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."
... therefore Microsoft has now officially become the devil (it was assumed before).
Rob
Google has modified all Microsoft.com links to point to SCO's website.
I'm on a chair.
Company with many diverse software offerings, including internet services, wants to be the top search engine.
It's a company, what would you expect?
The news would be if Microsoft said it didn't want to be compared to google, or any other search engines. This, as it stands, is hardly newsworthy.
--
Use Vobbo for Video Blogs
What next? Taking over the internet? Oh i forgot, they already did :/
As long as they use Windows to power the thing google doesn't have to worry about MSN being king of the hill for search engines.
That being said, if anyone can compete, it's Microsoft. They have deep pockets, but they don't always win (see UltimateTV, e.g.).
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
Trying to take on google's API..
Called MSNBot, the software scours Web sites and collects hyperlinks and documents. The software is part of MSN's effort to challenge Google by revitalizing MSN Search with its own algorithmic search technology.
You'll never beat the mind-share that Google has. No-one is gonna use MSNbot as a verb, like "I just googled for planetside tips" or create sites like googlism. Msnbotism? Hah!
--------
Free your mind.
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.
Let me guess... it tells YOU what your looking for?
What does Microsoft think it has going to counter that sort of incredible power?
that should make searching for why my computer just BSODed that much easier.
One Can Never Own Enough Musical Instruments...
Once Microsoft bought the government, buying Google was the next logical step.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
a typical example of microsoft having so much money that they don't know where to spend it first... And in a bizarre result, they tend to spend it on the thoughest oponents !
Google is good and popular technology, very unlikely they can improve on it, yet they will throw millions at it just *because* it's a 'monopoly'. Very much like the XBox being the dead-end answer to the PS2.
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
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
what i think is really interesting here is what will happen to the new functionality.
presumably, it'll be part of MSN. so who are they after, really?
the tech savvy don't use MSN. the tech ignorant use AOL. so who are they going for? it makes me nervous when ballmer & co set their sites on something and i don't understand the reasoning behind it.
it can't just be about longhorn search capabilities, can it?
ed
Just for kicks, go to MSN's front page and search for Linux. If that's any indication of what their new search engine is going to be like, I'm sure we can rely on it to be a completely accurate and unbiased source of information.
Microsoft, the software giant, announced today that it was poised to take on God, Creator of the Heavenâ(TM)s and Earth.
âoeI think we are ready for this,â said Bill Gates, who plans on renaming himself âoeThe Gatesâ. âoeGod has had his time running the universe, now itâ(TM)s my, err, our turn.â
Microsoft would not comment on future plans if they do indeed beat God out as ruler of the heavens, but did say they plan on charging a license fee for living.
God was unavailable for comment, but was heard laughing very loudly.
Film at eleven.
Can you see Microsoft showing this level of restraint?
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
User-agent: MSNBot /
Disallow:
Here's some more history about Microsoft's (MSN's) searching capability.
I like people.
Apparently msnbot.com has been owned by Go Daddy Software since April of 2002, according to the WHOIS entry. Maybe they knew something we didn't?
I'm sure when MS sues Go Daddy Software over this, it will show up here on /.
MSN, as it turns out, is not the only newly announced pretender to Google's throne. Yahoo!, following its purchase of search engine Inktomi, recently said it would try to take back its early reputation as the Web's best search provider. And Overture's recent acquisition of the first really good Web search utility, AltaVista, gave indication that its hat is in the ring, too.
This is a lot of strange bedfellows. Google has been Yahoo's search provider, and Inktomi has been a longtime Microsoft provider. The musical chairs reinforce the notion that the act of searching isn't the key value of a search engine anymore.
MS as been challenging google for a while. For those of us in the not so uber geek clan(IE users), this has been known. Whenever a page fails it takes you to a msn search page. Nice features that lures some away, but the content sucks and results are not as good as googles. The Google search engine is the best and others try to compete, which is a good thing. Good luck MS but my homepage remains faithfully to google.com.
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. ..."
Who had a Microsoft rep in the office proposing the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars.
So my friend said "All right - let's have a test. I'm going to have Google look for this search string that deals with Microsoft technical information - and I'll have the Microsoft technical page do the same thing. And we'll see who has the most accurate and fastest results."
"But - but that's not a fair contest!" the Microsoft rep told him.
