Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Wants to Take on Google
blenderking writes "We do view Google more and more as a competitor. We believe that we can provide consumers with a better product and a better user experience. That's something that we're actively looking at doing,", says Bob Visse, director of marketing for Microsoft's MSN Internet services division, said. Full article at: Yahoo. This could have fit in with yesterday's April Fool's stories..."
Google isn't competition for Microsoft. Google is a quality product that actually works. Totally different than anything Microsoft puts out.
If MSN want's a better search engine then Google then just make it and let the users judge it. Viewing Google as a competitor from the consumer viewpoint is a mistake. Google is a streamlined efficient search engine while MSN is a hodgepodge of Internet services for the masses.
Maybe Microsoft is disappointed that google will not have an IPO anytime soon, reducing possibility to easily buy Google and plug it into MSN.
If Microsoft wants to ensure their long term future they need to improve the server OS's and innovate in client software, not worry about being everything to everyone.
...but can they leave ANYTHING alone? What's next? I won't be surprised if they branch out into other markets...Oh, GM is selling a lot of cars, we view them as a competitor. Sheesh.
Zed's dead baby. Zed's dead.
It'll be interesting to see if Google is really evil enough to beat Microsoft. Oh, and Microsoft's search engine really sucks (at least the few times I've used it), so it'll be good to see a version that doesn't.
If there was an answer to that question, do we really think Microsoft could do that?
If they think they can do it better then google they should just write it and if its better people will use it.
Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
"We see life as a less-than utopian user-experience. We aim to remove all question, doubt, pain, suffering, and freedom of choice from our prosepctive devotees. We feel that our God project, Diety 1.0, will present a truly enhanced
life for all, the benefits of which shall be obvious. Our product will overcome."
"We believe that we can provide consumers with a better product and a better user experience"
that means Microsoft will be making plans to buy google.
other than that, no, they really can't
Is there ANY record of a microsoft server project being used on this large a scale? I know that hotmail is now being served with MS software, but I also know that the MS server products that are being used to run it aren't doing half the job that BSD did. So, basically, is there anyone out there who can tell me whehter this is possible without a special OS, et cetera set up to do this job? (it's a pretty bold claim, I'm interested in it in a could this really happen sort of way.)
Google is already so powerful and so popular that it's already a verb in most people's vocabulary. It is unlikely that Microsoft would be able to overcome this popularity so late in the game, especially since Google is totally platform independent.
Who actually uses MSN? I know that it is the default homepage and quite a few non-techs never change that. How many of thier hits does that account for? It must be a lot, because MSN is no competitor for google. They must be getting a false reading.
We're only gonna die from our own arrogance, that's why we might as well take our time...
... if anyone has a copy of the early revision (1996) of Bill Gates' The Road Ahead propaganda.
The one where he dismisses that Internet thing as a passing fad.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
In contrast, Microsoft is selling a world view -- theirs. I can't even imagine searching for gcc, or Java, or "Linus Torvalds" on Microogle and expecting to get useful information. You don't ask a plumber if your pipes need fixing.
Cantankerous old coot since 1957.
From past experience Microsoft's idea of better is more packed with features. I use Google because it is fast, efficient, and has unobtrusive advertising. Can you honestly see Microsoft competing on those terms?
On PBS' Nightly Business Report this story was reported as Microsoft is looking into *buying* Google. Now that's a scary thought.
...then it'll finally own the only decent way to navigate microsoft's own website
668: Neighbour of the Beast
I think I just died of laughter.... what are they going to run their search engine on? MSSQL ?!!!!
3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still
I don't want a ****ing 'user experience' out of my search engine. I want a page that loads fast and gives me the answers I'm looking for.
I think that historically, "trying to build the better mouse trap", has produced numbers of new and innovative products. It's very important to the future of technology that other companies evaluate the status quo and try to improve on it. If Microsoft or any other company can develop a search engine that better's Google approach, then that's great and we'll all use it.
If Steve "Uncle Fester" Balmy thinks he can produce a better product than Google, then I personally invite him to stick his neck out and do it!
However, he should bear in mind that whatever MS creates:
(1) Will have to have a noticeable lack of any sort of banner ads or popups.
(2) Will have to have a clean, simple, easy-to-use interface that's compatible with ANY BROWSER, from the text-based Lynx on up to the latest version of Opera, Netscape, or IE.
(3) Will have to be fully compatible with text-based screen readers, such as those used by vision-impaired folks.
(4) Will actually have to work as well as, or better than, Google if MS wants it to have a ghost of a chance.
Right now, Google completely fulfills requirements 1-3. I will be watching with great amusement as Uncle Steve and his Cronies try to add "value" to the search engine "experience," and most likely fall flat on their collective arses doing it.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
This is 1 major reason google should NOT go public. If you have a successful company and you're making money, and you don't need expansion capital, there's no need to go public. Unless they just want to make a quick buck, and move on to something else.
By going public, there's a good chance google will end up losing their edge, and potentially be in a position to be bought up by MS.
In many ways, I see this as a good thing. If MS wants to build a better search engine with a "better product and a better user experience", more power to them. They can't do anything to make me stop using Google, so why should I be worried if they see Google as a competitor?
Should MS, by some miracle, come up with a better search engine and a better interface, then I'll use it because it's the best for me. If they come up with a new feature that I like, I'll use it. I don't really care who's engine it is, so long as it finds the results I'm looking for. If it sucks (as I suspect it will), then that's a few million dollars less for Bill and Steve. Either way, we the users win.
Competition at work: may the best search engine win.
Cue The Sun...
i use google exclusively for my searching. i use google to search microsoft sites. I use google to help me search MSDN. The people that write MSDN work in the same building as I do.
I think google is the stuff and i rarely see a need to use anything else. it is -Exactly- the interface that i want and it is lightning fast with no distractions.
perhaps there is some breakthough in searching/indexing technology that MS thinks they can make. I'd buy that - there are lots of bright people here that really understand interesting problems with other approaches and can turn that understanding into solid products.
or perhaps someone decided google isn't "friendly" enough (i.e. not filled with crap, ads, marketing tie-ins, etc etc) and needs to be cluttered up and "popularized". maybe someone simply wants MS to have the #1 search and thats driving the whole story..
My worry is that whatever comes out of this, it will end up being 800kb of dhtml and popups and shitty ads. I don't think anything will ever replace google for what the majority of people use it for unless it is as simple and stripped down as google is, interface wise. i mean, i have a vested financial interest in MS products doing well but i still find myself using what i feel is the right tool for the job which fits my usage habits best, and for basically all searching tasks thats google.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Microsoft should learn to pick it's fights. Does Google have money? No. Does Google have the daily attention and trust of tens of millions of people? Yes.
Quite honestly I think Google are the better armed this time round. Besides, they don't have a shareprice to uphold, they don't have a justice department probably still looking to kick their arse... nobody wants them dead. Do I need to go on?
Dave
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
Looks like microsoft got mad at the ugly front-end google used for searching all of microsoft's content. Wonder if they'll take it down and force microsoft to use their own crappy search engine again. I know many microsoft people use this google search to find what they're looking for.
Okay, so we're going to let Microsoft, a proven monopoly, control what sites we SEE?
You could look up porn and get M$.com. Microsoft porn. This is completely messed up. Having so much power left in the hands of Google is bad enough, and they have never been proven to be truly untrustworthy. Having it in the hands of Microsoft is completely intolerable.
Fortunately, they will suck.
I'm so fricking info-paranoid I've got my own spiders to find sites for me, so this kind of thing doesn't bother me too much, but still, for that portion of the population that doesn't know any better (AOL users), I shudder to think. What kind of content could they possibly find non-objectionable?
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
I want to know why the hell I have a better chance of finding the microsoft support document I need with google then I do searching directly from support.microsoft.com...
An article month's PC Magazine mentioned this. The author shuddered at what a Microsoft Google would look like, perhaps something similar to the "teenage clutter" of MSN.
-- Who am I? How did I get here? My God, what have I done?!
What is one of the first things that someone does when they have what they consider to be an original idea? I think most people may just go google it to see if they are right in it being an original idea. At that point, the idea isn't anything more than a spark, but what if Google's R&D division is using these sorts of sparks that they see pop up from other people's searches? There will, no doubt, be a million bad ideas, but the one great one may be worth millions, and if I submit it to google, they've got the resources to develop it, and I don't have a leg to stand on in fighting them or proving anything.
Just a thought, and yes, I took my medicine this morning. ;)
Revolutions are never about freedom or justice. They're about who's going to be top dog. -- Kilgore Trout
So Microsoft says that some day they might be able to out-do Google. Why is this news, and why should we believe them?
Let them show us. If their service is better than Google's, then I'll happily use it. I don't know if anyone has noticed, but Microsoft's track record in terms of service delivery hasn't been that impressive. Likely their only success is Hotmail (which has very worthy competitors, and which was a glowing success well before Microsoft bought them up)
I found this less funny than Slashdot's attempt at an April's Fools prank. But required Microsoft bashing aside (for the record: no, I'm not a Linux zealot or anything, it was strictly for humor purposes), I say good luck to Microsoft. Not because I think that they'll fail or anything, but because if the competition's good enough, it'll hopefully inspire Google to come up with even more of their creative tools that I enjoy playing with so much.
"Programming is like sex - one mistake and you'll have to support it for the rest of your life."
Google does not sacrafice the quality of their product for the sake of generating more revenue. Google is where they are today because they provide a search engine that is fair and unbaised. MS on the other hand has shown that they are willing to sacrafice the quality of their product if it means more coin in their pocket. BTW - what happened to RealNames?
A Google representative could not be immediately reached for comment.
The rep was too busy cleaning up the coffee that he'd laughed out of his nose.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Did you mean: Windows XP
Your search - linux "open source" - did not match any documents.
No pages were found containing "linux", "open source".
Suggestions:
- Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
- Try different keywords.
- Try more general keywords.
Also, you can try Mooglesoft Answers for expert help with your search.
