Microsoft just announced it’s new search engine Bing, and it is going to spend a reported $80 million to $100 million on an advertising campaign to familiarize consumers with the brand. But was it the best name it could have picked?
Asked about the name onstage at the D7 conference, CEO Steve Ballmer admits: “I am not what you would call the creative side of life. Short matters. Being able to verb up can be helpful.” But he also says, “We wanted something that unambiguously says search.”
Does it? To me, Bing says nothing. I think a better name from the ones Microsoft was supposedly considering would have been Sift. Other candidates were Kumo, which is project’s codename, or Hook. Which would you have gone with?
Bing and Kumo are easy for people in almost every country to pronounce and spell … unlike sift.
Ya Sift is weak. Bing is dope.
Sift sounds like something else that starts with s–t and ends in t. So you can sift-talk against google or “oh sift, this site sucks”
Kumo is too ambiguous. Hook reminds me of hooker, which may or may not be a good thing but not family friendly.
Bing is family friendly enough to appeal to kids and teenagers and moms.
no thanks to sift. bing rocks!
Bing is fine. It comes with a bang. It hits you strong. Whereas Sift is weak, Hook is familiar and Kumo is distant.
no thanks to sift. bing is better!
I will probably go with Bing than Sift. Sift doesn’t seem that good at all.
They should have left it as “Live Search”…they spent years rebranding many things to that and now they’re just gonna start it all over again for a marginally better search engine?
Plus, WTF is MSN is doing these days? Die already…
I agree with Scott, I think MSFT have too many brands, and I guess the Windows Live guys will be feeling just like the MSN guys when Live was the newest thing at MSFT.
livelocator would have been a great extention to the live.com brand. 100G and it could have been theirs.
they did not buy the domain livesearch.com for 800g just shows their true commitment to the live.com engine as a whole is weak.
they spent 100Mill on powerset some natural language engine theory no one has ever seen or knows if it works. and now they are gonna spend 80-100mill on an ad campaign for bing. what is wrong with this picture? what i do know is if you dont learn from the past your destined to repeat it and failure keeps alot of people gainfully employed. win or lose money in markets is better than under somebodies mattress or off shore bank. micro can afford to lose.
MyLocator .com ™ – find yourself
Locator dude, as usual, your self serving comments only prove what most readers of TC know — that you are a self-promoting douchebag that only cares about the hot air that comes out of your mouth. Go the hell away!
B. I. N. G. does stand for something:
“Bing Is Not Google”.
(One Slashdotter got the credit)
@Smart Aleck
That does not mean it’s a bad thing, last i check google is not the all knowing, all wonderful search so many claim it to be. It is the best option at the moment. I think after seing the Bing preview, google might be getting some tough competition. The way you search using it makes it easy even for a caveman.
doesn’t really have a nice ring to it
Disagree on the ring…
A good campaign captures everyday phrases people say without thinking about it (e.g. McDonald’s “I’m lovin’ it”)
You enter a search. Bing, the answer is there.
This is a very good choice.
*BING* you are now free to move about the web.
I don’t know. Kumo could easily be spelled as cumo or koomo. You can’t really mess up Bing.
What makes a great name is how easy it is to pronounce and spell. Bing works on both levels. Google and Facebook work because they aren’t longer than two syllables and nearly impossible to spell wrong. Typing the name must be easy, for some reason some words or brands are harder to type.
Unrelated, Bing reminds me of the “What makes me so funny” scene from Goodfellas, when Pesci says “Bing, I thought I told you to go **** your mother!”
Google isn’t easy to spell wrong? Do you want to rethink that statement?
It isn’t even the correct spelling of the real word. The proper spelling is Googol. That’s the first confusing part, and it’s downhill from there…
In a lighter way, someone pointed out most of the internet successes have double letters like Google, Twitter, Facebook, Yahoo, AAfter [ pardon my bias! ]
Bing is cool.. Bing reminds me of a scene in “Groundhog Day” in which Phil meets Ned….. Classic…
You’re are the only smart one in the building.
well it’s clearly not you
Bing for moi. Bing sounds effortless…sift sounds like hardwork
Yeah that was my first thought – I sift through the crap on my desk and that is work. Bing says fast and non committal.
Bing is a good brand. Its catchy, easy to spell, easy to remember, and has no definition. I don’t know if it “says” search, but it does convey instant gratification (think cookies in the oven or slot machines).
Sift seems like a good idea to tech people like us, but its not a good brand for the general public.
I think “Bong” would have been better… Microsoft is high if they think have a chance of building a search brand this late in the game.
Exactly. I think why Microsoft failed with Live Search wasn’t the UI/technology/etc. — it was that compared to Google or Yahoo, Live’s results never went that far back. On Google and Yahoo, you can easily find stuff from a decade or longer ago. I’m sure I’m not the only one who uses search engines to research stuff…and most of the time I want the most relevant material – even if it’s 5 years old – and not what is currently the most popular.
