Slashdot Mirror
Ballmer On Microsoft's Search Goofs
An anonymous reader writes "AP reports on CEO Steve Ballmer's regret over Microsoft's failure to get into the search market early on. Best quote? 'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.' Nice to see they're still user-oriented."
"I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad," he said.
So, does not the recent 600 some odd millions dollar fine by the EU suggest anything to these guys? The USDOJ let them off the hook, but the rest of the world is proving not to be as forgiving. Perhaps they should be a little more humble?...........Nah.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Sounds like my kind of search engine!
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
from ballmer on microsoft's goofs, to balmer acting like a goof
I can counter that by saying, "I will make sure I never have an online experience again!"
Suckers.
'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.'
And that is exactly why MSN Search will never be bigger than Google.
BTW, timothy, just so you know - when inserting a clarifying phrase into a quote, one encloses it in square brackets and not normal brackets.
'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.'
I figured that the submitter hacked part of that quote out of the middle, only to find out the original article had it posted that way too!
And the pictures! I usually don't think of Steve Ballmer as evil (just the company he works for), but those pictures make him almost look menacing and demonic.
"Mwa ha ha ha...all your base are belong to us! Now give me your money, and here's your yearly upgrade of office. When's your first born due?"
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Happy Trails!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
Billy Mac, of Mac trucks, had this to say:
... a busy highway without getting hit by a Mac truck."
"I want to make sure (Steve Ballmer) can't get through
Setec Astronomy
I can pretty much guarantee that I'll see one on Slashdot every other story.
I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.
Well, don't think this behaviour is exclusive to Microsoft. Every CEO and Marketing exec is saying exactly the same thing, and have been for years. Everyone wants their ad where the user is.
Can someone say "unhealthy obsession"?
Fanaticism? Jealousy? Envy? Mod me to -1 and take my pain away.
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
don't you think Ballmer kinda looks like an evil Dr. Phil?
Apart from the wheely mouse (which I think HP invented), I can't think of *any* technologies that Microsoft got into early on. They missed TCP/IP, networking in general, the net (and the browser), etc.
Of their successes, with the honorable exception of their OS (copied from DR and then Apple) and their office suites (which they copied from, was it Lotus?), it's all been dubious business practices... Very successful company though they are, they are in no way innovative. Innovative isn't necessary for a monopolist position, and in fact is a bad business strategy - you might waste loads of cash, and you've got nothing to lose by preserving the status quo...
So it's just pure 100% Balmer, again...
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.'
That's gotta be a mood killer for people surfing pr0n.
This is no different than Microsoft's usual business tactics; enter a market where there are strong competitors, and use your ubiquity to promote your own agenda. I won't be surprised if in the new version of windows the 'CTRL + ENTER' trick to enter the www. and .com in the address bar suddenly brings up and MSN search isntead of what you were looking for. [Incredifind anyone?] The only thing is I doubt they will be able to get really good footing with the Google-naut in the fray. Unless of course they lose their 'Page Rank' copyright lawsuit.
On a side note, the only time I actually though Microsoft's product was better was the IE vs. Netscape wars. I used to use netscape but then IE got better. I don't see that happening here.
If you click Microsoft's ads does Microsoft have to pay more?
This will solve more problems than one. Really. If Microsoft makes everyone's online experience the digital equivalent of being pestered by sales calls 24 times a day, on the hour, every hour, then maybe people like myself will turn off the computer, get up, go outside, and get some more exercise, loose weight, defeat the obesity scare, live longer and have a social life! ...or, realistically, develop better ad-blocking software.
Who am I kidding.
Though it would be funny to see what ads would pop up when searching for "Windows XP 2004 Server Keygen"
If MSN Newsbot is any indication of their upcoming competition with Google and their excellent news page, I wouldn't worry just yet. I have tried using MSN Newsbot but abandoned it because of lack of content and mismatches between the article text and pictures, some of them ridiculous. They cannot even copy the concept with a decent level of quality. Note that both news services are currently in beta.
It's no wonder they're behind in the search engine wars. Nobody wants to be intruded with ads they don't care about. I shouldn't get an ad for the newest version of Office when I'm looking up one of my favorite bands. And if I do get that ad I don't want it to be bigger and placed in front of my search results.
