Slashdot Mirror


Google Muscles Into Microsoft's Turf

gollum123 copies and pastes: "AP has a story on how as Google rapidly rolls out new products, the company best known for its wildly popular search engine is muscling into the software giant's turf, including its stronghold: the computer desktop."

10 of 246 comments (clear)

  1. Ironic .... by Gopal.V · · Score: 5, Informative

    Am I the only one who finds it ironic to read about Google's World Domination plans on Yahoo news ? :)

    Google Search - ?
    Gmail - Hotmail
    Desktop Search - ?

    That's how the tally stands for Google ... I won't waste my time explaining what MS has that Google doesn't :)

    But I gotta love http://www.google.com/firefox :)

    1. Re:Ironic .... by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 3, Informative

      But I gotta love http://www.google.com/firefox :)

      they have http://www.google.com/ie too

      --
      I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    2. Re:Ironic .... by oexeo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look at the beautiful design for Firefox, and then compare it with the crappy one for IE, says alot about what Google thinks of IE*, doesn't it?

      *In actual fact the page for IE was designed for use in the IE search pane, where as the Firefox page is obviously designed to be set as the homepage.

  2. Re:Hyperoffice.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    No one wants hosted crap. Recurring fees, no applications if you are somewhere w/o an Internet connection, you never really "have" the software, etc. Its frickin rent-a-center.

    Unless you have no IT staff at all and always have an Internet connections...and even then there are better alternatives.

  3. Re:Microsoft, here's a tip by SnowWolf2003 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Get a clue Microsoft! The Google Toolbar supplements basic lack of features in IE (such as auto-complete, search box, and pop blocker). When it's your product, you don't need to add a toolbar extension, you just add the features to to the goddamn browser itself!

    actually, MSN released a toolbar that added similar features to the Google toolbar. Microsoft, in XP SP2, did actually add the popup blocker to the browser itself. Although MSN is part of Microsoft, it acts much more like a seperate company, another example of this is MSN Messenger vs. Windows Messenger.

  4. Re:Netscape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I thought Netscape was going to do this... about 6 years ago.

    Yes, but then their revenue stream was cut off by the illegal anti-competitive actions of Microsoft.

  5. Re:Aieee! by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 4, Informative
    This guy doesn't even know the difference between memory and storage so why should I listen to him?

    Actually, there is no real functional difference between memory and storage.

    The only difference is, basically, access speed. And since storage nowadays is a lot faster than memory was a decade ago, that difference is only relative.

    You may add that memory is wiped when a computer is turned off, but that is not the case for all kinds of memory, besides the fact that many computers are never turned off.

  6. Re:Microsoft, here's a tip by Curate · · Score: 3, Informative
    MSN messenger and windows messenger are nothing alike.

    Wrong. They are virtually identical. They are instant messaging clients, similar in concept to AIM.

    You're thinking of the Messenger service, which should not be confused with Windows Messenger. Open services.msc and look at the description of the Messenger service. "... This service is not related to Windows Messenger."

  7. Re:When Google write an operating system.... by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    "their backend systems arn't exactly off the shelf components"

    Really? Guess its so secret their own staff don't know it:

    http://www.google.com/technology/

  8. Re:For how long? by Xabraxas · · Score: 3, Informative
    they are legally required to put profits for their shareholders above all other considerations

    No. You're wrong. Why do so many people think this? They are responsible to their shareholders in that they cannot willfully or illegally lose their shareholders money. They do no have to forsake their values.

    --
    Time makes more converts than reason