"No," my friend said, "It's not, because Google just returned the results for its entire current storage of the Internet, and the Micorosft Technet search engine is...still looking."
Should Google be worried? Naturally - always be paranoid about competition. The best thing it can do is keep going to businesses and say "What do you need to look up?" and figure out how to make their system work for them. "You want to search emails super fast? You have tons of documents you need to search through?"
To be honest, Microsoft has not succeeded very well outside the operating systems - look at handhelds, cable access - MSNBC is doing all right, but I attribute that to the NBC rather than the MS part of it.
Google has a lot of brand name, it has proven, cheap, realiable technology that is getting better. As long as they keep that edge, keep pushing the envelope, keep talking to businesses/consumers and find out what they want and deliver on it, MS will be left with YAMSP (Yet Another Money Sucking Project).
Of course, I could be wrong. But based on my Safari and Mozilla browser searching Google and my non-Geek wife actually using the words "I'll just Google that later", I'm not too worried.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
And don't forget about Google's API which works with several programing languages and gives the developer a lot of functionality.
.NET only feature.
I bet that MS would not offer that, or maybe a
Google is more than just a search engine.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There was a story a few days ago about distributed computing and search engines... Ahh... here it is. You don't suppose that Microsoft hopes to make use of DC software in the updated Messenger client to index pages?
Maybe default Apache configurations should disallow MS bots, so that MSN can't find anything?
Turnabout is fair play? No?
This is my sig.
what? if i use IE i am not uber? i'd rather use IE than a majority of the browsers out there.
you suck, you will never be uber.
If you liked licking my balls, add me to your foes list!
Google is not a selectable default search engine in IE already. The only way to effectively make Google your search page in IE is to make it your homepage.
Oh no! Is the XBox2 going to include Microsoft Bob as well?
I read the internet for the articles.
I remember playing with msn's search a while ago and it comes back with some funny results. Why is the 3rd result for a search on "Linux" titled "Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP" from www.microsoft.com?
Pardon my flagrant opnionation here, but I envision the following:
MS Coder: Boss, we've got a problem.
MS Boss: What is it?
MS Coder: It turns out you can't trust the "keywords" meta-tag.
MS Boss: What?!?
MS Coder: Seriously. Some unscrupulous people abuse it.
MS Boss: Crap. Now what?
MS Coder: Well, it seems we're going to have to come up with a smarter algorithm than "index by keyword metatag".
MS Boss: But Google didn't have to write any fancy software.
MS Coder: Actually, we're now operating on the theory that Google does in fact have some fairly advanced software.
MS Boss: Advanced?!? You mean like technically advanced?
MS Coder: Yeah, it looks that way.
MS Boss: But we don't write our own technically advanced software - we wrap mediocre implementations of Unix technology in Macintosh user friendliness.
MS Coder: I know - it's a bit of a problem.
MS Boss: Pity we can't "partner" with them.
MS Coder: Yeah, like Stac, Java, and that smartphone company.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
What does Microsoft think it has going to counter that sort of incredible power?
Just playing devil's advocate (you did ask) but presuming they can get search accuracy within spitting distance of Google, their big advantage is Windows and Internet Explorer. (Yes I know, illegal bundling, monopoly, yadda, yadda... Who here thinks MS won't tie something into Windows if they can?) They could tie all sorts of interesting search functions into Windows and Office. Why fire up the web browser if you can search without it?
I agree that it's unlikely MS will supplant Google but never underestimate a monopoly with $40+billion in the bank. Most people get to Google through Microsoft software. That's a perfect opportunity for MS to put itself in the middle. Not easy but definitely possible.
>> Don't be cocky.
Remember Hotmail? A very popular web-mail service? Remember MS coming in and leaving things be for a few months, and then bombarding it with advertising?
Don't think MS won't take advantage of every bit of white space. Yes Google should take notice, but I couldn't picture them being incredibly concerned.
they stop returning good results.
That's the only reason that I use it. If MS can create a better search engine then Google, that finds better pages with less thinking (less words and tweaking of searches).
The only problem I have with a search engine is when I go to it and have to try like 10 searches to get what I want, when I can goto Google and get it in 2.