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
But Microsoft is now turning its considerable might toward catching up. It's a move that puts Microsoft head to head with Google, the world's most popular Web surfing vehicle, and Yahoo, the Internet's most popular destination, in what many see as an important, growing and lucrative market. (Boldification mine)
Heh. Most popular? Nice to see that on Yahoo! News. (Although, being on yahoo may or may not have nothing to do with it since apparently it was written by an AP Business Writer)
Or maybe Yahoo! is the Internet's most popular destination, but I never knew that before. :P
This is just in keeping with the idea that it's more profitable to advertise heavily than to improve your product or make it cheaper. For most durables we buy, the actual production costs are very low in comparison with the retail price; the surplus is eaten up by the cost of selling the product to us.
I rue the day that you can't even get through slashdot without seeing some kind of "Buy Microsoft Software at www.microsoft.com" ad.
.
.
.
Damn!
The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.
Sounds like the online experience I'm having right now as I type this message.
Go tablet PC go!
Search: Linux
i d= kb;en-us;314458
/ un ix/tco.asp
m l
........"
results 4
1.)http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?sc
"How to remove Linux and install WindowsXP
2.)http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/migrate
"Linux more expensive to operate then Windows"
3.)http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxlicense.ht
"Linux contains SCO Unix intellectual property
4.)http://www.linuxsucks.com"
"Boy those guys at Microsoft sure know how to make great products
http://saveie6.com/
I want to make sure Steve Balmer can't get through a doctor's visit/border crossing/stop light without getting a full rectal exam.
BlackNova Traders
IE became the most popular browser primarily because you couldn't avoid it on any installation of Windows. Netscape, by contrast, you had to download, install, and -- in theory -- pay for.
Many Windows users will think it's too much to type in google.com and hit enter before they do a search, so Microsoft will once again use its monopoly to ruin a great product. Just like IE. Just like Windows Media. Just like Office. Just like Windows itself.
Remember, Microsoft's OS monopoly is so undermining precisely because Windows is the only thing most of the great unwashed computer users will ever see, and Microsoft controls what they see on that Windows computer. Well let's enjoy Google while it's still in business :-(
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
Quality products? There's a phrase microsoft avoids like the plague.
... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad," he said. - Can you say "Resistance is futile"? Yeesh. I knew they though it, just didn't think they'd be so blunt about it in a public conference!
Who cares if the products are high-quality, as long as they're ubiquitous, overpriced, underdeveloped, and as long as they all leverage eachother and all the other Microsoft money machines (MSN, hotmail, etc. etc.)
That's what they care about.
If only they could do it as intelligently as Disney does it - they're the same company, they're a massive organization with countless products of all different kinds, all leveraging eachother, constantly. But you'll notice the only ads on the Disney channel are Disney ads. It's all in-network. ABC pumps Disney & their holdings constantly.
If only MS had that kind of combination of balls and business smarts - instead they just have a 100% assimilation policy.
"I want to make sure (a user) can't get through
[Z?]
That last quote in the article is wierd, IT'S A YAHOO TROLL!!
Seriously, it doesn't attribute that quote to anyone, it just sort of ends the article. Also whenever you see "..." in a quote it means something important was cut out and the quote is wrong (this is common when advertising movies for example).
I'm not trying to defend Steveio I just think it's a lame way to end an article.
Serious, this is the funny quote I like:
"That's probably the thing I feel worst about over the last few years -- not making our own R&D investment," Ballmer said at a conference for online advertisers held at Microsoft's Redmond campus. "
COME ON! 75% of their software is developed by outside companies, then Microsoft just buys them out. I think he should have said "The worst thing is, we waited so long to aquire google, now it's extremely over-priced for us".
Mod +5 Drunk
REDMOND, Wash. - When Microsoft Corp. entered the Internet browser war in the 1990s, Netscape Navigator was the early leader and Microsoft's Internet Explorer the late-blooming upstart.
Now, Microsoft is gearing up for a similar brutal and pointless battle in search technology.
Chief executive Steve Ballmer conceded Thursday that one big misstep by Microsoft over the past few years is that the company did not put resources toward the 'embrace and extend' - Microsoft's term for wholesale copying and stealing - of search technology.
"That's probably the thing I feel worst about over the last few years -- not destroying a small competitor in a wave of litigation and threats," Ballmer said at a conference for online advertisers held at Microsoft's Redmond campus, as sunlight bounced off his fat bald head.
Instead, he said, the company had kind of assumed that it would be fun to wait for a while to see what ideas others came up with, before stealing them. Joking that the pervasive software giant is often stereotyped as "a bunch of blood-sucking vampires" he said: "This is a case where we didn't destroy it all -- and I wish we had."