Everyone is missing the point here... Let's assume that Micro$oft could actually create a search engine 70% as good as Google. Then they bundle it into their OS and IE. Then market the crap out of it. Do you really think that the normal Windows user will continue to use Google? This is the whole problem with those bastards controlling the desktop OS which 90% of the world uses. They really can do this kind of stuff and get away with it. Remember Netscape, WordPerfect, etc. Be afraid. Be very afraid. And since I am in a good mood I will give a few suggestions for helping to change this situation:
1) Write a windows worm / virus
2) Contribute to the linux kernel, kde, gnome, etc.
3) Teach your friends and family how to actually use Linux.
Is bill making money off of it?
No? Enemy./
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
This could have fit in with yesterday's April Fool's stories...
So you're saying it's a dupe...
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Why is Google perceived by MS to be a competitor? Why does MS feel compelled to own everything? Why not admit that Google is excellent, that there's already lots of competition in the search engine niche, and get on with life?
:-), but they regularly come up with stuff like this, and it just disgusts me. They're like evil monkeys. Just can't stop fidgeting, fidgeting, fidgeting.
I try and try not to hate MS (I hate hating, and personally find it exhausting
go read the april 2003 fast company story
t ml
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/69/google.h
google is so much not like ms that it'd be hard to imagine them being assimilated, unless they just bought them a'la webtv - but them a look at the numbers and a possible ipo and i doubt ms money could compete with the pride and reasonable money to be made from doing what they do well...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
If MS built a Google-scale site using their security-challenged tools, it would be the biggest target for crackers on the net. Also, given their record for keeping their own servers patched (remember Slammer?), it would probably get raped about once a week.
The resulting flood of data as MS-Google tried to infect the rest of the net would be a marvel to behold, at least until all the outgoing connections melted...
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Why should you be worried?
1. Google IPO.
2. Microsoft buys Google.
3. Start worrying.
"In an effort to support the patriotic spirit and boost the economy, we assumed that by search for 'linux gcc', you really meant 'Microsft Visual Studio.'"
Microsoft really can't tolerate anyone else anywhere near the industry. The sad part is that by having the evil empire even express interest in putting Google out of business, they will probably screw Googles chance at a decent IPO.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
I don't know what your background is [Computer Science degrees for me] BUT it just seems like good business sense to constantly diversify. Microsoft sees a market that Google is currently dominating, but by no means invented, and wants a piece of it. Furthermore, this is a market they can more easily get their paws into than, say, apple juice manufacturing, because of their name brand recognition within the computer industry and their current control over the average user's browser selection. Microsoft is a company that has had some innovation but, more importantly for their stockholders, has made some really shrewd and often illegal business moves. These kind of moves are what a good company does to build their capital and continue to thrive.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Let's just hope it doesn't just buy alltheweb.com and then just integrate to windows/iexplorer. As much as I love mozilla, ms gave netscape/mozilla a huge blow in the browser wars. I would hate for them to bring down google like that.
Robert Bindler
A Computer Science student's views on technology.
If Microsoft does try to offer a "search portal" I think their key selling point will product integration.
..and asumming they play fair and don't let their desktop default to their portal.
If there's one driving force behind Microsoft "invovation" it's trying to connect everything to everything else (all be it a select "everything else" has an "MS" preceding it).
Idealy, this is a very cool concept. It's one of the key elements that made Office so damn sucessful
But Microsoft can take it a bit too far at times. (What the hell were they thinking when they decided a movie player is a core componet of an OS?)
I can only imagine that they'd try a similar thing with a vast database of webpages.
If they're sucessful, your average everyday consumer will end up with a lot of new easy to use tools for web research... it effectly would open the door of spiders, web crawlers and agents to your ordinary MS user... as to how sucessufly they can pull somthing like this off.
Ultimately I think it will come down to a question of usablity for your average user.
That and how much money they're willing to throw at it...
or IE jump to it with every 404...
ah hell.
I was wondering if the M$ search engine will include some good hearty blue screens to make your searches unstable too? And maybe some memory issues, and definately it needs to be the slowest search engine out there.
It is only fair seeing as how Bill Gates invented the internet...
-1 Overrated (Too many big words for me to comprehend)
given that they use google for their own searches (www.google.com/microsoft), doesn't that just show that they believe google's search algorithm is better than their own? I assume google has this patented so what makes microsoft think they can make a better search engine without stealing ideas? Or are they thinking of making some sort of AI sentient search engine that can tell us what we are looking for? Seriously though, I can't see any reason for pursuing this course of action unless they come up with some truly revolutionary search algorithm.
Would you? Does Google make a whole lot of money? I'm not so sure. Who knows what the books at Google look like? In the red or black?
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Not that this wasn't entirely predictable.
While I think that it is true that Microsoft doesn't like anyone in the industry, competition can only make things better (assuming everything is legal). It's easy for most of us to moan when Microsoft throws it's weight around but what is diffrent in this case is that they are the underdog. Their brand recognition got them into this, lets see if they can actually become a competitor to Google or if this is just trying a slick marketing trial.
Actually Microsoft is the only company at all, that might be able to install Windows on 10000 boxes. After all, they are the only one, who does not have to pay for it.
It would be a horrible experience for google users though.(all of us?)
Moritz
I did a search for "yahoo" on msn.com to see if it still have you one result that said something like "wouldn't you rather use microsoft's site." I don't remember what it used to say exactely. If anyone know's what I'm talking about, please post. Anyways, my top five results were:
:P
Yahoo! Top Pick
Web portal and search tool provides extensive categories and news. Hosts Yahoo Auctions, Classifieds, Weather and Maps.
www.yahoo.com
Start Your Own Web Community
Set up a free chat room, message board and more at MSN Communites.
groups.msn.com
WEB DIRECTORY SITES - ABOUT
Yahoo! Chat
Large chat hub allows users to choose from hundreds of chat rooms, on a variety of topics. Also discover international chat.
chat.yahoo.com
Yahoo! Finance
Research the US market through basic and detailed quote analyses, business news, and investment guides. Has quick access to international data.
finance.yahoo.com
Yahoo! Mail
Sign up for free web-based email from Yahoo. Services includes instant message notification and mail for international users.
mail.yahoo.com
Number 2 is for MSN!!! How can you trust a company with a search engine that gives itself a top rating when it has absolutely nothing to do with what you're searching for?
By the way, the link for the MSN site was dead anyways
Just for the record, I don't think Linux is much of a Google competitor either.
If they're starting with comparable search technology to their knowledgebase, they have a long way to go... BTW, I can find knowledgebase articles a heck of a lot easier using google then through the knowledgebase site.
Also, Microsoft has knocked down plenty of companies that people didn't want "dead." Furthermore, you should consider your use of the word "nobody." When you say nobody wants them "dead", you're implying that no one exists that wants Google beaten. I'm sure there are people, as evidenced by the article, within Microsoft who want to beat Google.
The Justice Department has been placated. The Republicans are pulling the strings in government these days. Let's not forget who is appointing federal judges around here. Here's a hint: It's not Tom Daschle or any Kennedy.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
"We believe that we can provide consumers with a better product and a better user experience."
I'd imagine that means having links to hotmail, articles on other MSN-related sites, advertisements, having to log in (and out for those using public computers), etc.
I seriously don't understand how anyone can actually think that these things provide a "better experience" for a search system than a box for entering search terms and a button to start the search, all resulting in a simple list of relevant results. How is this better than this?
Even as a "portal" (more so than before), Google still does a better job than the others.
"Shooting is too good for them."
-Simon Trafalgia
I'm a little dumbfounded as to how MS sees them as a competitor though, they haven't really made much of a move in to "portal space." Is this just another case of a company being too powerful and good at what they do for MS's liking?
Microsoft *seriously* thinking Windows could simply even host what Google does is going to be hilarious to watch.
:).
Dollar for dollar -- sure, Microsoft could pretty much eat them for a lunch snack, but when it comes to PERFORMING Windows just isn't even close to being up to the task. That's after looking at Windows 2000 AND 2003 Server variations which is pretty much everything they have to offer.
I also just happen to not have Windows servers myself for a good reason -- and just happen to have many Linux boxen running various shops (along with OS X, BSD, and Netware of course
Let's just all call it MicroBOOB
Well, let's see a simple, useful product that works well, does what it advertises without adding a whole lot of useless bloat and complexity.
Microsoft hasn't done that since, well, ever.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
I'm sure MS taking on Google will be about as useful as say, US invading another country..
MM
I find it laughable, in the extreme, that MSFT sees Google as competition. Hell, they seem to view everything as competition, yet only those things where they hold near monopolies are they successful, and the products vary from pretty good to aggrevating (I've worked with their 'productivity tools' enough over the years to exclude them from anything I'd place on my home computer. Life is too short to spend grousing about how such simple tasks can be such a pain to accomplish, at least for free, at work I get paid to put up with it.
For those opportunists out there, try to guess what they'll name their brilliant new search engine and register the URL first. ;-)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Can you imagine how useful Google would be if they had BOB? or the paper clip?
yesterday, i was on a m$ box and typed in only "msnbc" into the IE window as if i was using mozilla which automatically would resolve the .com for me. oops, that's the msn search, and wouldn't you know it, msnbc is second in the msn search listings for msnbc! the first listing was some crackpot conspiracy theory site.
lets face it, if microsoft made toothpics, they would be flat and long like playing cards and somehow integrate into windows.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
I hope more people do start using Microsoft's search - especially my competition. The less information they're able to find on the Net, the better it is for me. Let the ignorant masses flock to MSN -- then let them pay us to find the information readily available from Google!
Google has been making inroads on deploying in corporate intranets. Boeing's search engine just switched to Google last year.
MS could quite possibly create a search service integrated with the rest of its intranet backend stuff and sell it to IT managers as "easier to deploy and maintain than a beowulf cluster". And they can throw in a bunch of "features".
But unless a search engine like this already exists somewhere and Microsoft can just buy it, tweak it, and market it, they probably won't get very far. I've been becoming increasingly pessimistic as to whether a large corporation can get through enough corporate red tape for any novel R&D done at all.
