Feeds

Google and Microsoft relive Joan Collins catfight

Hair pulled, eyes scratched over 'stolen search results'

The essential guide to IT transformation

We haven't seen a catfight like this since Linda Evans and Joan Collins. Or maybe even Bette Davis and Joan Crawford.

Google flaming Microsoft for copying its search results was already great fun. But the two have now descended into the sort of endless slagging match typically reserved for insecure adolescents – or Register commentards.

Microsoft is quite clearly copying Google's search results – in automated fashion. Google caught Redmond in the act by loading its live search engine with 100 bogus results pages. But surely, Google's rather involved efforts to publicly shame Microsoft are rather childish – not to mention deliciously ironic. This is a company that makes multi-billions from copied content.

At first, Microsoft's response to Google's claim was relatively restrained. A brief statement sent to The Reg didn't deny the claim, and then came a blog post from Bing vice president Harry Shum that didn't deny it again. But the post did accuse Mountain View of a "spy-novelesque stunt to generate extreme outliers in tail query ranking".

Then Microsoft did deny it. "We do not copy Google results," Redmond told ZDNet. So Google unloaded a blog post where it accused Microsoft of not telling the truth. "Microsoft’s Bing uses Google search results—and denies it," is the title. And it demanded that the copying stop.

Google and Microsoft

Google and Microsoft

Meanwhile, at a mini-conference in San Francisco, Microsoft's Harry Shum traded public barbs with Google search guru Matt Cutts. At one point, Shum referred to Google's "sting operation" as a "new source of spam and click fraud". And according to CNet, before the conference kicked off, Cutts "made the rounds...with a laptop open to four screenshots comparing the fake queries Google constructed and the results page with the same queries on Bing."

Throughout the day, Microsoft head of corporate communications Frank Shaw slung mud at Google via Twitter. When one Google supporter said Mountain View's evidence was "pretty convincing", Shaw responded with: "Google had employees log onto ms customer feedback system and send results to Microsoft"

Then came the return slap from Google's Matt Cutts: "Normal people call that 'IE8'".

And then the final hair pull from Shaw: "@mattcutts hey if this whole engineering thing doesn't work out for you, try PR -- you've got the chops for it. ;)"

You can see the full blow-by-blow here:

®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Mozilla's 'Tiles' ads debut in new Firefox nightlies
You can try turning them off and on again
Linux turns 23 and Linus Torvalds celebrates as only he can
No, not with swearing, but by controlling the release cycle
Scratched PC-dispatch patch patched, hatched in batch rematch
Windows security update fixed after triggering blue screens (and screams) of death
This is how I set about making a fortune with my own startup
Would you leave your well-paid job to chase your dream?
prev story

Whitepapers

Endpoint data privacy in the cloud is easier than you think
Innovations in encryption and storage resolve issues of data privacy and key requirements for companies to look for in a solution.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Advanced data protection for your virtualized environments
Find a natural fit for optimizing protection for the often resource-constrained data protection process found in virtual environments.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.