But Microsoft is now turning its considerable might toward catching up. It's a move that puts Microsoft head to head with Google, the world's most popular Web surfing vehicle, and Yahoo, the Internet's most popular destination, in what many see as the next depressing confirmation that there is nothing that can be achieved that Microsoft won't wreck with some awful code, a stack of ripped-off eyecandy and several billion dollars worth of marketing.
"I think you'll see some blood on the wheel in this area," Ballmer said.
Ballmer mentioned the European Union (news - web sites)'s ruling against Microsoft only in passing, when asked about rumors the company may be making some big acquisitions. He said he hadn't heard that; he'd been too busy paying attention to rumors coming out of Europe, as he made bunny ears with his fingers.
The European Commission (news - web sites) slapped Microsoft with a $613 million fine Wednesday for abusively wielding its near monopoly in desktop operating systems and ordered sanctions that go well beyond the company's antitrust settlement with the United States. The company has vowed to raise an army of the undead, to destroy the continent in a reign of fire, to sow its fields with salt and leave no stone atop another, pending an appeal by its lawyers.
"I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad," he said.
X10 had this amazing new technology for years, didn't they? Let's hope Microsoft delves into this pursuit deeply and ends up with the same result as the X10 people did...
sig.
Hell, even Bill Gates likes Apple.
http://saveie6.com/
Microsofts entry into the search engine market is just part of capatilism. After their settlement with the DOJ Microsoft can no longer pressure OEM's into preloading Microsoft with the options Microsoft would prefer. If by some chance Microsoft is able to take over the search engine market it won't be based on some sort of evil monopolistic plan or because they are soo well known because Google gets more hits than any other web site. Put your tin foil hats back on and stop worrying.
If I'm not mistaken, Steve was referring to an entirely different subject when talking about the ads. He was talking about companies using their advertising budgets wisely, not the fact that he wishes he had google so he could blast Microsoft ads everywhere as the majority of the posters seem to believe.
Considering how important Google has become (at least in my geek world), I'd like to see lots of competition. I love Google now, but I think it was better a couple of years ago. How much longer before new corporate interests bias the search results. As long as there are competing search engines, there will be innovation and other sources of information. I don't want to see all of the eggs in one basket, even if the basket is Google.
Tech News, Reviews and Tutorials
If they did, we'd be rather surprised. Linux isn't a company. They have nothing to tell their users (other than `don't send your "how do i use gimp" messages to the LKML` :), they don't need advertising. Linus doesn't make money for every install. Nobody on "Linux" cares.
Now the Linux companies like IBM, Red Hat, SuSE, etc. may want you to see ads. But they aren't in the position to enforce this because they do not stuff things down their users' throats. Sure, there's the SuSE mascot all over SuSE's KDE. That's fine; that's branding. SuSE doesn't intend to make a search engine that displays SuSE ads. They aren't trying to put google out of business. Why? Because they make Linux, not search engines. M$ would probably be a good company if they just made Office (or just made Windows, but they don't really do a good job with that). Instead they try to force shit down their users' throats. That's why everyone hates you, M$.
And yes, if SuSE tried to make a search engine, web browser, media player, BIOS, mail client, office suite, etc. that all integrated and all kept me locked to their platform I'd be outraged. Wouldn't you?
My other car is first.
...if he considers bluescreens and error messages as ads.
thanks a lot bill for making the free market look so bad. Sheesh. To think of all the cool shit Bill Gates could do with 50 billion dollars. He could make robot servants or racing spaceships he could waste it all on scientific cool progress stuff. he could have changed the world and earned immortality. think about it, what would you do if you had that kind of potential? Would you proceed to make a grey and white arial fonted boring ass self advertising agency that tweaked powerpoint every couple years? hell no, hell no. I hope somebody in here is the next big programming marketing mogul, wouldnt surprise me. When you get done with that innovation and you are super rich... Do some some cool stuff with the money. I mean, by all means keep 10 mill in your sock drawer, but use the billions on robots. Space robots. Bill Gates could fund his own Nasa, and I wonder if he could have made a little money too
They'll probably release a MSN toolbar that is a feature-for-feature copy of the Googlebar, and automatically install it on the next Windows Update. Maybe on "accident" is uninstalls the original Google toolbar (Cough*netscape*Cough). Make all URL line searches and mistypes go to MSN, and remove the ability to choose your default search engine.
They don't have to make the "world's greatest," they just have to make something that is competitively passable, and is deeply hooked into their existing product line. The "Internet Search" in the file search bar is already inexorably linked to MSN...
