(Fans of the Navy's old slogan, "It's not just a job. It's an adventure," may recognize the rhetoric enlisted to serve Microsoft's cause.)
The URL used to evangelize bing.com, decisionengine.com, spells out Microsoft's claim as well.
Please, it's a search engine. I can accept that Wolfram Alpha deserves a term of its own like "computation engine." But Bing?
Microsoft's attempt to redefine search is a sure sign of competitive insecurity. No matter what terminology is used, Bing is competing with Google as a search engine.
And Microsoft makes no secret of the fact that Bing is competing with Google. The company dismisses a critical characteristic claimed by Google -- simplicity -- by stating "Sometimes simple isn't enough." (This despite the fact that later in the video, Microsoft says, "Simple, organized and consistent. That's Bing.")
And Microsoft makes a more obvious attack on Google in its claim that, "Instead of spitting [search results] out in order of popularity, we break them into logical categories."
With any luck, Microsoft will publish a technical paper that describes the difference between spitting search results and arranging them logically, without expectoration.
Finally, Microsoft posits the existence of a problem called search overload, which Bing helps solve. It's a clever conflation of information overload with Google's interest in organizing information. The information explosion is Google's fault, Microsoft seems to be saying, and Bing will save you.
Frankly, I find the idea of a decision engine a bit creepy. A decision engine is HAL, from 2001: A Space Odyssey, saying, "I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that."
If Bing is a better search engine than Google, I'll use it. But I can handle making decisions like that without a decision engine to guide me.