decision-making, but it’s an appealing promise." So we've established we're not actually talking about what Bing <i>is</i>, we're talking about what it <i>wants</i> to be.<p>Which is fine. Except that at the end of the third item, the example they use is based on weather results:<p>"Most people like having a canned answer atop the results, as long as they can trust that it’s correct. What’s the top reason most people hit a search engine? Bing researchers found that it’s to decide what to wear, based on the weather outside. You don’t need t0 search every page on the Internet to figure that out."<p>Indeed. Try seaching for "weather" on Google, it offers up a weather report at the top if you supply a zip code or keyword (like "nyc" in my example below), and has an input box for you to specify one if you don't. It seems an odd example if you want to show how Bing Is Not Google.<p><a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=weather" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=weather</a>
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=weather+nyc" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=weather+nyc</a>