The ______ Agenda
I don't want to be feeding the troll, but seriously, you don't believe this, do you? IE has a history of breaking every conceivable W3C standard as Microsoft sees fit, and it's only because of Microsoft's monopoly that they can get away with it.
Have you ever tried to make any web page look the same in IE and any other browser? Surely, the very idea of being "the most compatible" is somewhat moot if there's no point of reference. Who (or what) do you think IE is compatible with?
And concerning which browser is "the best", there's always the classic list of 101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that IE cannot.
Remember when Microsoft first scoffed at the internet as a whole, and then finally got in the act with their cute little "Internet Explorer" browser? Remember how we all laughed at them, and pointed at how much better Netscape was? I mean, Netscape Navigator 3.01 vs. IE 2.0 and 3.0. Think about it... then IE did infact become the better browser. Now we finally have the new Mozilla and Firefox and while they are again superior products (I can't stand not having tabs) the game is over.
Are we now doing the same thing with search engines? It's like MS is late to the party again and we're too busy laughing at the car they came in to notice that they are eating all of our food.
Casual Games/Downloads
Is there some sort of psychological predisposition among geeks to despise marketoids? Sell sell sell, lies lies lies, bottom line is the only thing that matters -- we hates it, don't we precious?
I understand the need to sell a product and to make a living off of something but DAMN! When you're part-time freelancing web work, you tend to meet a few marketeers along the way. I did a freebie personal site for someone once who dragged a friend over to me only to ask "ok, so how do we make money off of it?" Arrrrgh!
Then there's people who don't care what kind of info they have on the site as long as it's branded and linked to something that sells.
As for Microsoft -- well, we all know their marketing department seems to overpower their quality assurance department. I guess this is part of the reason I'm not thrilled with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in this either.
So, is this thing against marketeers a manifestation of the Cathedral vs. Bazaar way of thinking? Academic information sharing vs. having to sell your soul for shoddy products?
"I want to make sure (a user) can't get through
He's not talking about the online experience a user gets from searching a current or future microsoft search engine technology... read the previous 2 one-sentence-paragraphs and you'll see that he's clearly talking about microsft advertising their products and services ELSEWHERE as they do now... he's talking to a crowd of online advertisers so it's about microsoft benefitting others, it all makes sense... also keep in mind that the butchered half-quote is within an article posted on a rival website that's according to the article stands to lose from microsoft future search efforts... yahoo! I think it's naughty of them to spin things to confuse people.
Ballmer said Microsoft spends about 12 percent of its media budget on online advertising, and that he orders his staff to "saturate" that market first and foremost.
"I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad," he said.'
Which is somewhat different from that implied by the submitter; rather than Microsoft wanting to dominate search space, and slapping their ads on everything, it's actually a suggestion that online advertising can be effective, and that companies should spend more of their marketing budget online.
Given the dearth of funding models for many websites, I'm amazed that people are willing to twist an attempt to get more money into advertising online as something more evil.
'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through .. an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.'
Atleast he's honest about planning to be the number one cause of popups around the net...
this is probably the most boring sig in the world
The quote in the blurb is taken totally out of context. It's presented as a way to convince the reader that Microsoft intends to do the following:
1.) Create a search engine that will be popular enough to rival Google.
2.) Create a method of forcing users to view unending advertisements each time they search, click, blink, etc.
3.) Profit unendingly.
What Ballmer was referring to was the amount of money Microsoft spends on advertising. He was using hyperbole to explain that many companies only spend 1% of their budget on advertising, and they should bring that up to 4-5%. He then said that when he gives money to his advertising people, he wants them to spend a metric shitload of it on online advertising, thus when people browse the web, even if they're not visiting Microsoft sites, they see Microsoft advertising.
He's not talking about abusing their own search engine to display ads but rather about spending their own money on advertising in the hopes it will net them more money.
That's not to say that I don't believe Microsoft deliberately manipulates their current search results and will continue to do so in the future in whatever incarnation their search engine may take, and it's not to say that I don't think Microsoft is a horrible company that breaks the law as much and as far as they can and that they need to be broken up in order to stop them from abusing the market any further, and finally it's not to say that they're not contributing to the downfall of capitalism and democracy and society as it is known for much of the Western world, but Jesus, if you're going to play ball, play fair. Only companies like Microsoft play unfair, and that's fucking wrong , and you can't say out one side of your mouth "Microsoft isn't playing fair!" and say out the other "Steve Ballmer rapes horses, with the dead bodies of children!"