However, they had better start from scratch because all their previous search engines are really bad. The MSDN one being the worst. Maybe there is a way to have it return better results, but I haven't found it. I want it to be easier to narrow down my choices for APIs. I mean why is a MSCE API ranked higher then a Win32 api call on their results pages? Are there really more users of the WinCE api?
The only time I ever seem to use the MSN search is when I enter a URL into IE that it doesn't recognize (i.e. just about anything that doesn't either end in .com or start www).
Then it invariably brings up an MSN search page with, surprise!, my url right at the top. Hell, using that method they could become the leaders in much the same way that the MSN homepage is one of the most visited one on the internet (because so many users don't bother to change the default one loaded every time you open a new browser window).
"He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."
1. Acquire a large EMP device.
2. Park large EMP device outside of Google headquarters.
3. Detonate large EMP device.
4. Profit!
or something along those lines...I can't think of any other way they'll get ahead of google...
(also notice, that the usual missing step 3 is included in this exercise for your viewing pleasure)
Now they're trying to integrate their search engine into the OS? Well if they do MSN's search service will eventually rise to #1 regardless of how poor the quality of it is (It's working for IE). Because most people will just use Windows' search function, and a smaller portion will be aware of that as
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
A quick google on this topic (search term: microsoft google slashdot) would have shown that this story is a repeat.
It's notable that this functionality is customizable. MSN is the default site that Internet Explorer sends you to, but you can configure it to redirect you to one of the following sites instead:
g ht
AltaVista
Google
Ask Jeeves
Fast
DirectHit
Excite
GoTo
NorthernLi
Yahoo
I, of course, have it perform the search on Google.
The other thing to note is that MSN does not have an "I'm Feeling Lucky" button, but it does have an annoyingly fugly butterfly. I think the last two items will be the determining factor in the Search Wars.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
...then they will fail miserably.
:)
Half the time, I get JScript 'Out of Memory' errors or NO results from my searches...
Long live Google!
Had the same problem at both work DNS servers, as well. Only router-blocked port 53 from that /16, tho. Execs and stuff need to get to some of the sites in there :(.
(I know, replying to your own posts is lame. Sorry, deal.)
The registry key that has this (on 2k) is: \HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Search . There are 2 keys here - Customize Search & Search Assistant. Both of them point to http://ie.search.msn.com/...
Now, I can't find the address you're supposed to change the references "to" (as in, at google), but that's where to change it "from".
I am dyslexia of borg - your ass will be laminated.
They try to control what you read and hear via NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, Newsweek, and Slate. They go after what does and doesn't exist on the WWW by setting up MSN, Expedia, Encarta, Carpoint, etc. They try to control personal communication through Hotmail. They control what software you use via Windows and their aquire-and-crush tactics. Controlling their customers' search results is simply the next logical thing to do.
There is competition, right now, but that is no guarantee of competition in the future.
In other markets and industries, people have clearly stated they don't want one company controlling their whole life. Why is it so damn difficult to do the same thing with computers and software???
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Search: [browser ]
"Browser" returns the following link:
Internet Explorer Website.
Search:: [mozilla ]
"Mozilla" returns the following link:
Internet Explorer Website.
Search:: [OpenOffice.Org ]
"OpenOffice.org" returns the following link:
Microsoft Office Website.
Search:: [quicktime]
"quicktime" returns the following link:
Microsoft Windows Website.
Search:: [Apple computer]
"Apple computer" returns the following link:
Microsoft Windows Website.
Etc. You get the idea...
W
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
...the M$Nbot will index pages that have "100% Microsoft-Free Site" badges on every page? :-)
Honestly, this isn't such a bad thing. I use Google as my main search engine as do most geeks, but even after preaching the virtues of Google for years, my 24 year-old sister *insists* on using MSN Search, as she "finds it easier to access and use MSN Search" for some God forsaken reason. I guess because it's just easier to hit the "Search" button on IE's toolbar than it is to go to Favorites and click on Google.
In any case, if my sister is an example of the standard non-geek masses, getting people to switch from using MSN to Google is difficult at best. If MSN can become more handy and more useful than it currently is, where's the harm in that? It might give Google some competition, which is always good, and increase the productivity of searching the Internet for "the unwashed masses."
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde
The first thing that attracted me to Google, even before witnessing the quality of the search algorithm, was the sheer bareness of their main page. I heartily applaud any website that keeps their main page under 15Kb. Even more important, I applaud any website that values the goals of the users so much that their main page is essentially a single function with no fluff. I also applaud any website that maintains a zero ad banner and popup rule.