As for usability, let's just say that the two things that give me the most grief at work are Microsoft's CIFS servers and Outlook. I lose more time waiting for things, or trying to recover things that were lost or misfiled or corrupted, or trying to dig through Outlook's atrocious lack of threading (both decent mail threading and multithreading)... but it's hard to turn that into a number that IT managers can gawk at.
It seems to me that it would serve Microsoft quite well if the leading search engine ran Microsoft software, not something they have been denouncing as a toy or communism or whatever.
I'm not thinking about personal users, but businesses. The pointy-hairedest of managers knows how well Google works and has probably been hearing at least a little about how Microsoft products aren't quite the most secure or trustworthy. Maybe he'll think, 'If it works for Google, it should work here,' recommend using Linux in the company, and cost Microsoft some potential money.
Anyone agree this might be a motivating factor in the announcement, or am I just reading too far into this?
Actually, I can. Microsoft are quite comfortable with simply buying a market. They just pour money onto it, embrace and extend it, FUD it; and ship it with their OS, and then finally they own it (usually). Check out IE. Other browsers are a tiny percentage of the market. Check out Microsoft Word for another example. Both are decent products. Microsoft can do decent if they really have to. Alas.
That's what they normally do. And it usually works. The only question in my mind is whether Microsoft really can capture this market. The incumbent is good, widespread and it's unclear whether Microsoft's strength on the desktop even, can allow them to capture it. Indeed, it's not even clear whether it's worth them trying- nobody knows how much money Google makes on it; or how much money Microsoft could make.
Anyway, back to the original question: can Microsoft do the right thing enough to get the market? Yes, and worse still, there's no guarantee that they would continue to do the right thing.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Here is the funny thing about google adds. I read those, I sometimes click them, I have even bought stuff from them. This is far difrent then any other add on the internet. So it seems like not only do they get searches right they also have advertising right. If more people would fallow there path and not the microsoft path the world would be a better place.
From the article:
Google, the No. 1 Web-search provider, has become so pervasive that it is not uncommon for people to refer to searching the Internet as "googling".
Um, can they say that?
As you imply, that actually is the problem. I don't want a million pages that contain a some or all of my keywords. I want 10 pages, or fewer, that actually address my issue. Google needs two search fields. One, the simple text search that currently exists, and two, a context list of keywords. Words in the context keyword list could be preceeded with a "-" symbol to block all pages returned from the text search that are tagged with that context.
Lets say I have a wireless PCMCIA card that doesn't work with the new OS version I just installed. I would like to do a text search on "wpc11" and a context search on "-purchase" and have all URLs which are trying to sell me one be discarded. I realize finding an automatic means of contextualizing URLs is not simple, but that what is needed.
The market will bless whoever can figure how to do it.
What do I mean? Google search is now embeded into Safari on OS X. It's right next to the location bar, and very convenient. Imagine if Internet Explorer had this type of functionality built in, and intentionally made impossible to switch from the Microsoft solution to any other.
Then you'll get the exact same thing that happened to Netscape (besides the other internal issues they had). Sigh...
F-bacher
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
Viewing Google as a competitor from the consumer viewpoint is a mistake.
Except M$ got where it is by not caring about security, ripping off others' innovations then killing their company, dabbling in all markets, and only viewing competitors from the consumer viewpoint.
Seriously, when has quality even been part of M$'s strategy (and strange as this may sound, I don't mean that as a flame). If you have an ineffective DOJ, why not just keep utilizing your marketing and monopolistic strength to kill off competitors? Why is there any need to improve?
And sadly, this extends to a large degree to enterprise software as well. How smart is the typical CIO? Even more important, how much does the CEO know about software? Not much, which is why MS software is the safe choice for CIO's. Like the saying goes, buying MS doesn't get people fired (not *quite* true, but you get the idea).
A combination of FUD, astroturfing, buying shill journalists, buying out companies, market-killing monopoly extending has always been a good way for MS to win. Why would they stop now?
Quite frankly, I wouldn't do anything different from how they're doing it, except for their deranged obsession with piracy. If they ever figure out that widespread piracy does for them what they couldn't even LEGALLY DO (ie, dumping and undercutting to achieve market saturation), most of their OSS problems would disappear. Their arrogance in this area is one of the few things that could ever bring them down.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
(5) Will need to refrain from slanting search rsults to MS promotion or editorial.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Are you talking about the paid links that appear to the side of the main results???
I was referring to pay-for-placement being not obvious from algorythmic results.
They have placement ads on the right and at the top. The ones at the top are barely differentiated from the search results, on purpose(The sponsored links). Believe me, this is part of why I use it.
Quoting Google: With Google AdWords you create your own ads, choose keywords to tell us where to show your ads and pay only when someone clicks on them.
Like I said, we spend thousand a month with just Google. I like google too, but they are just as "for sale" as the rest. Great. Im glad, because I am buying and I like what they are selling.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
The reason winCE won out was becase it was better. Deal with it.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Sorry. The devil made me say it.
today is spelling optional day.
"We believe that we can provide consumers with a better product and a better user experience" As long as it done have that FuNnY butterfly man i be happy!!111
... isn't a little fellow known as ...
KARL MARX
is he? if not... plagerism!
-pyrrho
Has anyone thought about the marketing potential there is behind any good search engine? I mean think about it for a sec. You have zillions of queries comming from different places. Now index them by subject, then roughly sort them by geographical places (IP/ISP mapping) and sell this to whoever is interested. And many many many more potential applications along the same lines.
They probably already do this I don't know but the amount of info they get is probably what MSN is drooling for.
-- CowboyNeal deals with my sigs.
esilva
Soon enough you'll see Google Switcher ads...
ha ha ha. What more can anyone say?
Checking out my form of escapism.
It seems suspicious to me this comes so quickly on the heels of an announcement by Google that they will not seek an IPO; perhaps Microsoft found they could not buy Google?
You can't force someone to sell a privately held company...
When you're a dictator, everybody is your competitor.
Think about it, won't you?
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
MSN is more Yahoo than Google. It seems their natural competitor would be closer to Yahoo.
Considering all the crap they have on their site, Autos, Maps, Home Gardening, Orgami, Personal Diets, Footcare, bla blah blah they (Yahoo, MSN) are trying to be the free version of AOL.
Whereas Google is just search and thats all they do.
The only way for M$ to defeat Google is to make their browser crash or diddle around with Google and that will only prove the M$ software is quirky. Most people do remember Netscape and Word Perfect and they remember them fondly. It's easy to get them to try Mozilla. It's also easy to get them to look at free software too these days. If M$ wants to deprive their users of Google, fine, that's one more nail in their coffin.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
By giving linux distributors discounts on advertising.
:)
Heres my thinking: Microsoft will no doubt start trying to advertise their search engine on new versions of windows and new windows service packs, as well as making it their default IE start page everytime you take a windows update.
Solution? Get everybody to switch to linux, then we all win
They could start by making their google toolbar available for other web browsers than IE.
"Freedom Fries" is actually pro French... the word "French" is now synonymous with "Freedom".
-pyrrho
Good for us. I don't think MS will suceed, but if they do, we'll have an even better search engine. If they don't, well, then they might well spur futher improvements at Google. Really, the money MS spends on this project is money spend for our benefit
I simply refuse to use MSN.
And I won't!
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
No brainer... and Google wants it. That's why Google has leaked a couple "We're not IPO'ing" stories. Take the money and run. It's all about the money, stupid!
Cheers! -- Richard
You see what they did to hotmail? I suppose the only thing better than Dog Food is more Dog Food! Woof woof, adverts, spam and Passport, how's that for a mail service? You can do the same for a search engine too! Wow, double the revenue untill they lose half their users.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
My M$ Hotmail is such a good user experience that I am sure M$ will win this one folks.
Here are just a few of the great thing I have learned today?
1.) I was able to help out a coed who was low on cash, and had just bought a camera.
2.) I have found out how to refinance my House.
3.) I now can have up to 26 physical contractions during climax.
4.) I am considering the Get Bigger 100% Proven Results offer.
5.) I may be able to get rid of high credit card intrest
How could google beat these people?
Get a free ipod.
Look at what search engine is default on most Windows PCs today. MSN.com And Google still beats it. MS is forced to make a superior product this time and I don't see it happening.
I'm not drunk, I just have a speech impediment. And a stomach virus. And an inner ear infection.
...that M$ could bundle and tightly integrate an MSN browser^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsearch engine into their OS...?
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
You take Google's fine R&D department.
I'll take Microsoft's R&D and Marketing departments, backed up by 40 Billion dollars with nowhere to go.
You think you are going to win?
There are empty buildings somewhere in Mountain View, CA that housed the last people who thought that way......
I don't see it.
Microsoft spends $$$$$ on a search engine to compete with Google. It sucks, but it becomes the default for IE, the default for MSN customers, and the default for the new 'windows internet search' feature (which won't explicitly tie in the browser). 90% of the population will use this shitty search which is based on commercial presence, Google will close shop, and the web will become an even worse wasteland of ads and sales sites.
Microsoft seldom spends money to be the BEST, they spend money to be the BIGGEST.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
I don't think Microsoft will have no chance competeing with google. For the one and only main reason google provides more then a general search engine it probiedes specific ones for linux, BSD, MAC, and yes, yes even one for MS. This allows for google to be versitile and flexiable to the users whims.
Can you say "Netscape 2"? That was the browser on everyone's lips, and with the release of IE (a crappy release, even), everyone was saying, "What's Microsoft doing trying to get into the online world? Don't they make word processors and operating systems?"
Yeah.
And Video Games? Plenty of failures, but the jury's still out on the XBox, for sure. And Microsoft doesn't make video games, remember?
Make no mistake - if they want to beat Google, they will. It's not a question of "if," it's a question of "when," and, if you're smart, "How." Start paying attention now, and when there's room for another mega conglomerate at the top, maybe you'll have learned enough about the way to run a company to not blindly hate them just because they're big.
To sum up, a quote from Doc Holliday in teh best movie ever made:
"I'll remember you said that."
