Microsoft Releases Toolbar Suite

Bundled Soon? by fembots · 2004-12-13 13:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

Who wants to bet that this suite is going to be bundled in the next Windows? It's pretty easy for them to integrate this toolbar into any Windows-apps like IE, Outlook, calendar etc since they also happen to write the OS.

I always maintain that the majority of users don't know they have a choice, hence they're using/starting/opening whatever that's been thrown at them.

It's quite convenient for MS to sit and see what works, then create their own, and with their dominance in desktop OS, they can easily claim a huge chunk of the desktop-suite market share overnight.

It wouldn't be as easy for its online search service because that requires users to go there, thus opens up the "choice" perspective.

--
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.

Re:Bundled Soon? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 13:45 · Score: 5, Funny

i'm glad they did this. honestly i like ms stuff and hell i'm glad they came out with a toolbar so i dont have to download one from google or anyone else. they designed the os, the browser - they probably know best when designing this add-in toolbar.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 13:49 · Score: 2, Funny

Mod parent up funny! (I think... gawd, I hope)
Re:Bundled Soon? by fupeg · 2004-12-13 13:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

Next Windows? You mean Longhorn in 2006? How about an update to Windows XP? Especially now that SP2 makes most people turn on auto-update... They could just slip this in one night while you're sleeping.
Re:Bundled Soon? by wastingtape · 2004-12-13 13:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's quite convenient for MS to sit and see what works, then create their own, and with their dominance in desktop OS, they can easily claim a huge chunk of the desktop-suite market share overnight.

Seems to work though wouldn't you say? I think a lot of business models are fashioned after low-risk investments. If someone else has already done the R&D why not "borrow" some from them? A good examples of positive externalities.

Actually, as you mentioned, integration with all of MS's tools is probably great... for people who use them. Devaiting from the norm has it's consequences however. Running SquirrelMail as your primary mail client you rarely get support like this (heck i can't even click a mailto: link and have a window open up). It's all good for ma and pa Dell Windows XP machine.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 14:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

And what's wrong with that?

If Apple did this, Mac Fanboys would be clamouring to download it and then post how it makes the Mac even EASIER to use...

Ah well. MS has an OS that 97% of the PC's use, and they leverage it to their advantage. Apple, and in fact, ANY company would do the same. Good luck to them.

Of course, justice, truth and "what's right" don't jive with the current corporate mindset. Love it, or leave it. Don't bitch about it.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 14:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

Meh...

Apple bundles everything they can think of with their OS. And the people love it. MS used to do that, and the people loved that too. That's just the way it is.

Of course, choice is just that. Choice. If I choose to be a monoculture using desk-jockey, what makes you right and me wrong about my software preferences?
Re:Bundled Soon? by kayen_telva · 2004-12-13 14:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

using the firefox extension "linkification" you can have your default mail "client" be a webpage, like squirrelmal
Re:Bundled Soon? by EnderWiggnz · 2004-12-13 14:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

in general, you are right - the "first movers" with a technology rarely win, and their competitors quickly copy any successful initiative.

this, in normal situations is healthy.

however, when one company has a monopoly on a good or service, they can then leverage that monopoly to extend their hold on the market. like integrating a browser, or designing your own rail cars...

or, adding a desktop toolbar.

--
... hi bingo ...
Re:Bundled Soon? by Porn+Whitelist · 2004-12-13 14:24 · Score: 3, Interesting

auto-completing of forms, and a pop-up blocker
What it really means (IMHO) - they're feeling the heat from both firefox AND google.

--
my journal: scripts for leaching porn baked fresh daily
Re:Bundled Soon? by Dr.+Descartes · 2004-12-13 14:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

I would argue that certain distributions are usable by Joe Sixpack if they don't have to unlearn any computing habits instilled by using alternate operating systems. I have a brother in law who doesn't care one wit about computing. He's a pretty average high school kid. He uses apps provided by KDE under SuSe to surf the web, check his email, write his term papers, et cetera. I installed it for him one day and have answered one question since then regarding it. It just kind of works for him.

I know it's anecdotal evidence but that's what most of us have, especially when the vast majority of searchable and citable evidence regarding open source is TCO studies sponsored by third parties with a vested interest in the outcome. Those studies focus on a completely different environment.

On topic: I'm glad that MS has thrown its hat into the desktop search ring. I think that search is a much needed feature for that Windows. Finding a file in Windows seems unreasonably resource intensive. Likewise, there's nothing like downloading a file and forgetting where IE tossed it and you're fumbling about your OS to find it. No, not me, I don't do Windows. Friends.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Martin+Blank · 2004-12-13 14:36 · Score: 4, Informative

Unlikely, as even Microsoft wouldn't consider this a critical update, which is the only thing that AutoUpdate downloads. If they tried that, they'd have thousands of large corporate customers ticked off that this had been dropped onto their systems without their consent.