Don't try to subvert truth like some neocon on a power trip.
Here's the actual article's text:
MSN vs google.
What's interesting to note, is MS actually throws up a pretty useful page. Tutorials, links to the most popular distros, particularly with beginners. If someone who knew something about linux decided to search for information on it, no doubt they'd be more specific. But if one was looking for very basic information, MSN returns a very good set of links.
Google, of course the gold standard. They return 95 million results to 415. But since I wasn't going to read anywhere near 415, that is in a practical sense actually the same amount. And again, a nice page. Links mostly to the popular distros. Google does have it's news partner links, which is one up on MSN.
But looking at the MSN page, they have a little be broader view, than just distros or news to get you started. Both return good first pages, but I'd gice the edge to MSN on this one.
And Page 2.
Well MSN just stomps Google here. That first page was pretty close, mostly identical in fact. But WOW. Could I improve my proportion of relevant links in Google by killing the international sites? Sure. But really, in importance of reducing the number of steps can't be overstated.
On this metric, MSN pretty soundly beats out google. If I want generic linux info, the kind that I might want just searching for "linux" MSN is the way to go.
So shouldn't we start talking about Google's anti-linux bias?
Oh, and from my browser's about page, in the interests of full disclosure:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
In the 7 billion they plan to spend on search technology, I hope they spend some money on fixing win XP's search within file option. For me, it sporatically works. I often have to use a windows 2000 box over the network to search an XP drive in order to "search within file".
I tell you, buy a Microsoft penis enlargment kit, and you'll increase in size by this amount in one day.
One World, One Party, One Operating System
When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you
A lot of bad things can happen to a company using non-windows Operating Systems, you know. We wouldn't want that to happen now would we?
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, we've got a customer who doesn't want to renew their software licenses. What are we going to do?
When I saw the title "Microsoft's Search Goofs" I naively thought they might be apologizing for deliberately redirecting any searches for "xfree86" to porn.
Alas, I was not surprised to learn that they just want to send MORE ads our way.
MS has a long way to go before they can build a search engine that replaces Google in my regular use, especially if one of the main features of said engine is to send as many Microsoft ads at the consumer as possible. I use Google for its effectiveness and minimalistic site design. No popups, obtrusive banner ads, or flash ads to piss me off.
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" -Rush
Could this actually be a prelude to including some form of adware in Windows? That would certainly fill that goal he has set for Windows users...
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
Honestly, I almost think it is a good thing that Microsoft is joining the search engine fray. I have several reasons for this, but primarily, the first one is that search engine technology has seemed a big stagnant. Take Google, for example. With a great many websites participating in feeding search engines Spider Food, it is more difficult to find results that actually match what you are looking for. If microsoft manages to boost this, and cause a stream of activity in fixing these issues by providing a high powered level of competition, then I think its great.
Now, this does not mean I am advidly supporting Microsoft. This just means I'm supporting the addition of another wild card to the search engine battles that might have some good come out of it.
I certainly hope so at anyrate, as using Google gets to be more difficult with each passing day.
-- RJ
AFAIK, they were groundbreaking leaders in bringing certain conveniences to email clients, such as double-clicking on an attachment, causing it to execute.
Prior to Microsoft, nobody had ever thought to do such [euphemisms coming up] .. inspired and visionary things. Indeed, most of their competitors still haven't dared to even try matching these features.
Another one: They got the brilliant idea of taking an Apple menu, moving it to the bottom the screen so that it's slightly slower to get to, and then moving it up by one or two pixels, so that if you slam your mouse pointer against the edge and then click, you will still manage to miss the menu, so you have to carefully adjust upwards a little, and then click, if you want to hit the hotspot. That tiny little offset of just a few pixels, is an innovation where Microsoft not only led for years, but most of their competition still hasn't matched them.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
...Windows 2003 Server?
sig mind freed
if I search on "Balmer's monkey dance", what would I get?
...isn't that there are bugs in Windows (plenty in FBSD and Linux and every other OS) ...isn;t that they are a monopoly (IBM has a stranglehold on big iron that makes MS grasp of PC's look like a hug) ....isn;t that they deploy a suite of back doors known as Office (nothing witty to insert here) ...it is that they are driven by their marketing department.
this is and always will be the core of what Slashdot zealots hate about them.
I won;t even bother to check this for typos because it will be labeled as troll by Slashdot dweebs who refuse to grow up... simply because it doesn't deamonize a large American software company that did well.
