<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rocking Bing decision engine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/</link>
	<description>Bits and Bytes of Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:37:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy Sia</title>
		<link>http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-1957</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy Sia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:59:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/?p=765#comment-1957</guid>
		<description>i have been using the BING search engine for a couple of weeks. it seems to be as good as Google but for some reason i would still want to stick with Google search engine ,-</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i have been using the BING search engine for a couple of weeks. it seems to be as good as Google but for some reason i would still want to stick with Google search engine ,-</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jade</title>
		<link>http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-1945</link>
		<dc:creator>Jade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:09:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/?p=765#comment-1945</guid>
		<description>Bing does give search results much like Google but i would have to say that Google still gives more relevant search results</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bing does give search results much like Google but i would have to say that Google still gives more relevant search results</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: detoxdiet</title>
		<link>http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-1900</link>
		<dc:creator>detoxdiet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:08:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/?p=765#comment-1900</guid>
		<description>my initial test result shows that Bing is as good as Google when displaying relevant search results. Google might be having a tough competitor with Microsofts own search engine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>my initial test result shows that Bing is as good as Google when displaying relevant search results. Google might be having a tough competitor with Microsofts own search engine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TigerTom</title>
		<link>http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/2009/06/16/rocking-bing-decision-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-1883</link>
		<dc:creator>TigerTom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:49:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karuppuswamy.com/wordpress/?p=765#comment-1883</guid>
		<description>Any competition for G00gle is good. Have the dumped the pretty picture feature? I only get a grey background when I go to Bing.com.

A beautiful picture cached for a day or a week would be a good draw to users.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any competition for G00gle is good. Have the dumped the pretty picture feature? I only get a grey background when I go to Bing.com.</p>
<p>A beautiful picture cached for a day or a week would be a good draw to users.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