This will be a good test... see if MS still has the power to enter a new market and stomp on the established leader. They've already backed down against AOL in the ISP fight, and they're finding that Netscape won't stay dead.
They've got the desktop OS, and the desktop office suite, but beyond that they're struggling. A big loss here could be the beginning of the end for MS' domination.
People shape laws. Not the other way around.
"This could have fit in with yesterday's April Fool's stories..."
No it couldn't have. This is believable.
For the last several weeks, my web server logs have shown that my sites have been crawled heavily by bots from Microsoft-owned IP addresses. (I know they're bots because, even though they don't identify themselves, they DO pick up robots.txt and obey it.)
This has been going on since, oh, about mid-February.
Aside from not identifying themselves, the bots are well-behaved: they pick up and obey robots.txt, and they only request a single page at a time and take a few minutes between requests so as to not overtax my servers.
So, yeah...this announcement is no big surprise to me.
Whether good (or "Don't Be Evil") wins over evil.
My company is going to release a really simple program soon to change the Microsoft Automatic Search in Explorer. I can't stand misspelling a domain or something because my keyboard's all sticky... er....
anyways, that search engine sucks.
"More and more we see Google as a competitor". Considering microsoft never had their market at all, this statement is totally awesome. I wish I had their marketing guys working for me.
It's amazing that they can make google look like the little guy when they're kicking their ass all over the place, and microsoft's results aren't even worth viewing.
Ace
I do. They make a better browser. The make a better word processor. They make the best mice and joysticks. They make great games. XP is an excellent OS. Not everything they make is great but no company has a perfect track record.
Back in grad school (starting in '93) I was anti-MS, for no good reason other than they were so big. When I bought a new computer I strongly considered geting OS/2 for it (phew...dodged that bullet). I bought the WordPerfect suite to write my thesis with. I used Navigator to surf the web on my PC. You know, a funny thing happened. WordPerfect was ok for small documents but for something like my modest thesis with images it sucked. I gave MS Office a go (I had never used it before then) and was sold...it got the job done. After I left grad school IE3 was released...the first version to exceed NN. IE has never looked back. For an OS, I have XP at work and home (in addition to an installation of Linux via VMWare for testing) and it works. It doesn't crash, runs fine. One of my Linux zealot coworkers seems to be forever downloading the latest build of something or looking for a better widget, all while Linux looks more and more like Windows on the desktop. I do use OpenOffice.org suite on my home computer, because I gave my wife my copy of Office XP to use on her computer. For simple spreadsheet work and basic letter writing it's fine. It's still no match for Office though.
So years ago I gave up the pro-this, anti-that stance and took one that's pro-me. I use what works best for me. Period. Best search engine? Google (which is not a verb, you trying-to-be-cool buzzword compliant geeks). If another search engine is better for me, than great, I'll use it. Same goes for other products. I don't have time to waste on half-assed products just to make a point. I want to spend less time wrestling with software and more time getting things done (which translates to more time with my family). I know it's sacrilege to say so here in the geek hive, but MS products generally are better than competing products.
Now this is finally something funny.
You posted a comment about the very submission I see at the top of this page. However, a crackhead moderator has decided you are "offtopic." Offtopic, for describing the submission itself.
I guess to be on topic, you have to bash Microsoft and promote Linux. Even if the moderator disagreed with you, your post is most decidedly not "offtopic." In fact, my post is not offtopic either; it is a continuation of the discussion you started that pertains to the submission that is the basis of this article. And yet, I will not be surprised if my post is modded "offtopic" as well, or "flamebait" or "troll."
I'm rolling on the floor.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Yeah, MS wants to destroy Google and Ximian thinks they can put all this effort into MONO and not have to pay the piper someday? >
Actually, I think that Microsoft should pick up a copy of Mozilla and hack on it and ship it.
Doing that would open source their web browser, but they're not making any money on it anyway, and they can do exactly the same evil things with a hacked Mozilla as they do with IE anyway, so what's the difference?
The irony of having effectively used their competitor to develop Microsoft's browser would be total ;-)
I can't see them actually doing this though, but it would be very funny ;-)
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Its sort of surprising the amount of outrage alot of people seem to have towards microsoft for its questionable tactics. I really dont know what people expect, microsoft is doing what millons of other busineses do, try to push a product that is dirt cheap and sell it at a horribly inflated price to encourage sick profit margins. So they hire a bunch of devlopers straight out of high school, create a user interface for idoits (desgined by idiots) and boom, they have the desktop market.
The problem with this, is after a while it really starts to bite them in the ass. Windows is quickly becoming more and more bloated, requireing steeper and steeper system requirements, wich has lead to a sort of infiltration of linux into the desktop scene. Microsoft simply cant have this, they are getting a royal ass kicking in the server market, and according to their preformance last quarter, they are losing money on everything except windows. And with this new linux infiltration (be it slow, but anyone who has used kde 3.1.1 can testify that linux systems are slowly catching up) they really Have to find some new source of stable income. Buying google isnt really a means to control the flow of information or some conspiricy, its simply microsoft makeing a desperate attempt to create a new source of income, because short of a redesign of the windows kernel (wich they sorta did with windows 2000, but that was more of a bsd rip off), the windows future is becmoing unsure, and currently, if they lose their grip on windows, the creation of the xbox, this new msn explorer bull shit, and now competing with google, it really is just microsoft trying to make sure there is a microsoft in 20 years.
That feels better.
Sorry, no logical arguments here. Just brainfarts and disgust.
For godsakes - now M$ sees Google as a competitor? A strong search Internet engine with newsgroup archives and an (overly priced) search appliance is a competitor? I don't see it. I just don't see it, and trying to think about the jumps in logic M$ is making my head pound...
Is that why I have to append ".com" whenever I am forced to use IE on Wintel? Is M$ that worried about hits to that stupid MSN search engine?
I'm awaiting the day M$ decides to take on Maytag as a competitor.
Will nobody stop them? Hell, I'll volunteer to manage your help desk! I know a ton of coders and support folk ready to head to greener pastures...
Just as an aside: Why do I have a feeling the geek world might be a better place to live if Paul Allen and Steve Wozniak had stayed on in their respective companies and Gates and Jobs had wandered off...
Okay...I'm off to play more Wind Waker. Sorry for this brief lapse of logical thought...
Has anyone ever tried the Search box on www.microsoft.com? The few times I have tried, the search results for their own website were so poor that I ended up using Google with the site:microsoft.com search modifier.
Besides, Google stands for everything good, and Microsoft stands for everything evil.
I suppose that Microsoft would try to compete with Google to provide corporate customers with a search engine for their intranet and extranet sites. I doubt that they would get anywhere trying to make money with free web searches.
What insight does this runny stream of crap gleam whatsoever, aside from the glint of sunlight upon each soft ripple? "Everyone is missing the point here." I knew right when I hit these words that your post would be drivel.
Negatives:
1.) You use the word "Micro$oft." Wow. A dollar sign. Not only is that original and creative after all these years, but it is also nicely hypocritical considering $lackware sells CDs, as do the B$D's and other companie$ who, gasp, attempt to make money. Sorry, "ca$h."
2.) Your premise is idiotic. Bundling a search engine into the OS? The most they could do is integrate it into the Start Menu's search option, but people aren't forced to use it to search the web and won't ever be, no matter how much you hate that fact since it goes against your wild-eyed conspiracy scenarios toward Microsoft. Nobody will "be afraid; be very afraid" but you. I don't fear a search engine being integrated into Windows. People will continue to use Google if it is better. Internet Explorer won because Netscape began to suck.
3.) You suggest writing a Windows worm/virus. And despite this, you still got modded +5! This not only reveals the intentions of the trigger-happy crackheads who mod up anything remotely anti-Microsoft, but it reveals your stupidity like a giant gaping sphincter slowly expanding to unleash its defecation upon the world; in this case the Slashdot discussion following the article in which you chose to splatter this crap upon my screen.
Of course, I will likely be modded down by someone who disagrees with me, even though moderations should not be performed based on simple disagreement. But as your post and its subsequent moderations reveal, moderators are not concerned anymore with not being blatantly biased. Anything's game now when it's an article mentioning the M-word.
Next.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Go to google.com and do a search for
:)
The best search engine
now go to google and do a search for
The worst search engine.
Fun
Jolyon
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
Microsoft is constitutionally incapable of doing things that way. Google gives you search results, MS wants to give you a "user experience". I've already had all the Microsoft experiences I care for.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Seriously, it is getting old. You don't have to be the number one player in every market. I know it's hard, but you might be able to at least survive in the number 2 position.
-You may license this sig for only $6.99.
but MS products generally are better than competing products...
That's OK. It's not your fault that you've had limited exposure to quality products.
I guess if people don't use Mac OS X they can muddle along with M$ dreck and
homegrown Linux. I'm almost envious that you'll be able to visit an Apple Store
nearby and discover anew how wonderful computing can really be. It will be
a whole new enlightening experience. Come join us.
That's the first thing I thought of when I saw that Microsoft wanted to compete with Google. Microsoft's web-search engines (across all of their sites) are just awful. Head over to MSDN and try to find something fairly specific; you will invariably get something like 47,083 results sorted (as best I can tell) by the number of times they contain the letter "t". Run the same search on Google and most of the top results will be relevant info-- and Google is doing a much bigger job, indexing the whole web.
The same thing goes for other MS-owned sites-- Slate, for instance, which sports an embarrassingly useless search engine (I can only assume it's based on MS technology, because it seems to display the same unwillingness to hunt down relevant links.) Before MS seriously attempts to dominate this particular area, they'd better bring their search technology up to spec.
I've haven't???
Good grief it's late and past my bedtime. Sorry.
I try to be clever and blow it.
That is the headline to look for if Google has money problems in the future.
If Google is a threat then Google needs to watch its back. If Microsoft can't build a better product(sic) then they will just buy it. Google had better not have any financial problems or they might just go looking some day for cash and bang, like a loan shark, old Billy will show up with the cash.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
Google is already so powerful and so popular that it's already a verb in most people's vocabulary.