--
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Martin+Blank · 2004-12-13 14:40 · Score: 4, Funny

Especially since most of them have icons for all 168 programs and 2978 files they've made sitting right there...

--
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Re:Bundled Soon? by slonkak · 2004-12-13 14:49 · Score: 3, Informative

No, most corporations use an internal SUS server to distribute Windows Updates. Using SUS, the administrator must first approve the critical updates before they get pushed to the clients. That is, unless some assclown configured the SUS server and makes it auto-approve anything...
Re:Bundled Soon? by 1u3hr · 2004-12-13 15:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

But the computer and electronics industry tends to confirm the first mover advantage:

Microsoft - first microcomputer software company
Intel - first microprocessor company
Oracle - first reliable and commercial RDMS company
AOL - one of the original online services
Xerox - first photocopier company
Sony - first widespread transistor radio company

You've got to be joking. That just shows that the real first movers have been wiped from the public mind.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Wog · 2004-12-13 15:43 · Score: 2, Funny

But you're not bitter, or anything... :-)
Re:Bundled Soon? by Oliver+Defacszio · 2004-12-13 15:52 · Score: 2, Interesting

So you're no better than those you (probably) hate. Congratulations!
No, no -- let me guess -- it's TOTALLY different because YOU'RE right. Bleh.

--

-
Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
Re:Bundled Soon? by gardyloo · 2004-12-13 16:46 · Score: 2, Informative

I'm sorry, but I have to repost something I posted earlier, in this same thread. I don't deny that the phrase the real first movers have been wiped from the public mind might be (somewhat) insightful, but I'd like some actual refutation to the points which were quoted. Actually, the parent poster is correct (to the extent that I checked). Here are the facts I found (3 minutes, dudes -- not diffucult!):

Actually, Xerox WAS the first photocopier company: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photocopier ; TI seems to be a little ahead of Intel for microprocessors (but close!): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microprocessor ; TI developed the transistor radio, but Sony very much popularized it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_radio; and so forth. (AOL was a direct competitor with CompuServe, and, in fact, did a lot to popularize it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL). The thing that clued me in was the Xerox comment (since I knew they were the first photocopier company), but, in fact it was mainly your knee-jerk reaction and lack of any real information that made me go look these up.

The original poster is vindicated.

Cheers!
Re:Bundled Soon? by Paradise+Pete · 2004-12-13 17:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

Microsoft first microcomputer software company?? No.. IBM maybe.
Micro-Soft was the first commercial software company for microcomputers. And one of Bill Gates', sorry, "William Henry Gates III" first official acts was to send a whiney letter complaining about people not paying up for his BASIC interpreter.
Re:Bundled Soon? by Trepalium · 2004-12-13 17:21 · Score: 5, Informative

Microsoft - first microcomputer software company
I don't know who was 'first', but Microsoft was founded in 1975. Gary Kildall's CP/M dates back to 1973 or 1974. Digital Research Inc., the company that was founded to sell CP/M was also founded in 1975.
AOL - one of the original online services
CompuServe predates AOL by quite a bit. CompuServe was founded in 1969. The company ("The Source") that would eventually become AOL was founded in 1978.
Intel - first microprocessor company
Sony - first widespread transistor radio company
Texas Instuments was probably the first to develop both these technologies. The microprocessor situation is fuzzy at best. TI's transistor radio predates Sony's by about three years (and Robert Denk's radio may have predated that by another 6 years). Sony's wasn't even first-to-market. That honor belonged to I.D.E.A's Regency TR-1.
Frankly, I don't think there's any 'first mover advantage' in these examples at all. On the other hand, there's a very real ability for the dominant companies to use their marketing muscle to 'rewrite' history in their favor. Few people question the 'fact' that Microsoft was the first software company, or that Intel invented the microprocessor, or that AOL was the first online service.

--
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
Re:Bundled Soon? by 1u3hr · 2004-12-13 17:23 · Score: 3, Informative

in fact it was mainly your knee-jerk reaction and lack of any real information that made me go look these up.
Sorry, I had an appointment. But I knew most of those, certainly Microsoft (ever heard of CP/M from Digital Research?) and Intel, were in no way the first movers, so that's what jerked my knee.
The original poster is vindicated.
Your own post shows that none of the companies, except perhaps Xerox, was the "first mover". So who is vindicated? Changing the qualification to "first popularizer" is a different question altogether.
Re:Bundled Soon? by gardyloo · 2004-12-13 18:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

No, I've never heard of CP/M; I'll look it up. Which I've just done, and although it may not exactly support MY standpoint, it in no way supports yours. http://www.maxframe.com/CPM.HTM has a quick synopsis.
What, then, is a "first mover"? According to http://searchcio.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid 19_gci509397,00.html , "In the business world, a first mover is a company that aims to gain an advantageous and perhaps insurmountable market position by being the first to establish itself in a given market."

