|
It's a town centre park[^]; I've been there enough times.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
I'll give it to you then. Modified accordingly.
Nagy Vilmos wrote: I've been there enough times.
Cottaging?
|
|
|
|
|
"It's about doing rather than searching"
Then a picture of Katy Perry, which in fairness I'd rather do than search.
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks for the smile 
|
|
|
|
|
|
it's MS. encrusting the UI with barnacles is what they do.
|
|
|
|
|
The ribbon does spring to mind, yes.
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
I've always believed it's a stupid name for a search engine. It reminds me of that irritating twerp of an insurance salesman in Groundhog Day. He's the wally that appears when the weatherman, Bill Murray, keeps stepping off the kerb into the icy puddle. An appropriate name then for Microsoft's offering. 
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
|
|
|
|
|
SeptimusEjjog 151576 wrote: It reminds me of that irritating twerp of an insurance salesman in Groundhog Day.
Ex.Act.Ly!
(Or should I say "BING!"?)
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
You have to understand their market analysis. Bing is catering to potheads from Hawaii needing directions along the CA coast highway to find the illegal growing fields while hitting Starbucks at various points along the way whilst the passengers look up photo-shopped actors and actresses as inspiration for doing the nasty in the back seat.
At least, that's what I gleaned from that strategy link.
And besides, what else would you expect from a search engine called "Bing?"
Now, sadly, the problem is, everyone else will follow suite. Just look at what's happening with google maps. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I dunno why people make fun of the Bing name.
I mean, what the hell is a "Google"?
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more with "keep it the same way for several decades". The best example of a successful "simple" website is http://www.craigslist.org[^]. Its easy to find what you're looking for, and there are not distractions all over the page!
Hogan
|
|
|
|
|
I use Bing so I can get Amazon gift cards.
The weird part about Bing is that on average their search results are as good as Google, sometimes better, but when they are off, they are absurdly off. (Like getting nothing but Chinese results for a search.)
What disturbs me that article is their fascination with Katie Perry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll wait until it's really here and there have been some tweaks. The preview looks to be adaptive and I hope that it will still be productive (more productive?) when I, like you, search for some help on tricky SQL syntax, documentation on using a class or an obscure error message. I use Bing all the time as I believe if gives superior results to Google, so I'm wary of change (if it ain't broke ...)
I do understand why MS is trying ideas as despite (IMHO) the better search results, Google still tops the charts (remember VHS vs Betamax!)
I agree about flashy tricks and unneccessary chrome (although I like Bing's images), especially as I have a crap connection at home.
Fingers crossed!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
Only with MS[^]
Won't they have an exception filter to excuse their own breeds, like the poor little "Bing"?
Side note: Outlook UX is cool  beats the g stuff for me. If it supports an in-browser chat to interface with my other G mates, I can move to Outlook.com fulltime 
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had the same thing happen with google emails and gmail. It is humorous.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Keep Clam And Proofread
--
√(-1) 23 ∑ π...
And it was delicious.
|
|
|
|
|
Surely a project budget war between product teams
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone ever read these? I know I never do.
There was a new program on the tellybox last night starring Dave Gorman sort of doing standup - ish.
It was OKish.
Quite a large part of it was about terms and conditions and how no-one reads them apart from him, I suspect that he reads them just to try to find mistakes, which was what he managed to find on page 7 of 30 odd for the Boris Bike scheme in London.
This said that a year was 365 days or 364 in a leap year.
This was eventually changed 999 days after the scheme launched and with hundreds of thousands of transactions having taken place each one of them with people agreeing to something that was nonsense. He then revealed that each member of the studio audience had agreed to his terms and conditions when entering the studio, and these agreed his right to have sex with any of them at his discretion for up to a year after the broadcast.
All a little forced perhaps, but do you read such things? Do you write them and have you ever been tempted to slip something in that is a little evil, or even just to check to see if people are paying attention?
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it - I like DG since I read his Googlewack Adventure.
I liked the rider to his Ts&Cs that a repeat started a new twelve month period!
On Dave, that's going to be pretty much eternal... 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
I have successfully hidden the cure for cancer in Apple's T&Cs for installing iTunes ![Sheep | [baah]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/sheep.gif)
Why do you think they openly admit that they did not find the cure for cancer yet ![Badger | [badger,badger,badger,badger...]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/badger.gif)
Loading signature...
. . . Please Wait . . .
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I saw this too. Agree with the OKish statement, I sort of like his stand-up routine, it's not amazingly funny but sort of geekish.
In answer to your question, no I have never read them and believe that anybody could wriggle out of them on the grounds that it is common knowledge that they are never read. I think anything important has to be highlighted, you should only read this.
|
|
|
|
|
Most on-line companies would have to breach their privacy policy, if they wanted to enforce their terms and conditions.
The word to remember is "unenforceable" -- if a clause or codicil in one of these terms and conditions statements runs contrary to the law of the land, that word comes into play.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
