Slashdot Mirror
MSN Planning to Take on Google?
asyn42 writes "CNet is reporting what should be no surprise, Microsoft appears to be readying itself to take on Google for a position as the top search engine. The long range impact on the relationship between MSN and Yahoo/Inktomi is likely at risk."
Unfortunately for Microsoft, this is one area where it will take real innovation to usurp the top player.
You can't make Windows somehow incompatible with Google to force Windows users to use Microsoft's search engine. Google will find a way around it.
I found the meaning of life the other day, but I had write-only access.
What does Microsoft think it has going to counter that sort of incredible power?
I remember Netscape being quite omnipresent at one time. If they tightly integrate their search engine with Windows while making it work well, things might change.
Unless they:
(a) are as fast as google (yea, right)
(b) are as clean as google -- no graphic ads, only small text ads (again, yea right)
(c) Take the same strong anti-censorship stands that Google has taken (big yea right here)
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
--Pat
If they tightly integrate their search engine with Windows while making it work well, things might change.
You mean things will stay the same.
We bitched about IE being a core part of the OS, now we get to bitch that MSN is. Antitrust lawsuits, here we come again!
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
This quote from the article raised a few red flags in my mind though:
Seriously, does anyone else see future security holes in this? Because I sure as hell do. Think of a misconfigured Longhorn box, open to the net, letting ANYONE browse through their entire computer. Think those Quicken docs are safe? How about your stored emails? Not that you can't already find this stuff on KaZaa et. al, but I see a more widespread problem here.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
You're talking with a friend about some obscure topic, and to find out the answer, your friend says, "I'll google it." He fires up IE and heads to the MSNbot web page, at which point you say, "Dude, I thought you said you were going to google it."
This should be modded as insightful, not funny.
I am quite terrified, cause I am sure this will happen at some point.
http://use.perl.org
"linux" search on MSN; top site goes to Amazon, next two go to Microsoft.
"linux" search on Google; no microsoft links on the front page.
Bottomline: MSFT is not a credible source of information. I don't think that I'm the only one that thinks so.
--
$tar -xvf
Microsoft has clearly lost the Internet battle.
Microsoft's goal was to create a network in which they control all the protocols, all the formats and everybody has to pay a fee to put a site online.
But now we have a network with TCP/IP (Unix), http (neutral), html (neutral) where everybody can put up websites.
The whole browser-battle was just damage-control by Microsoft.
And in the next 5 years, with millions of online-capable PS3, millions of online-capable cellphones, millions of new Linux desktops (It's happening slowly, but it happens, just look at Munich and how 5 other cities around it also are looking into switching to Linux just a month after Munich's decision) and millions of Firebird or Opera users on Windows, IE's domination days are counted.
Sure, they will probably hold the majority of browsers for quite a while, but if only 30% are non-IE, it's a too large chunk to ignore and IE domination is over.
Yeah, I think they can easily replicate that.
Google isn't even doing advanced clustering, it is just fancy load balancing on top of a ton of small cheap servers. You could easily do the same thing with a bunch of Windows 2000, or Windows 2003 .Net servers.
The one thing Google DOES get from running Linux is big cost savings. For Microsoft, that's a non-issue though since it's their own software.
Here is what will stop them - Google can and does keep up with the times, updating their engine. Even if MS had the competing technology today, they would have to get it integrated into the OS/Browser. It won't happen with the OS, people don't upgrade that often, and it takes MS a long time to come out with a new version. IE may be a better candidate, but everyone doesn't upgrade their browser very often. (mass majority)
How they would be able to compete is to change what is already integrated, like if they updated MSN. (which is probably what they are doing). So further integration into the OS won't help them, it will become outdated very quickly.
And if they try to take on Google in the centrally located search engine, they can't do it. MS cannot innovate as fast as Google, period.
That being said, Google won't last forever. I remember several other "kings" of the search engine - Yahoo, AltaVisa, NorthernLight, etc etc. Google has held on for a long time though, because they innovate. I think the only was MS could beat them would be to buy them. That is their MO anyway.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Most posters here are overlooking the obvious.
As usual, this won't be a question of who as the superior technology or performance. It will be a question of which of the two (MS or Google) can force themselves upon the user first.
Obviously MS can, since it controls the computer. Most users are not technically saavy enough to choose a search engine. Most don't even understand they can type into the address bar.
When they go "onto the internet", they see MSN. MSN is the internet to them, the same way AOL has been the internet to a lot of unfortunate people over the last many years.
Of course, working against MS are the various spyware packages that help the user find things (via popups) that might not have appeared on MSN's search... chuckle.
To summarize, and no offense to non-saavy users (who won't read this anyway), but the sheep will be shepherded right thru MSN as usual.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Like this week's PC World magazine (I'm pretty sure it was PC World) says, when your name becomes a verb, something has gone very right. Google has had things going very right for a long time, and they're not trying to take over the entire world, which gives them cool points to boot!
But seriously, as a result of this, all of their products are incredibly useful and tolerable. You won't find much anti-Google sentiment out there because the services they offer are simply useful:
And, of course, the default Google search is customizable in particular ways. A search for link:slashdot.org tells me that nearly 31,000 web sites link to Slashdot. A search for site:microsoft.com netscape tells me that "netscape" is mentioned on at least 7,800 pages at Microsoft.com.
Sorry, but I don't think Microsoft can catch up to that. And even if Microsoft could, how would such a successful web venture as Google be hurt by it? If nothing else, a little competition might *slightly* reduce Google's load, allowing for even greater expansion of services...
I wrote far too much, but I'm in class, so I had a good excuse.
MSN.COM: 42KB HTML, 48KB Images.
GOOGLE.COM: 5KB HTML, 8KB Images.
MSN is too commercial. The search technology doesn't matter. The reason why Google is attractive is because it's:
1) Simple
2) Simple
3) Simple
4) Ad Free
5) Accurate
MSN (and Microsoft) has none of these. If they get #5, they are still down 4 in my book. They can't get 1-4 done, they've already buried themselves knee-deep in editorials, audio, video, and syndicated content.
Moving away from their current setup will alienate their coveted "AOL types", and improving search technology will do nothing to gain the attention of "Google types".
It's not about the results alone, it's the atmosphere and the confidence!