I can't wait for Microsoft to be used as a verb:
"Our company was microsofted so we'll have to let you all go."
Really. Just because it has to do with computers, it's competition? sheesh!
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Put simply: they try to be everything and everyone. They are always trying to be the "next big thing", but not by putting all their efforts into making their current endeavours into quality results, but instead trying to spread their manpower (and therefore their streams of income) over the vast technology market.
Oh, sure other companies do this too, but not the way MS does. Apple, for example, doesn't have their own database software (anthough they do have their own browser now). Sun doesn't have their own search engine. Redhat doesn't have a special online service. And Google does not have their own OS.
Seriously, as the largest software company in the world, Microsoft could still make it to step three (if you've been under a rock for 2 years: "Profit!") without trying to be the one and only market leader for everything technology related. They need to make Windows, and perhaps their Office Suite, and make them good, and less expensive. They need to work with other developers, even if those developers aren't paying them top dollar to be part of the MSDN. Open Standards. Simplicity.
Quality.
And this is why we hate Microsoft. Greed before quality.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Goodle has nothing on them there. Haven't you ever heard "Oops, the server is all Microsofted-up again!"
For legacy maintenance purposes I recently had a chance to play once again with Windows 95, and NT 4. Both (OSR2 for 95) come with Internet Explorer 2. That's right, *2*. For those of you that never had the pleasure, let's just say it's like using a word processor from the Windows 3.1 days, with less graphics support.
So anyway, I needed to poke around a bit online, and for fun, decided to check out some sites with good old IE 2. Google: perfect. Slashdot: perfect. Hmm, let's try microsoft.com.
I only have one word to describe it: OUCH.
The number of Javascript errors I got JUST FROM GOING TO THE INDEX PAGE made me want to stop. Of course, you have to click on each and every one. After a time I got so fed up, I thought, hell with this, I'm upgrading IE. You don't want to know how much fun it is. Most of the navigation doesn't work properly, and the pages scroll like mad horizontally at 640x480 for some reason. Anyway, I managed to get IE 5 installed on the 95 box eventually, so I thought, what the hell, let's put IE 4 on the NT box - I had the service pack 3 option pack cd handy, figure I'll save some headache.
Ok, so we're running IE 4. Let's browse to microsoft.com again. Lo and behold, there really isn't any improvement (although at least you can set it to avoid Javascript errors on a page - but click on a link, and up comes the error again).
I know Microsoft has basically abandoned their old platforms, but come on - there's no need to have such complex crap on an index page, for god's sake. At least check my user agent header and feed me something a little simpler. Most of the other websites I frequent didn't give me 1/10th the problems.
Long time Windows/DOS user, and I really do like Windows 2000, but I gotta tell you: if Microsoft thinks they can even come close to what Google does, well, I want some of what they're smoking.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
There was one search engine that IMHO had a better "experience" than Google: Northern Light. It categorized the results into folders of related topics, so it was easy to discard irrelevant results. But it didn't have the web coverage Google has, and it was plagued by too many "premium" search results that you had to pay $$$ to access. Northernlight.com still seems to exist but it's not what it used to be.
I agree. I use google all the time to search other sites whose search engines aren't up to snuff - especially slashdot. Slashdot's searching is the component of the site that is really the most lacking IMHO
I have used OS X (we have a test box that runs OS X...I work in a Java shop so we have to test across platforms). I should have included a caveat in my original post stating I would use OS X over XP at work (at home, I need the games, man). When my company purchased a new computer for me they bought me a Dell. Fine machine, but I really lobbied for a G4 running OS X and was turned down. I continue to rag on the IT guys about it (one of whom uses a Mac as his primary computer!) so perhaps in the next upgrade cycle I'll get my wish...
MSN.com (their search engine) has been the default home page of every Internet Explorer install since 1996. Also, try typing anything into IE that doesn't nicely resolve. Once again, msn.com (can't remember exactly how many years this behaviour has been in place). 7 years with 90% of the computing world pointed straight at your search engine, and Google is #1 by leaps and bounds.
Next!
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
...the day constipated monkeys fly out of my arse with curare-tipped wrought iron fence and no lubricants OR ex-lax!
This sig no verb.
Antisemitism? This struck me as odd, so I did a Google search. All I found was this quote which is clearly not antisemetic:
". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.
"Antisemitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently antisemitic, and ever will be so.
"Why is this? You know that Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land. The Jewish people, the Scriptures tell us, once enjoyed a flourishing Commonwealth in the Holy Land. From this they were expelled by the Roman tyrant, the same Romans who cruelly murdered Our Lord. Driven from their homeland, their nation in ashes, forced to wander the globe, the Jewish people time and again suffered the lash of whichever tyrant happened to rule over them.
"The Negro people, my friend, know what it is to suffer the torment of tyranny under rulers not of our choosing. Our brothers in Africa have begged, pleaded, requested--DEMANDED the recognition and realization of our inborn right to live in peace under our own sovereignty in our own country.
"How easy it should be, for anyone who holds dear this inalienable right of all mankind, to understand and support the right of the Jewish People to live in their ancient Land of Israel. All men of good will exult in the fulfilment of God's promise, that his People should return in joy to rebuild their plundered land.
This is Zionism, nothing more, nothing less.
"And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is antisemitism.
"The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!
"My friend, I do not accuse you of deliberate antisemitism. I know you feel, as I do, a deep love of truth and justice and a revulsion for racism, prejudice, and discrimination. But I know you have been misled--as others have been--into thinking you can be 'anti-Zionist' and yet remain true to these heartfelt principles that you and I share.
Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--make no mistake about it."
Do you have a reference?
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Then someone will just start "GNUogle," the Open Source search engine!
It's not so; I might point out that Google achieved its success not because it was a default search page ANYWHERE; it achieved its success because of the quality of its product. Indeed, the success of Google speaks to the fact that the 'bundling advantage' that MS has isn't enough to control the search engine market - if it were, they would already (control it, that is.) They obviously recognize this, and while I'm sure they would love to be able to do what you suggest (use monopoly position to bring the field down and then control it) they know that it isn't the case, that feature based innovation is key.
Micorsoft taking on Google? This is like those Iraqi press conferences where they claim that they're going to lash out and smite the agressors. Sheesh.
Come to think of it, are we really sure Bill Gates is alive? I mean, I'm sure it's him in those videotapes, but you really can't be sure of when they're made. You notice he never holds up a current newspaper when you see him on TV?
Seriously, one of the big reasons Google is popular is that it's not at all like Microsoft. It will be difficult for Microsoft to duplicate that formula.
no this is not happening google is my god and i will do every thing in my power to see that this does not happen EVER. if it kills me oh well but M$ is not taking on or over google they will have to do it over my dead body. dont break my religious ties im to young for that i need some thing reliable to look up to.
Microsoft must be taken down a notch. If people don't organize nothing will happen.
Lets face it, Google has algorithmic search sewn up for now, and MSN's search sucks so bad, that they are going to have a heck of a time convincing people to use a "new improved" MSN search.
Let's assume that 50% of American users are already online... If you'e buying books and you've been on the web for more that 1 year, you've pretty much narrowed it down to one or two sites where you're going to ever buy books online. Similarly, you've narrowed down your search preferences.
My landlord loves Dogpile and will never switch even though he knows that Google is better.
My point is that Microsoft will have to aim their search at that 5% of the 50% of US users that are total newbies. And they're going to have to force them to do it through the IE browser and other nefarious means.
The US search market is already well segmented, and unless they are heading for China or India (or post Sadaam Iraq), then I wish them luck.
Newsfollow.com
1) Annouce you're a competitor of google
2) ????
3) $$$$
Oh wait - this is Microsoft
1) $$$
2) ????
3) Announce you're a competitor of google
That's better.
......bastards.
please ignore sig on this point - you will be more likely to gain nirvana on your 2nd journey - me
(& apparently "there is no aitch in nirvana")
-- Mod me down. I am not a karma tart. ffs,gag
google looks good in lynx.. no other search engine can say that.. enough said
Selling software wont make you money, selling a service will.
I was all ready to light you up when I read "Tables with square bent metal and vinyl covered chairs are a bad sign.", but you staved that off with your "I don't think I've ever had bad bar-b-que in Texas. It's probably a capital offense to serve bad bbq there." comment. The absolute best BBQ in Texas is always at a place with metal tables (or wooden picnic benches inside) and vinyl chairs. For fellow Austinites, I'm referring to Rudy's and Bongo, among others. Take it from a life-long Texan: if you walk into a BBQ joint and see a single person eating it with a knife and fork, or eating at a table with a tablecloth that needs to be laundered instead of wiped with a sponge, get the fuck out. I worked at a Tony Roma's in college. I know what I'm talking about.
I find it ironic that Microsoft would say this, considering a recent (March 1, 2003) MSDN article about: Build Your Own Research Library with Office 2003 and the Google Web Service API.
So whenever someone or a company gets _successful, Microsoft automatically puts them under their label as a competitor? Microsoft is successful, but in this case they're claiming to be successful in something they're not. In this case Microsoft is blowing it's own trumpet.
Analytic & algebraic topology of locally Euclidean meterization of infinitely differentiable Riemmanian manifold
Frankly, I really don't think Microsoft is capable of providing the product that Google does. One of the major reasons that I switched to Google in the first place, and the main reason that I continue using it, is that Google is a very simple product that does what it is supposed to. It is a search engine, and it returns results. Sure, new features have been added, but they don't clutter the original product. There is no "bloat", so to speak.
Microsoft's products, on the other hand, seem to be designed from the ground up for bloat. Just take a look at how Hotmail changed after Microsoft took over. Not that I have anything against Microsoft...hell, I'm using WinXP right now...but I just don't think they could restrain themselves. I think the urge to tinker/improve/bloat would be too strong.
I'm sure Microsoft could come up with a decent search engine, but I'm equally sure they'd bog it down with un-necessary features and integrate it into everything they can. We'd have adds all over the place...and links into Microsoft's product database...and then Windows would be modified to use the search site exclusively, and the "Find Files" button wouldn't work without an Internet connection.