MS will never be able to compete with this. I would be very surprised if their main page will weigh in under 75Kb. It will be 90% fluff. And there will be ads all over it!
Google wins.
.
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
Um, it's already in Windows XP. Just click Start then Search. MSN is the default site (as expected, why would it not be?) but with two clicks you can change the default search site to Google, or a number of other search sites.
I think I'll stop here.
or change the default to something other than Microsuck.
[sarcasm]
It's actually quite simple: [/sarcasm]
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
Here is an article on making IE use Google.
Cheers,
JAKD
"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
A lot of posts are arguing that Google is too well-entrenched, too effective and too smart to ever fail. Consider these points.
1) Google is entrenched. Yes, "google" has become synonymous with "internet search." But does that really mean people would never use anything else? Just because your mom uses "google" as a verb does not necessarily mean that she's a big fan of Google. More likely, she's just using the search engine, and its name, because everyone else does.
Don't assume that the non-geek masses would make any fuss about "googling" something through a different search engine. After all, most of us call facial tissues "kleenex" regardless of the manufacturer. Hell, in some parts of America, people refer to all pop (soda) as "Coke."
2) Google is effective. Sure, it's effective. But is the effectiveness really so great that no one else can come up with a substitute which is adequate, at least for the average user? Be honest, Google-fans, when was the last time you even used another search engine? Do people continue to praise Google's effectiveness on the basis of actual comparisons, or simply because "Google = best search engine" has become conventional wisdom? (And I don't believe that would be enough to protect Google, either, given that "google" has become generic enough that a lot of people might think they are "googling" regardless of which search engine they use. Think about how many people believe that their web browser is "AOL.")
I wonder how much of Google's popularity is actually due to its lack of visual clutter. The spartan layout is nice on its own merits, but because it presents information in a clean, efficient manner, I suspect that people are also more willing to believe that the results are efficient as well. If Microsoft can make a search function that is built into Windows, it could challenge Google's transparency and no-brainer ease of use.
3) Google is smart. The people at Google are clever, but I'm not sure anyone is too smart to make a critical mistake that Microsoft can take advantage of. After all, Microsoft has ready access to the vast majority of computer desktops, and many billions of dollars in cash that they are willing to spend in order to buy dominance in new markets.
Google isn't infallible. Remember the usenet fiasco? They angered a lot of people with that. Most of whom have forgiven and forgotten since, but odds are good that at some point, Google will make another big mistake. Or perhaps just a series of small ones. In any event, Microsoft can afford to wait for that to happen, and has a lot of experience in taking advantage of rivals' slip-ups.
I read something here on
I find the Google Toolbar to be quite a usefull little add-on to IE. Any time I want to search, it's there. Plus, it has the ability to highlight the search terms on the webpage. In addition, clicking on the search term highlight moves you from one occurence of the search term to the next one on the page.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
MSN search bots definetly are hostile to the internet.
On my server, I had this experimental php script that just prints new lines in a loop forever.
Well, a brilliant bot from MS address space (it didn't identyfy itself as anything else than IE) didn't read the robots.txt (which denies everything) and found its way to the script. When I later started wondering what was jamming my ADSL, I realized that the bot had hammered the script a bit over hundred times, each time timing out after downloading about ten megs...
signatures pending - ansa@kos.to - (dont mail there)
Clippy: You seem to be getting your ass fragged. What would you like to do?
Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
Yes, IE6 is far superior to the majority of browsers out there - IE3,IE4,IE5 and IE5.5!
Karma: Could be worse (could be raining)
Google's corporate ethic is diametrically opposed to Microsofts.
Therefore, Microsoft's corporate ethic will ALWAYS prevent a Microsoft Search Engine from producing reliable (ie. uncommercially biased) results.
Google's refusal to bias it's rankings based on ad revenue is it's strenght, and the very reason it become so popular, it decimated all competition. No matter how good your technology may be - if you poison your results with commercial bias, there will be roughly ZERO demand for that search service. Even if Microsoft leverages their monopoly to try to cram it down people's throats, it will still fail. Nobody wants another spam factory disguised as a search engine.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Google has been expecting this for a long time and are prepared for it. MS is the only company that has been considered a serious threat, at least for the last year. They've got the name recognition, browser control and financial resources to do it. But do they have the right technical people? Are they committed to buying their way in no matter the cost? How about overcoming some very ingrained company traits and playing fair?
