Shifting Expectations

On the face of it, this battle is still no-contest, however... I came across an interesting item on the RIA Journal blog pointing out that Facebook now uses Bing to power their extended search results and not Google. This possibly goes some way to explain the apparent optimism detected by Rory Cellan-Jones when he recently met with some Microsoft executives . As Rory points out however, Bing has only 3.3% of the market, with Google retaining an impressive 84%. Rory makes the point that he, like many, tried out Bing when it first came out but then reverted back to Google and that Bing’s biggest challenge would be to break down that user inertia. Basically, why bother going to Bing? If Bing can get itself “institutionalised” by becoming embedded in major tools like Facebook then it stands a chance. If it can’t, it will remain insignificant. The big question I have is why did Facebook choose Bing?

A couple of items in the media caught my attention and started me thinking about the strange beast that is the English language. Firstly, there was an interview on Radio 5 Live with two people in Corby in connection with the story about birth defects and the link with toxic waste . During the course of the interview both interviewees either used a word incorrectly or made up a word. In both cases, on first hearing, it was almost possible to believe that the words were correct, but something jarred and the errors made me laugh and despair at the same time. In the first instance, the interviewee said that "the council was clearly negligible " in their dealings with the toxic waste. In the second instance, a few seconds later a second interviewee said that "the ruling showed that there had clearly been neglection on the part of the council...". I assume that the first interviewee meant to say negligent and the second neglect, but the two mistakes started me thin...