I just don't honestly believe that Microsoft could produce something that simple, streamlined, and effective.
yrs,
Ephemeriis
When I'm around home, I'll visit other places, usually on a recommendation. But if I'm travelling, it'll be McDonald's or Burger King or some similar major chain. Why? Because they are consistently sufficient. You get the food you expect; it's not going to be much worse than you expected, and more importantly it's unlikely to get you sick. Picking some random non-chain hamburger place in a town you're unfamiliar with is far more risky.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
google ads are NOT called 'placement'. The terms 'pay for placement' or 'paid placement' have very specific meanings in the search engine industry, and google does not use them.
The ones at the top are barely differentiated from the search results
Barely differentiated? They're very clearly labeled "Sponsored Link", and even have a purple/green/blue background to distinguish them.
Far better than other search engines, which put paid-for-placement ads in with the normal results, without any distinguishing marks.
WTF! am I the only one who thought MS == Shinra as soon as i saw "MoogleSoft" *Shudder*
Why not just buy the company out? They've done that a zillion times in the past. Slap a non-compete deal on the employees, and then they can do what they like.
Option 2, license google technology from google.
This evening, 4/2/03, Nightly Business Report on PBS said that M$'s stock price went up when they announced that they were in talks to buy Google.
It's not whether M$ can compete with Google that we should be concerned with. Competition is good. It's the lack of competition that we should be worried about.
"The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Albert Camus,
Microsoft can take on me, come on Microsoft you know ya wanna, huh, yeah thats what I thought motherfuckers, yea its like that huh.
Ill fight those motherfuckers!
This is no more than M$FT attempting to dry up google's sources for IPO capitol. They have done the same thing number of times. What investor is going to fund a company that is going to have to compete with M$FT...??!!??
The gun being IE. Already, fucking IE starts on some page other than my homepage (google.com) roughly 10% of the times I run it. It's either windowsupdate, or msn something, etc. Imagine if they *really* wanted to take down google. Those occasional mis-starts will become much more frequent.
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Pray, is this one of the signs of The End?
This sig no verb.
Everyone is missing the point here... Let's assume that Micro$oft could actually create a search engine 70% as good as Google. Then they bundle it into their OS and IE. Then market the crap out of it. Actually, if you look at IE 6, and maybe the lower ones now, MSN is already the default home page, and MSN Access to the internet comes on all Microsofts systems now as it is. And no, it's not even 10% as good as Google. As a system builder, I set my systems home pages to Google before I sell them. It may just give the new user a fighting chance to at least find whatever it is s/he's looking for.
For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
I completely disagree. The pay-for-placement links are very obviously removed from the normal search results.
I did two quick searches. The first was for "linux". Below the Google header / navigation bar is our first sponsored link. This link is encased in a pink box and clearly labled "sponsored link". Below that is a category listing. Below that is a few lines of news items related to Linux from google news. Then comes the search results on the left flanked on the far right by two sponsored links in their own blue boxes and clearly labled "sponsored links".
I performed another search - this time for "athlon". Two seperately labled "sponsored links" encased in blue and orange boxes respectfully. A category listing. Then comes search results flanked on the far-right by four clearly labled "sponsored links" each in their own green box.
Google CLEARLY seperates their sponsored content from their normal search results. Other search engines selling placement have intermixed search results with sponsored content with the sponsored bits coming up earlier in the listing and no labeling or seperation. This is very different than what Google does.
Any one remember sidewalk.com? M$ lost soo much money on that they are still trying to figure out what happened, but then again they also screwed a lot of small biz out of lots of cash to get listed in it. another fine example of "build it and they will come" mentality, except nobody came. So the way i see it, google has nothing to worry about.
We substituted the coffee Slashdot normally drinks with "Sandoz Crystals", Lets see if they notice the difference
You can always tell what the ads are on google...
The reason why those ads are so successful is not that they look like search results, it's that they are short enough that I don't mind glancing them over to see if they are relevant.
I think I've clicked on google text ads about an order of magnitude over any banner ad.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
A few months ago, you could type "go to hell" in Google's search box, and it would return www.microsoft.com as the first link. You can read more about this here, here and here.
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
I hold the belief that 50% of the reason M$ won the "Browser War" was the failure of Netscape to put out an innovative product. Netscape stood still while M$, while blundering, did move forward. We could spend hours discussing M$ vs. NS, but I think you get the point.
Google is not the same. Just as MSN was not successful in taking on AOL, I do not think M$earch will be successful against Google. Google is constantly working to not only improve its own search technology, but has also introduced many other successful services. I believe they will continue to do so.
And I will now officially apologize if I equated AOL to be a quality service like Google.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
"Come join us."
That's why I don't use OS X. Any OS that has a semi-cult following creeps me out. Linux used to be that way but recently it's become much more "mainstream". Apple managed to become "mainstream" around 1994-1996, but they blew it with the iMac. Now, the iMac was the best business descision they ever made - Apple needs a following to compensate for their massive flaws (choice, for one, I can choose to buy a Dell or HP or Gateway, or build my own PC - I can get small form factor or ten bays, I can choose a slot-loading DVD, I can choose almost any GPU; With a Mac I can only choose between Apple's much more limited selection).
Think Sane. Think Choice. Think Compatability. Think PC.
Switch to Windows XP. Oh, so OS X is bulletproof? Trust me, I can and will screw it up. I can screw up Windows, easily, too.
Someone says, "I'm going to google you" and I'm cool with that. Someone else says, "I'm going to Microsoft you" and I'm likely to get the urge to smack 'em. Really hard, in fact.
Google has a really good reputation in the community, Microsoft does not. If judged by quality alone, Google's engine wins without a competition.
Unfortunately such things are not a bellweather for business success.
they aren't stupid, or missing the boat. They already own the browser market.
At the point where enough people want other features, microsoft can *easily* add those features to IE. They just aren't wasting time doing it now.
Yes, mozilla is neat... yes, opera is neat... yes there are some products that are better than MS.. but they own the market now, and it takes more than bells and whistles to get them off it.
Since I first got on to the web in 1995 we have seen a lot of change in the area of search engines. I remember so many that have come and gone its amazing to me. To think google will be #1 forever is short sighted. I love it, don't get me wrong, but to be honest all MicroSoft would have to do is advertise some and they could probably hurt Google. I remember when Ask Jeeves was the big deal in search. They were doing all those commercials for it. I think we remember others as well. The truth is really, if MS wants to beat Google they need to take some of that money in their piggy bank and out it towards finding a better way to search than Google. Thats basically how Google got to where its at, it built a better search.
I use Google to search Microsoft's web site. Need I say more?
I prefer Google as my home page even though I've got a fat corporate pipe at work and broadband at home. Who wants to wait even a few seconds for a home page to load?
That's great if it works for you. I hope those ads help keep Google in business, since it is my favorite site.
:)
I didn't even know what you were talking about until I tried a quick search. I don't even notice those links; my brain must instantly recognize them as ads and ignore them completely. The colored background makes that particularly easy.
Maybe the first practical application of Artificial Intelligence will be the comprehensive recognition and disposal of advertisements and spam
Jesus fucking christ! Can't this company just concetrate on doing ONE gawddang thing great, instead of trying to do EVERYTHING?
Google fulfills #4 as well. It works as well as Google.
Everybody I know at Microsoft, where I work as a contractor, uses Google as their primary search engine. Here's an example of why: recently at work I wanted the syntax for the VBScript SELECT CASE statement. I already had an MSDN window open for something else, so I typed in "vbscript select case" and here's what it found. Not wanting to wade through this mass of irrelevance I typed the exact same thing into Google and got this, a whole page of exactly what I was looking for.
Rock on.
How can you compare Google with Netscape? Netscape was just a forerunner, not a technically superior product among many others (there weren't any then). If IE didn't kill Netscape, someone else would have. One doesn't need much persuasion to convert from Netscape to IE, but from Google to something else isn't easy.
Macdonalds is being put through the wringer in the UK because small cafes are making and selling high quality food (no, not burgers), high quality teas and coffees that you actually want to eat and drink, all with quick and friendly service.
Result? Macdonalds is largely deserted and the cafes have real difficulty seating everyone. I'm sure they are still profitable with the slave wages they pay, but people are definitely choosing the alternatives in preference.
So, change the rules of the game. You can't play by the big guys rules, you just get squashed.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Well I just tried a live experiment with google and MSN. Hit MSN. Failed to load. Did it again and it loaded. Put in a search query and got nothing relevant back
With google got there first time. Relevant search results.
I know where I'm going to stick
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
"We believe we can provide a better user experence"
Knowing they can't provide a better total user experence than an AT&T 3B2/300 I'm wondering if they are just suffering from hallucinations.
I don't actually exist.
As to why it is common, if you recall the anti-trust trial in the U.S. where Microsoft was found guilty and the appeal where the verdict of guilty was upheld, you'll find that among the records is the fact the MSIE gained market because it was bundled with MS-Windows.
If left to compete on technical merits, MSIE will fall out of the market place and disappear. MSIE has fallen so far behind in technology, usability and security that it's a marketing wonder that any corporate intranets allow it at all. Perhaps offering a Google-like competitor is the only way to keep from losing all ground to Mozilla, Opera and others.
Microsoft could easily shut out any normal search service by further leveraging their desktop monopoly. Simply add searching functions in MSIE that make it hard to use anything than their own service, much the same way that HTTP error messages have been co-opted in MSIE.
Makers of embedded devices and other systems are quite aware of this and have been turning to Mozilla and Opera.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Wow, that was well crafted, as if Balmer himself read my post and called the marketing dep...well wait. I won't flame, you actually do make a good point, but here is where I stand on that:
Microsoft is the great equalizer; if they weren't arround, someone else would quickly fill their place. (And no, that someone would not be a distributed open-source product without so much as a marketing department!)
If Microsoft where to dwindle and perish, would the new market leader achive dominance the way Microsoft has, or will they most likely be whoever has the highest quality alternitive products at the time?