I honestly tried using Live Search (over Google) for a good 6-9 months when it first came out…but nowadays, I’m using Google 99% of the time. Google is like a library, Live/Bing is like a magazine section in a store. Might be good for newer/popular stuff…but no comparison when it comes to being a truly useful research portal.
You say that now. But people are already “search twitter”-ing each other the same way the google each other. And it was pretty unexpensive for Twitter to build their brand. Maybe MS should just ponder on that.
The name and the technology are not the issue. The issue is their strategy to go upfront with Google on Search. They need a lateral move. Where are the days of Bill Gates strategizing a la “Art of War”?
Twitter never said they are going to be the new best search engine. They are just beating Google a real time and that has given them an edge.
I like ‘Bing’ because it pops off the tongue and sounds energetic.
I’m sure the media mavens in Redmond invested heavily in consumer focus groups before settling on the name…
Friends fan will love this name
Ha, yes. My first thought was Chandler.
Correct – totally reminds me of Chandler – not precisely a character that reminds me of search. Before Bing I’d have prefered Egon. Sherlock. Even Phoebe.
Erick – betting you have no real world experience with these things. Sift would not have been better. More importantly, it doesn’t matter. The name acquires definition as the product develops.
bring it on and bing it on….
twitter=discovery engine+ bing= decision engine= real compition for google
its a DISCONET..
I dont know what bing means but i kinda like it..
its different,, and easy to use….
> CEO Steve Ballmer admits: “I am not what you would call the creative side of life. Short matters. Being able to verb up can be helpful.” But he also says, “We wanted something that unambiguously says search.”
GO GET A LIFE DUDE!
I like it. Anything to give goog a bit of competition. Healthy competition is good for consumers.
Completely agree about competition.
This comes to mind: http://www.yout...U6m3cqk#t=0m19s
I googled bing and found a lot of relevant articles. Whether, I will got a lot of articles on google after binging google is what Iwait for..
Is bing.com loading for anyone? It blank pages for me.
Welcome to the Microsoft world…
Epic.
not to state the obvious, but http://www.sift.com was already taken – and could have influenced choice. come on tc…
Bing was taken too…
BUNG!
[Bing. What a stupid frakin' name. Wow.]
I’d have gone with CRAP
Great roll-out strategy Microsoft. No “coming soon” page, no re-direct to a working service such as the existing live.com, just a blank white page. Will I bother to re-visit http://www.bing.com after 3 June to see if they’ve bothered to put something up? Probably not.
Bing is better than Sift.
Its like i enter a searchphrase and BING there is my result
Sift sounds like Sith from star wars.
Make the M$ sound evil.
http://www.traderbots.com/
Bing is better…
sift sounds like sh!t…
Catchy names are SOOOOOOOO important.
Yes Google works well, and Twitter used not to work well (Fail Whales All The Time), but great names, and huge.
Bing is just a bland name, not good, not bad, but certainly not catchy.
Microsoft is famous for bland names that they think are cool, examples include PopFly, SkyDrive, Zune. The one name they did get right is X-Box, but that’s about it.
What is amazing is how a company can put hundreds of millions into product developement, ad buys, and not be able to come up with a really great name.
a name is just the beginning of the story. what you do with the product and brand is what counts.
after all, what’s Google? what’s Yahoo? what’s Pepsi? what does “Nike” have to do with shoes?
bing is fine. sift is fine. kumo is fine. let’s see where microsoft goes from here with the product. that’s what matters.
“Nike is the Goddess of strength, speed, and victory.” FYI.
Yes, I’m aware. It’s still not directly linked to footwear, but rather, a name evocative of a particular emotion or meaning. For some brands and products, that’s the right decision. For others, maybe not.
My point is that one shouldn’t get too hung up on a name. It’s only the first step in the life of a brand.
this is a GREAT name….bing =/is short for bingo i.e. successfully finding what you are looking for….
Bing is alright it wont be that hard to pronouce remember this will be international so using something that is somewhat easy for people to say who dont speak english should be a concern.
I would have used ding instead
The fact that you don’t obviously like microsoft does not mean you should criticise them all too often. Try to be fair in your judgements.
I think Bing is cool. very cool.
Sift makes the most sense, sifting through information.
I personally like the name bing and I can’t wait to start testing it!
People should really take a more intelligent view and and not just bash it because it is Microsoft.
If the product will produce the goods and provide a useful alternative to Google then the name bing will definitely not get in the way of it becoming a success.