Then there's the Google motto of "don't be evil" to contend with. Part of Google's success, I believe, is due to not being evil, and more than that, to being good. That covers things like clearly marking ads, keeping their home page simple (I wouldn't use it as my browser home page if it wasn't) and not accepting payments for rank improvement.
There are a lot of very smart people at Google and my sources say the management is very shrewd and realistic. I'll bet they weather this storm. The drubbing of Netscape was, I think, an easier thing to do. Google already gives away their service for free, and they've got immense mindshare. Netscape had good name recognition at the time, but back then there was a flood of new users that didn't know anything about the net. That was also at a time when there wasn't so much anti-Microsoft sentiment out there (yes, even the general public has had a taste of it due to the court cases).
Wow, I just about convinced myself to submit my resume!
I just did a search on msn for "linux", like someone here suggested.
The first non-paid for result was "below the fold" of my window. I have to scroll if I want to even see past the ads.
If I want an ad engine, I'll go visit double-click. Nothing wrong with some ads...but mostly true non paid for results are what it's all about. It should not be a chore to see past the ads.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
http://www.etplanet.com/windows/longhorn/ Could it get any more integrated than having a search bar on the taskbar? This searchbar will search files on your computer, phonebooks... and "the internet" (read: MSN search)
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
MSN Search is already integrated into Windows. You can get to it from several places in Explorer, and Internet Explorer. And if IE can't find a page, it offers to find a similar page on MSN Search. And yet, people still type www.google.com in the address bar, to get to a better search engine.
What, exactly, are they going to change?
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
One lovely facet of Google is their sheer abhorrence of advertisements. Just a nice clean interface. Somehow, I just don't see M$ coming up w/ something of that caliber. Even if they divine a more superior search engine, I'd still pick Google over it anyday for the lack of advertisements.
"Embrace the whitespace!"
-jc
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.
Competition is a good thing, and I hope that MSN makes a nice offering. If its good, I'd use it, but only so long as it works in my browser.
MSN MoneyCentral has the best free stock screener, bar none, of any on the internet. You wouldn't know it if you don't use IE though, because the link to the deluxe screener doesn't even show up in other browsers.
Check out this FAQ about MSNBot:
http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm
Some of the responses are rather disturbing.
Mozilla is too and you don't see it running away with the race. MSN can still easily win. Just integrate it into the OS and make it the default search engine. Every one here is talking about how much better results Google gives and how the page is so much cleaner and works so much faster.
It doesn't matter. The vast majority of people use defaults no matter what, a good portion of the rest will think "Hmm well MS is a super huge company so I'm sure what ever they make will be really good quality and be so much better than the competition". Don't count on them pick up on the search time as they'll probably attribute any difference to the internet being slow. Also sure as heck don't expect them to really notice the differing quality of search results, for one it's a completely subjective category and another you they likely won't even pay close enough attention to notice the difference. It's simple enough, integrate it into the OS, (something similar to Sherlock? been a while since I've used it), and make it the default anything on the windows box, home page too, really the average new user has no desire to change any kind of settings with their computer for the simple reason they don't really understand them. A search engine is obviously a good choice for a home page, make it your search engine and they're likely in your palm forever. Given the resources MS has and the actions they've been willing to take in the past combined with the courts unwillingness to stop them they would be fools if they didn't become #1.
I stole this Sig
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.
"Google has a lot of brand name, it has proven, cheap, realiable technology that is getting better. As long as they keep that edge, keep pushing the envelope, keep talking to businesses/consumers and find out what they want and deliver on it, MS will be left with YAMSP (Yet Another Money Sucking Project)."
See, that is the point that most of the tech-savvy miss. The mantra of the tech world is "make a better product and they will come." Problem is that average-joe-user does not have a clue about what is better -- and it is for this reason that Microsoft will win (as they always have -- regardless of how much better or innovative the competition is). This whole article made my heart sink. Imagine this:
CLIENT SIDE:
1) MSN search bar in IE, default search to MSN with a bad URL -- no way to change to Google
2) Search local files -- also kicks back a MSN search if nothing found -- no way to change to Google.