I would hope we all learned a lesson with Microsoft, and perhaps the industry (all of it's sectors) won't be quite so forgiving with a company of such, er..."high stature" in the future.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
The McDonalds in my neighborhood just closed down. I think it's the simpler, cleaner, faster, and superior Dick's Burger's down the street (kinda like the google of burger joints =P). And the space is being filled by some Japanese cuisine.
The biggest thing thats worrying about MS buying / competing /whatever with google is MS's ethics.
For examle, go to google and search for "Linux".
Now go to search.msn.com and search for "Linux".
The number 3 result with MSN is "Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP
Learn about the Microsoft alternatives and how to move to them from open source products."
Surely thats not the number 3 most relevant URl for linux, is it??
That sort of functionality wouldn't be out of place in a modern OS.
Jon
I think MS's idea of a "better" search product would be one that embodies Gates' "English butler" idea. It would figure out (automatically!! without even being asked!!) what you really must be looking for. Sort of a Google-on-acid, all run by Clippy.
----------
Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium
I seriously doubt Win2K would more reliable than BSD, unless you are using some strange definition of the word "reliable". BSD boxes can run essentially indefinately without a reboot. Can the same be said for Win2K ?
They'll run their search cluster on WinXP.
And figure the poor bastards that have to set the thing up...
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Google knows very much about many: what was searched at a particular time from a certain IP. Google is able to watch the most recent (online)trends. Google stores much information I dont want to see in some evil corporations hands!
"Boss, M$Google has detected that someone with an IP from $some_corp is looking for information on Oracle products!"
Boss: "Send a sales team promoting MSSQL to $some_corp fast!"
Go away, grammar nazis! English is not my native language!
Looks like Microcrap is thinking it can take over the Boardwalk of search engines. I think it's understandable since they own everything else on the board. Scary
Microsoft. Google? BWAHAHAHAH MUUaaHAHAHAHaaaaaaa Hee heee.... Now, on a more serious note: I've got to start watching their respective financial statements.
C|N>K
And the winner is: Microsoft... :(
Sorry!
Check out GoogleFight
$> cd
$> more beer
www.googlefight.com
I hate to break it to you, but the outcome is Microsoft beating Google (40,400,000 to 19,600,000)
If they want to beat Google, then they will have to do better than this :
rabbit hole
I say let Microsoft buy google. Give them enough rope and they'll shoot themselves in both feet. Google is one of the only sites that *everyone*, techs and non-techs alike, knows about and likes.
Most of Microsoft's screw-ups are in areas that average people don't think about much, so our complaints about them go unnoticed. If they take over Google and ruin it (as everyone knows they will), Microsoft hatred will become far more mainstream.
Allchin: "But in terms of customer facing, does Google have a web interface? No."
No offense, but there is no way Microsoft could compete with the product that Google has... M$ will just get their butt kicked all over the place. Google is incredibly efficient, among other things... perhaps Microsoft could buy Google and keep it exactly 100% the same, but i doubt it. Eventually they'd get the idea to go and muck it up like they do with all their acquisitions.
stuff |
I think the main goal of this announcement is that Microsoft wants to make it harder for Google to raise money. Maybe they view Google News and the Pyra purchase as signs that Google could become a competitor to MSN, and Microsoft wants to slow them down.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
... they could just bundle their search engine into the operating system, make it impossible to uninstall, and make every search function on Windows point to it, with no way to configure the system differently. Hell, they might even have IE redirect any requests to www.google.com to msn.com. Then it won't matter if the MSN search engine is any better than Google; it's just that everyone who uses Windows will have to use it, whether they would have chosen it or not.
After the judicial system let them get away with crap like that the last time, why wouldn't they try it again?
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
Of coarse microsoft things there search engine can compete, how hard is it to get hits when every single default install of IE automaticly searches MSN if it cant find a page, or if the user types something other than a URL in the address bar. This is the same way that microsoft got so many people to use IE, since it is built into all OS's newer than Windows 98, and since all those people didnt bother getting a new browser then why wouldnt they just use the address bar search option? it requires far less work...
My appologies if someone had already posted this point, I cant say I read all 650+ posts in this thread before posting my own.
This sig was generated by a barrel of trained kittens for SeXy_Red (550409).
msn.com: 2380 results
google.com: 62,300,000 results
"Linux":
msn.com: 603 results (3rd one being www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/migration)
google.com: 56,600,000...
that's a long way to go for MS :)
Seriously, they want total dominance of the IT market ( and several others too ), so why is this a suprise?
There is money to be made, its a valid target for them...
Not that i like Microsoft, but it is a business.. this is what businesses do...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If you don't stop reading this right now you owe me $1,000. Send check or money order too...
Actually, it was this story, posted on a different mailing list that made me realize it was april 1st the other day... Perhaps Yahoo is just a little late and didn't get the joke?
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
The main problem MS faces in competing with Google is that Google is part of the world zeitgist. Nobody is going to go on a date, then come home and "MSN her". To "Google" someone is actually a verb. Even people who don't know jack shit about the internet know to type in www.google.com when they need to look something up. Google's immense power, completely unthreatening simplicity, and unique style have combined to make it more of a global phenomenon rather than just another internet search engine. MS may be able to copy some of Google's features, like the clean interface, the huge index, the nice extra features, etc., but making it into the zeitgist is as much a matter of being in the right place at the right time as it is about having the right product. Google has mindshare on a massive level, and that is what MS will have to compete with. I don't see them succeeding at it any time soon.
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
I don't care if the buisness model of a medium relies on me looking at advertisments. I don't care if companies need me to look at ads to pump thier numbers.
This is one reason why I like Googles system - it's links to products that (99% of the time) related to what I'm searching for. Like a directory listing, more than an advertisement.
On the other hand, TV commercials, flashing banner ads (tasteful ones don't bother me) - anything that interrupts my viewing of content - is intrusive and I have every right to remove it from my viewing experience.
Ads that attempt to decieve ("Your system is not optimized!" "You are the 1,000,000th visitor to this website, click here for your prize!") are even more annoying, and, imo should be shut down by the FCC (as well as most TV commercials - false advertising laws should be given some teeth again. How about being unable to claim or imply that your product can do anything that it can't demonstrably do?)
Nothing more to say. If m$ acquires google they'll turn it to shit. Just like hotmail.
Another thought is what will happen to http://google.com/linux ??
Girls are strange. They don't come with a man page.
-- Michael Mattsson
Barely differentiated? They're very clearly labeled "Sponsored Link", and even have a purple/green/blue background to distinguish them.
I think you are missing what he's saying. He doesn't mean they are not clearly marked; he means they are not significantly different than links you would get anyway.
In other words, when Google gives you an ad, you can be relatively confident it will be sufficiently related to something you want to see anyway.
Put simply, Google ads are things you may want to see based on what you searched for.
This is a Good Thing(tm).
Never confuse volume with power.
I interviewed with M$. And they were working on a search engine. It was supposed to be trying to add more advanced search algorithms.
So, yes they can compete... I guess....
It seemed to me that M$ is annoyed that MSN sucks so bad. They want to make MSN more visible.
Google is:
- Fast
- Efficient
- Powerful
- Accurate
- Largely Bug Free
These are features which oppose Microsoft's core ideology, and so they have no chance in hell of beating Google at its game.
MS' track record in this area is absolutely appalling. MSN's search feature is slow and returns some ridiculously irrelevant results at times. Microsoft's homepage is even worse, the search box is confusing, it is slow as hell (Microsoft were dumb enough to use Windows / IIS on their web servers - fools), and it returns results which are about as useful to the user as a pro-Microsoft story on Slashdot.
They had this to say on w2k outperforming freebsd by "a statistically significant margin":
I'm a girl too! See naked chicks in my journal!
...but if Microsoft can come up with something better, I'm all for it. An advancement in the field is still an advancement in the field, no matter who makes it. If anything, the new competition will make the leader work that much harder to stay on top.
Good luck to Microsoft in their endeavour.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The people in the place all hum the theme from "Dallas", then sing "Deep in the Heart of Texas" while roping cattle and riding to work on horses, and the state executes a retarded person.
And the next step will be the comprehensive disposal of your favorite websites unless you pay significant amounts of money per month to view them.
I'd rather pay the artists than the cereal makers and car salesmen for the artistic content I experience -- surely I can't be alone...? Yes, I know this will mean less content in volume, but I think what's there won't mean any less to people.
deus does not exist but if he does
No, they understand, they are just trying to turn the corner and collect the payoff of this pro-piracy investment. The pressure is on because the stock price is flat.
Cool, somehow I missed that gem of a Gates-ism. I guess I should amend my comment to indicate M$'s overconfidence and complacency. I don't blame them for huffing and puffing about piracy like they used to, it kept their corporate customers buying (ie, the moneytree). But now with forced reg of WinXPhome, customers will not buy that 2nd copy for any of a hundred reasons - forcing them to go to win98 for the second computer. And ultimately, having a lot of people running legacy OS's for longer than the natural product lifecycle is going to be bad for their security, since (let's face it) most windows installs go unpatched.
I think that the war for dominance they won could be un-won, and I think their efforts on piracy is the only chance they have to lose their hold on the desktop market.
Oh, and as for their share price, they will ultimately have to learn that they are no longer a growth company. Notice they finally paid a dividend? That's the hallmark of an old-economy company, and with Microsoft getting crushed (financially) outside their core markets, they better get used to it. They've simply reached saturation with Office and Windows, their only divisions making a profit. My point there is that, even if they get every customer to pay for their copy of windows, it isn't enough to stall their decline in growth more than a quarter or so. They've wrung as much growth out of that sector as is humanly possible, but that period is over.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
If Microsoft made a plane, would You fly on it?....
...not funny.
We dance to all the wrong songs.
--Refused.
Google search for worst search engine
which are...?
"Ok, buy em out, boys!"