Hook, without a doubt (If there aren’t semantic reasons or translations that kill it)
You guys will never leave MS. Keep bashing on whatever they do….bing is far simpler short and better than google…google sounds better as we are used to it nothing more
move on guys… whats in a name.. was yahoo a great name at the time, was google? doesn’t matter…
bing works if bing works
Considering I still remember the “Yahoooooooo” from ads a decade ago, I would say the name was a hit.
Bing is interesting, odd. Sift makes sense for search though, quite clearly. Its connection with search is obvious, Bing is meaningless.
What makes Twitter and Google such great names? As far as I can tell, nothing. Sure, they’re both enormously popular, and deservedly so. But as words by themselves, I just don’t see it.
As for Bing, I think it’s more about connotations and connections. Before you know anything about what the product or service is, what does the word bring with it from your experience? Because hopefully, you will then apply the connotations to the product before you have any idea whether it’s is actualy good or not.
Just one person’s opinion, but:
Kumo – this means nothing to me. It’s a made up word from where I stand.
Hook – fish hook, the hook in a catchy song, meat hook, etc.
Sift – sifting through something (sand, flour, legal documents).
Bing – the bell that goes off when I get the answer I’m looking for, or when I have mail, or an IM.
For me, that’s why Bing actually works. Sure, it doesn’t say “search,” but that seems less important than making me feel good about something before I actually know whether it’s good or not. Isn’t that a lot of what a name tries to do? My only reservation is I think two syllables is generally better than one.
Let’s face it, the brand name (as opposed to the entire brand, which is a different story), can only pull so much weight. In five years, if it’s wildly successful, by virtue of being a truly excellent product, they could have called it “Vomit Frog” and everyone would be talking about what a great name it is (”Google?” come on).
For the weight that the name has to pull in this case, I do believe it pulls it quite well.
I read somewhere that Kumo means “cloud” and “search” in Japanese
(I don’t know this for a fact)
Michael, I think you may have missed the “Bing” reference … as in “a machine that goes ‘Bing’!”
See this clip:
http://www.yout...h?v=lusXJIfB4ys
Doesn’t anyone remember Monty Python material any more?
Funny, the Monty Python reference that comes to mind for me is “What’s brown and sounds like a bell? DUNG!”
As I recall (and Google agrees)…Monty Python’s machine went “Ping” not “Bing”…another thing MS messed up….bwahahahaha!
Wait for it …
“They should have gone with BingLocator:”
lol. that guy is friggin annoying. what’s his deal?
LOL, awesome.
Did I read it on Techcrunch before?
BING = But, Its Not Google
Mike likes “Bing” but would have went with Posse (infinite POSSibilitEs)
Bada Bing…
Seems like most comments on domain names are really just an extension of what people think about the product or company in question.
If Twitter released a new product called Bing; readers would choose it over South Carolina.
Reworking @met’s comment…
Q. Why did M$ call their search engine “BING”?
A. Because It’s Not Google
Sorry, somehow they sound all pretty bad except maybe kumo – but then ther is no association to search either.
By the way, Topsy would have been great – but hold on, that’s already taken by a new search engine that actually rocks
Bada Bing! If they market it correctly it will work just fine. If the product is simple, FAST, and as accurate as Google it will work.
Microsoft is saddled with so much “baggage” as an evil empire with no soul that no name can overcome that perception.
Google is a friend. MSFT is a company.
How many search engines does Microsoft need? I don’t understand why they think they can build something from the ground and make it more successful than Live or MSN.
Bing is a Scottish word. It is big pile of crap, left over from mining.
Naming is hard – we ended up with “PigSpigot” which is weird and not easy to say, but somehow works for us. More importantly, if the product is great and fills a need, then you just call it something, stick to it and focus on the quality of what you’re providing.
That said, i think bing will be used by people who are computer novices not techcrunch readers – people who will just whatever is the default search engine on their default browser – I imagine IE and BING will work in concert in that way.
From the makers of WINCE, and this surprises you because….
I would have used the word “explore” somehow since microsoft owns it conceptually (internet explorer, windows explorer, etc). just “explorer” might have worked. or they could have bought the trademark “dora the explorer” from nickelodeon– get them hooked to MS tech early, right?
Here is why MS calls it’s search engine BING – (inspired by PINE)
http://www.plug...not-google-297/
Hey that poll doesn’t have the right answer to choose – MS-AOL
“Sift” is an ugly-sounding word, sounds like work, and will be hard to say in several cultures. “Hook” does not translate well at all phonetically (and lends itself to too many jokes). “Kumo” is a Japanese word that’s been used for lots of things: shoes, sushi restaurants, etc. I haven’t run it thru universal translation but it’s one of those words that could also translate badly somewhere on the planet.
“Bing” is not a great name, but it’ll do.
Now…what I’m trying to figure out is what’s up at http://www.badabing.com !!
This is probably another ad campaign as MG Siegler mentioned in a post. Another of Microsoft’s “innovations”.