3) Build MSN search into Office and Outlook without any way to use Google that way.
With this, Joe average user will find it harder and harder to use Google and easier to use MSN, regardless of which is better. In addtion to this:
SERVER SIDE:
1) Build the ability for MSN robots to get metadata from the OS itself in an "undocumented" way that no one else can use with the next release of Windows (who cares if it opens security holes -- no one blames MS for security holes -- they blame "The Internet"). Think of the whole IIS/IE broken-tcp-IE-advantage thing here.
2) Make it such that IIS breaks other search engines robots
Overall it will make MSN seem better and Google seem worse in comparison. They have done all this before and they will do it again. Microsoft will win no matter how good Google is.
I invite anyone to counter my argument that average Joe user will use MSN over Google if MS makes it too tough to use Google through the desktop Monopoly.
The *really* scary part about this is that if MSN wins Microsoft will control the information that flows on the internet. Imagine all Linux-related web sites no loger getting indexed? The whole "search-for-linux-get-windows instead" points to this.
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.
People use many types of access from various ISPS to login, using computers from a wide variety of manufacturers. Most of them use Microsoft operating systems which is a danger to the whole computing world. Microsofts software is increasingly unstable, bloated and generally low-quality. Their monopoly allows them to be lax with testing and quality control.
The same principle applies to search engines. Almost everyone uses google or yahoo to seach for anything. These two sites have become the very interface to the Internet. This also allows them to alter information (place pro-republican sites above pro-democracy for 'election' search), snoop (with the FBI they might already be doing this), and in the long run suffering the same quality control fate as Microsoft. People build a view of the world around them by exploring and communicating with the other people. The Internet allows people to talk to other people far away and share political and moral opinions which on a larger scale helps tolerance and peace itself. These are not small issues; how many politicians can anyone think of who do NOT get their information from the Internet?
More search engines will increase the diversity and break the stronghold of google. Google is a single point of failure for the Internet (the only other one is the DNS servers system) for most Internet users. Although I use it and love it, we are giving one company too much control, while knowing what the results of that are. I do doubt Microsoft can cut it as a competitor there since Ive never used MSN, and Ive seen their success with the XBox and other home-media entertainment ventures. Other skilled companies however can bring a fresh search interface to the online world.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
And in other news, the MSN search system finds web pages reporting the factual truth that the Xbox is more successful than the Playstation2, OpenOffice prints documents in pig latin, and Linux originates from North Korea...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
MS will win.
Want a list of victems?
Who was better? Now who is around?
Who are the current targets
MS can spend 1 billion dollars/month on the war and still make a profit. That's without touching the 50 or so billion it has in the bank. Some one mentioned 20 man years to recreate Google? Easy, they can hire 200 engineers and buy multiple server farms, each one the size of Google's entire installation. Out of petty cash.
I'm a geek. I search for "ant" on MSN, it talks about insects, but the first category mentioned, and the 4th link on Google is for the java build tool. I search for "ruby" on MSN I get precious stones, I search on Google and both the 1st category and the 1st search result are the programming language. I search for "lint" and MSN's search results are mostly about the stuff that you find in your belly button; Google's results are mostly about program validation.
I don't know which one is "better" but the results from Google match what I'm looking for. The ones on MSN don't.
207.68.171.244 www.google.com
They didn't exactly highlight this information either. The "Featured Sites" font color is light and you have to click twice to get the featured sites definition.
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!
Excuse me? Since when did I let on that I'm a n IT worker or anything? News flash: I'm not. In fact, I don't even HAVE a job, nor ever had one. I'm a FRESHMAN in HIGH SCHOOL! I made a simple proofreading error. No need to be an ass.
Search for linux on MSN: 572 hits
Search for linux on Google: 57.1 million hits
Does this mean the search space of Google is 100,000 times as big?
kinda like this
I was wondering why the survey i took on microsoft.com the other day (because i approve of them for the most part unlike most of you) kept asking questions like, "How often do you use Google to search microsoft.com" and "Which Search Engines do you use most often." I would have to say though that microsoft acquiring google could probably not improve google any I appologize if this has already been said, i was not willing to read 500 posts to check.
"or telnet localhost 80"
;-)
I often browse my home website in this manner.
-phish