"We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
Nah. I suspect that most shows that have made it in the past (The Simpsons?) have started out being ad-funded. Sure, people might be willing to pay for video/DVD collections NOW that it is popular, but I doubt it would have grown if i9t hadn't been forced onto the air with the help of advertising.
With websites, it's even harder. To get people to pay for website content is extremely difficult, and the chances of enough people visiting a new website *and paying to view it* to keep it in business, bearing in mind that with no advertising, EVERY website would have to be directly paid for, is remote in my opinion. If you think otherwise, you're not being realistic.
If you're against advertising, I think what you're really wanting is for the current large companies/websites to maintain a stranglehold on things (for they are the only people that would have enough of a customer/view base to stay afloat through subscriptions) and for no new ones to emerge. That's not what I want.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
MS can want to take on Google all they want to, but as long as MSN remains a mess of clashing colors, pictues, advertising, pop-ups, and unnrealated information, it will just remain another crappy ISP's attempt to build a portal that can convince AOL.com junkies to switch. And given MSN's history of screwing up pretty much everything, that will not happen.
Advertising is stupid. And the people who advocate are even stupider, because they believe there's some sort of obligation for people to look at the ads.
You clearly don't have a clue about advertising.
This is one reason why I like Googles system - it's links to products that (99% of the time) related to what I'm searching for. Like a directory listing, more than an advertisement.
That is *still advertising*, so please at least learn what advertising IS before you contradict yourself by saying that 'advertising is stupid'.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
So going with the 'Bigger' not 'Better' approach Microsoft seems so fond of . its safe to state that they want to be the Walmart of search engines.
.. err .. don't have knowledge of Walmart.
Walmart being a HUGE, kinda crappy department/discount store here in the states for folks whos countries have not been cursed with
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
Ignore the grumpy bit at the front and just read the rest of the post.
1) Bundle "new" search engine with your OS.
2) Have google on the back end.
3) Add lots of pop ups.
4) Profit!!
At last, the plan is complete.
What, me Tweet?
People seem to be getting used to having everything provided for them by large companies and/or governments. What's wrong with amateur & local content? What it lacks in polish, it makes up for in fostering a sense of community. Really, it comes down to where people want to spend their money (i.e. the market is always right). I think you're correct, if people are willing to accept the current model, they'd pay through the nose for the same subsidized crap they already get, rather than invest less money in deveoping someone with a bit of potential outside the current whorish media system.
:/
I've never bought a Britney Spears CD or watched an episode of Survivor, so why should I have to fund these activities with my supermarket purchases? Ah well, grumble grumble grumble...
deus does not exist but if he does
Why is this marked flamebait? And why do people think this wasn't funny? I thought it was hilarious.
Of note was the fact that while Google was in first place, MSN was in third place behind Yahoo.
Take that for whatever it's worth.
This sig no verb.
I would probably find it a lot funnier if I knew who Cardinal Sergey Brin and his gang were, and why they rush into the rooms.
Hmmm... Let me google for references.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
Remember when M$ bought Hotmail and switched from BSD to Windows and all the problems that have happened since then? Google runs on Linux, and if Microsoft buys Google and switches to Windows, Google will be slow and unreliable. Not to mention pay-for-placement will be introduced and totally ruin the only honest search engine out there today.
> Beating that will take some major innovation (AI or some sort of highly intelligent ranking system)
Yes, and we all know Microsoft's track record with AI --
* Microsoft Bob
* Clippy
Frankly, I don't like MS, nor how the people there ``innovate", but I hope they don't return to using that technology. I'm not looking forward to the collateral damage.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
If they REALLY want to, they'll bury them. Just like they buried netscape, OS/2, and all office suites. They invested a HUGE sum of money into natural language processing technologies. In fact some of the best scientists in this domain are currently working for them. So if they want to, they'll eat Google alive.
to see who gets into office before they try to kill another innovative company... Have you noticed that when you search for 'google' on msn the results list has MSN second from the top with a pretty picture beside the link? It use to be first, before google.com so they are getting better.
Microsoft has been willing to carry MSN.com for quite some time with no profit. They make their profits on their OSes. If they are willing to put their effort towards killing Google, they'll be able to do lots of damage. Netscape was a worthy product, and it's essentially gone; WordPerfect was a better DOS product, and they pretty much killed it, too. (lengthy digression opportunity avoided.)
Google's business model has been pretty low-key. I've never seen a Google ad, yet it is clearly recognized as the search engine. They make a much better product. Faster, more robust, better features, and most of all, better results. They have rolled out advertizing in a way that is straightforward and reasonable. MS would have to go very far to provide a better user experience for me, and based on my experience of MSN, I don't think MSFT can do it.
Google is already a profitable company, and may not need to go public to raise cash. Take a look at Google's Corporate Information. As long as they stick to their way of doing business, I'll be using Google. I just hope that Microsoft doesn't beat them up too badly in the process.
It would obviously be a bitter pill to swallow for them to keep the existing technology "in place" (this would have far more exposure than hotmail using unix systems) so you know they will want to switch to MS based OS's for their server farm.
Personally, I doubt their systems can handle such a load. Sure, "I may be wrong..." and 10 times as many NT boxes will actually keep up without crashing [and you know MS could afford to expand the google data center by an order of magnatude ;) ] but what is going to happen at the next outbreak of a MS-sql-based "worm" [whups -- as I wrote this my webserver deflected another default.ida request -- imagine code red or nimda happily bouncing around a few thousand CPU's in a single datacenter over a gigabit-ethernet backplane...]
And what happens the next time MS decides it is time to get the masses to "upgrade" by making the next release incompatable with the current release? Sure, updates can be automated, but on the scale it would take to upgrade Google's data center? [even at the current size]
the post itself is a reference to a Monty Python skit about the Spanish Inquisition.
Sergey Brin is one of the heads of Google. (he developed it, and is the moral compass for google)
You can read a (fairly close) script of the Spanish Inquisition bit here
--
Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.
Sorry for you and the moderators who modded this up. You are wrong. Don't take my word for it, quoted from Google:
/.
Reach new customers through highly targeted advertising on the most used search engine on the Web. Google Premium Sponsorships advertising delivers your ad whenever someone searches on the keywords you know are relevant to your product. It is a CPM-priced, full-service premium program that guarantees fixed placement for your ads in one of two enhanced text links appearing at the top of the Google results page....
later on they state
Fixed placement and fixed budget allocation with CPM pricing give you control and consistent results.
Read that "guaranteed placement" again. Like I said, we are USING the program, not just talking about it on
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
once again, over modded, under supported.
Other search engines selling placement have intermixed search results with sponsored content with the sponsored bits coming up earlier in the listing and no labeling or seperation.
who actually mixes them them the actual search results? NO ONE. no search engine of any size does this period. just because you say "they" do, and don't say who "they" are, doesnt make it true.
Believe me, if someone does, please tell me. I would love to buy the product. But as an advertiser who spends a lot of $$$ on online ads, i can tell you no one has offered me this mysterious mixing of ads with search results you speak of.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
I didn't even know what you were talking about until I tried a quick search. I don't even notice those links; my brain must instantly recognize them as ads and ignore them completely. The colored background makes that particularly easy.
;)
:)
You are very correct in this. Many people do exactly this. I can even tell you a fairly accurate % of how many do, but I won't
A certain % ignore top ads, another % ignore right ads, etc. This is why someone worth their salt in marketing and advertising knows how to shotgun their ads, and work on placement as well. There is no "one" perfect ad. This is also why all the portals/engines are switching to multiple ad spaces: top, bottom, sides, word ads, banners, etc. On a few engines, we own all the real estate for our keywords, and can trace clickthrus
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Microsoft shouldn't feel left out - I use their name as a verb all the time. Granted, it's usually in sentences like: "I'm gonna Microsoft your datacenter back to the stone age." But still...
Microsoft can easily beat Google if they are willing to shell out a few dollars. Google is by no means the end-all be-all of search engines. One area that Google has not even touched, that Microsoft will have a serious leg-up in, is user specific search. Microsoft has access to a ton of data about who uses the web and why, if they figure out a way to use all that data without everyone crying then google may be stopped in their tracks. Also, most of Google's searches actually come from other portals that have partnered with Google, not from their own website, so clearly having a light-weight interface is not a concern to a lot of people. Most people tend to use what is put before them, if Microsoft can build an equal or better engine (again, by no means improbable) then I think they will win this game.
MSN: keyword: linux results: 603 containing "linux" Google: keyword: linux results: Results 1 - 100 of about 56,600,000 I think the thinking is if they can't find it then they won't use it. I doubt they'll actually change much with there search engine, they're just looking for press that says they compete with google. So people who don't know any better think there are all of about 40,000 websites on the internet. It's a better user experience if your a brainless twit.
A search engine is Internet based. The only way they can intergrate it with Windows and IE is to create a link to it. IE already does that upon default install. Guess what? People still can somehow find it in them to take up the arduous task of typing GOOGLE [ctrl+enter] to access the Google search engine.
Try this:
+ en gine&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?q=the+worst+search
and you'll see exactly why Microsoft wants to buy google!
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Too bad this article is so old. I just did a google search on slashdot, and the paid ad to the right is Google, saying they are hiring. I guess google wants to hire slashdot readers!
I would never type in a search term into a search engine owned by Microsoft.
Thats like buying a gun from Walt Disney.
You do have a point there. Most search engines seem to do a better job separating paid content from their normal "editorial" search results. But it hasn't always been this way. Indeed, it took notice from the FTC before sites began to clean up and better label their listings.
I did a cursory search for "linux" on a few of the other major search engines. And the results were fairly good. Ask Jeeves not only labels their links accordingly, but separates them with visually cuing shadowed boxes. AOL Search uses a bit of white space and bright orange labels to differentiate the various listings. And while MSN Search does label the different listings... their choices of colors, white space (or a lack thereof), and minuscule visual cues seems more designed to confuse the issue. Overture results are accompanied by a fine-print label on a result by result basis which seems to be the most obscured listings in my quick non-inclusive review.
Searchengine Watch did their own review on paid-for-listing features of various larger search engines. Although the information may be a bit dated.