Crap look at the big pitcure and see that all computers and software is/are cool. Jesus fucking christ have things degraded so far that the readers of a tech web site can't see that????
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Viacom owns a lot of entertainment and media companies.
Interestingly, he dismissed the importance of the internet as not being useful to his company. I think this was in 1994 or so. He said it was only of interest to researchers and hobbyists. His only interest in the internet was the possibility of video on demand, which his company had done some market research with, and determined was not going to make viacom any money.
Anyway, the thing that Redstone said that really stuck with me, gave me a chill in fact, was:
You'd think he was being delusional except that he made it apparent in the rest of his speech that he had the means to achieve that goal, and by the looks of it I think he's well on his way their.It makes you want to go live on a desert island, doesn't it?
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Best quote? 'I want to make sure (a user) can't get through ... an online experience without hitting a Microsoft ad.' Nice to see they're still user-oriented."
You joke, but judging from the Microsoft ads I see on slashdot every now and then, I'd say they're doing a pretty good job.
First of all. It's weird to talk about market share for Mosaic. Secondly, when they decided to stop development of Mosaic, and ended the program, it was the best browser available. That says something. Particularly about netscrape. Once they left acadamia and got all that venture capital behind them they couldn't keep up with the poorly funded academics who picked up where those who formed netscrape left off?! That's pretty bad.
At least Microsoft had an excuse. They had totally missed the boat, misunderstood the technology, the market and were desprately trying to catch up on all fronts. In spite of that by the time they hit IE 4 they'd won. And not just through better distribution. That's huge.
Christ, look at what some of the late commers like Opera, and Konq have done! If netscape with their money had that kind of innovation. IE would be a smoking crater of a dead end, and MS would have bought out Netscape for big bucks and then some.
The thing is is that he made this money. And when I say made, I don't mean earned, I mean he and other stakeholders in Microsoft created that money from what would never have been. As in, far from "empty[ing] the pool", the pool of money is bigger because of what Microsoft is worth.
Maybe you understood it but forgot to make it clear, and maybe you didn't. The dollar value that is assigned to stocks is given by assuming that you can sell all of your holdings without affecting the stock price downward. You can only do this if you have a small enough portion of the overall stock to not create too much supply.
Given this definition, I disagree with your claim that BG made the money (out of what, whole cloth?). He created a company and built a demand for his stock. The belief (by investors) that MS will continue to do well (as measured by the bottom line) is what pushes the MS stock price up, and accounts for a significant portion of BG's worth.
Having all of your value tied up in stocks and bonds doesn't give you much liquidity. If you have "things" (cars, homes, paintings, furniture), it can take a while to find a seller, and sometimes you have to find a specialist to take care of that for you (which is why you hear about "liquidators" who have cheap furniture, or whatever).
The value that is in the stock market is not real money until you sell your holdings and get cash. I say then, that your statement
the pool of money is bigger because of what Microsoft is worth
is utter nonsense.
Thats quite true, and I agree with you on most of the aspects, but it WILL force the other companies to get their acts together or end up outof business.
I don't think that Google has exactly been sitting on its laurels. They've continued to innovate. Not all companies that have market share (in a competitive market) aren't aggressively trying to innovate. eBay is another example.
However, this approach has never been Microsoft's business model. Microsoft puts other companies out of business and has a tendency of stifling innovation. A good example is in the anti-virus business. All the software companies out there are more-or-less spending their energy trying to figure out how to make their user's dependent upon them in fear that MS will bundle antivirus software in their next major OS release and put them out of business.
MS doesn't "enter" a market. It hijacks it. Nobody's motivated to compete with a company who doesn't do so on a level playing field.
And the Constitution should be amended to require EVERY individual to have a Microsoft Windows logo tattoed somewhere on their body, taking up at least 9 square inches of space, and that all newborns should have that logo tattoed on them upon birth. Yeah. That's a good idea.
I have four words for you:
I love this company, yeah!
Your insightful comment made me realize why Everquest won out over the pioneer in the "really big graphical mud" genre, Ultima Online. UO made a lot of basic mistakes that the late comer could capitalize on, such as forgetting to make their game like crack-cocaine.
The enemies of Democracy are
Do none of you know ANYTHING about marketing? Get your product in the customers head. There is no way around it. If you've got it (the money), flaunt it.
If you think this is immoral, too bad because that's life and everyone else lives by it.
Here comes the flamebait rating. Oh well.