With recent discussion of why Google added then removed real time search of Twitter, it doesn't come as a suprise to know that Google have a acquired new social engine Aardvark. Aarvark allows users to ask a question as if they would a friend and the engine automatically finds the best person to answer it. It is still in beta/invite stage and I am awaiting an invite (which I am looking forward to receiving) but once I know more, I will be updating the power and scalability of this new method of search.

Related links

• Aardvark
• Techcrunch article

I'm sure that you've heard the buzz about real-time search launched by Google... and good work guys! I looked into the real-time search options from Mashable's original post and realised that when I Googled "Phailanx" (the name of this blog incase you hadn't noticed!), my realtime tweets were appearing  despite a limited pilot on the functionality - I'm obviously taking that as a personal compliment from Google.

The real-time functionality adds a completely different dimension to how users can search, especially on the way in which they look for opinions, reviews and customer feedback/opinion. The ability to now showcase user communication via search becomes an important factor in corporate communication, reputation and commercialisation. With 28% of Shoppers saying that Social Media has influenced holiday purchases, real-time search instantly lifts the need for businesses to maximise social media marketing. Encouraging consumers to discuss brands is going to be a massive contribution to increasing conversions online, so businesses must get as much conversation going as possible. Just remember this basic rule:

Customer engagement + Simplicity = Success online

Related links:

• Mashable's full post on Google real-time search
• Follow Phailanx on Twitter

There will probably be no surprise when I say that I use Google (as with 70% of the internet population). Even if you take the three major search engines, create 3 identical searches and mix up the logos, Google tests better due to the search giant's perception of being the best.

However, there is a Blind Search test that will allow users to conduct a search and see which set of results best suit their search term vs result expectations. The Blind Search lets you pick which results you prefer before seeing which search engine provided them. I took the test and used three sets of criteria:

1) Professional/Business: Sticky Panda

2) Personal: cheap holiday in majorca

3) Informative: the speed of a 747

The results were as follows:

1) Google

2) Google

3) Google

Apparently I am a Google man through and through. However, others have found interesting results including creator of the Blind Search Michael Kordahi. Statistics from the tool show that Google wouldn't have the majority share if it wasn't for the company's brand equity. The results show that there is actually a more even playing field when just the results themselves are tested; Google 44%, Bing 33% & Yahoo! 23%.

Related links:

• Blind Search
• Techcrunch article

I don't know where I get these titles from but I thought I would take a look at Microsoft's strategy for the internet and see how Bing (Microsoft's new replacement to Windows Live Search) integrates into this. With Microsoft not launching Internet Explorer (IE) with the new release of Windows (I can hear web developers cheering across the globe), it seems that they are having to rethink their positioning online. While from a business sense, it made perfect sense for Microsoft to bundle IE with Windows, it was ruled by the European commission that they were monopolising the market, and therefore not being fair to competitors.

We all know that Microsoft has needed to rethink it's offering for a while, as their entire digital strategy falls around the sole fact that IE comes as standard and they can showcase all their products by using IE as a portal (For example Windows live mail, Windows Live Search, etc). At present, this was the only way Microsoft could compete with the big guns such as Google, Mozilla, etc. Now that this ruling is in place, what can Microsoft can do to firefight this predicament? 

Well, their first answer to this is to tackle the search market with the launch of their new search Engine Bing. According to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, they are looking at investing 5-10% of their operating income to invest into Search which will translate to anything up to $11billion (Patricio Robles, Econsultancy) - that's not a bad budget to kick-off a project. In fact, I wouldn't mind that budget at all.

Looking at Bing
So let's analyse Bing. Firstly the name is short and concise and is good step forward in my mind. In the same way you associate shoddy workmanship to a Lada, most people tend to think the same of Microsoft when online. Their change to a "trendy" name (in the loosest form of the phrase) not only disengages them from their previous brand equity, but also brings them into the new era of sites. You could potentially hear people say"Bing it" in the same way as "Google it." It may not happen, but if it did, at least it would sound good (as opposed to "Windows Live it").

Bing is also much nicer to look at compared to its precedessor. With an aesthetic image that changes daily and a clear, intuitive, Google approach to the interface, it definately ticks a few boxes upfront.

Ref: www.bing.com

So the next question is do the results step up when they need to?
Let's take a look - the design again, is very clear - again, almost Googlesque, but why reinvent the wheel? So with regards to design and layout, you can't complain too much about the way it looks. It does what it says on the tin.

So are the results valid?
In my opinion, no. I was very disappointed with the results that were displayed. After the hype I was expecting some groundbreaking intuition within the results, but I was delivered less than adequate information for what I was looking for. There were some interesting results that I haven't seen before such as PDA views for some websites; but let's face it, you don't need these unless you're actually on a PDA. 

A basic search for small-medium equity websites (e.g. Search term "Sticky Panda" for the Creative Agency Sticky Panda) delivers a correct top result but little related information. This only seems to be the case for websites above a certain criteria as a few other searches seemed not to make the cut at all.

There were also issues regarding the applicability within the ordering of the results. Items that I felt were more relevant to my need were bumped down due to what looked like a PageRank/hierarchy structure. So the slightest mention of a search term on a high traffic website such as the BBC would automatically get placed above lesser authoritative sites that may actually be more resourceful to the users' need.

Final opinion
Where as the usability and aesthetic design of Bing is well executed, it seems that less time was taken in producing the algorithm(s) driving the results. Microsoft needs to sink a good chunk of their budget into getting this right so that applied results are given at the right time to users, as this is the key to any search engine.

Bing is still in Beta and has a lot of (potential) financial investment available so it is definitely one to watch, but until I have more confidence in the results that I will see, I will not be making the switch from Google.

Related links:

• Bing
• Google
• Yahoo!