Now, I'm the last person to assert that if a company, paradigm, orgamism, WHATEVER has an advantage, or even a HUGE advantage over its competitors, that it's ALWAYS going to be on top; "insurmountable" is never, or rarely, literally that. However, very few people are going to argue with Microsoft's huge dominance of software these days, or with Intel's position in microprocessors (embedded ones, too). You may argue with the fact that some of the companies in the list were actually not the VERY first to go into their respective markets (but some of them were!); however, as my links show, the companies were, in many cases, the first to popularize their technologies, and popularizing, whether through advertisement, word-of-mouth, or even by locking the market onto whatever "standard" you're working on is just as important as having a truly useful, innovative product (fortunately or unfortunately).

I apologize for the term "knee-jerk reaction" I used in my original posts, and realize that you have some good points. However, in your first post you gave no evidence to back up your "insight", which was, essentially, that the winners get to write the history books. I have the feeling that we'll not agree on these points, but thank goodness the internet is anonymous, eh? And truly, debates, even dumb ones, make life interesting. :)
Re:Bundled Soon? by nametaken · 2004-12-13 18:20 · Score: 2, Informative

I'm just glad Microsoft is right on the bleeding edge of technological innovation. Clearly, they're pushing the envelope, with two fingers squarely on the pulse of the market.

Appreciate this post, I had to kill 200 pop-ups to use slashdot.
Re:Bundled Soon? by nelsonal · 2004-12-13 18:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

First mover advantage is very important in markets with network effects (ebay is the best example I can think of) in which the first guy there has a very valuable advantage by getting there first. The advantage is conferred by lower costs than later competitors to create their business network because the network they create is more valuable the more users it has. Later competitors (think about how little business there was on uBid or Yahoo auctions) must spend more per user than the initial competitor as their network is less valuable. Once eBay got the first million users it became considerably more difficult for uBid to sign up their 10,000th in then ebay had signing up its 10,000th user.
MS dominance was a result of being a first mover, but not in the way you think. Bill and Co were the first to figure out that application development had network effects and as a result courted application developers better than their earlier peers.
Intel has considerably less first mover advantage, if anything they achieved some advantages in manufacturing which allowed them to cover any other missteps by out investing their compeitors in down cycles (when AMD is attempting to remain solevant in a big downturn, Intel is building the next gen fabs.
AOL has never been anything except a stock scam that continued until they bought half of a real company.
Oracle built a natural monopoly (as did Veritas, Intuit, BEA and almost every other software company) but first mover was not the reason. Software is a natural monopoly because there is only room for a single competitor (two competitors are less efficient than a single one in software development) being first made little difference being the first to get bigger than any compeitors was crucial. If anything I'd say Oracle is experiencing rents to Larry's pursuasive selling of relational databases better than any competitors, and they probably would have won even if Informix had been offering RDBMS first. Development costs are fixed so the company with the most users has a lower production cost (which is why MS is terrified of the increasing vibrance of the linux development community). To many management gurus (stock shills) whove never heard of industrial organization attempt to use very specific technical terms to mean things they were never intended to mean. Pets.com was not operating in a business that conferred any advantage to the first mover (that couldn't be replicated as easily by a later competitor). Amazon got a tiny amount of first mover advantage from the free media coverage by being the only dotcom most media companies did stories on. Although there was no lack of coverage of B&N's entry to online marketing.

--
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.

Re:Google toolbar for Firefox by zachtib · 2004-12-13 13:43 · Score: 3, Informative

There is a toolbar for firefox: check here: http://www.firefoxtoolbar.com/

Ironically... by wasted · 2004-12-13 13:44 · Score: 5, Insightful

The toolbar claims to block annoying popups, but the most annoying pop-up on my work computer (where I am forced to use Internet Exploder) is the one that says I have Active X disabled.

Re:Ironically... by urlgrey · 2004-12-13 14:26 · Score: 3, Insightful

I wish there were a:
"Please don't show me this error message ever again for any reason whatsoever even if it's a life threatening situation. Ever. Really. I mean it. I'm sure."
checkbox and button combo for that.

--
Running 'Nix is like owning a Lightsaber. It's "a more elegant weapon for a more civilized time."
Re:Ironically... by dioscaido · 2004-12-13 14:29 · Score: 2, Informative

What pop-up are you talking about? IE6 SP2 only shows a small notification below the link bar of your current open window, which auto-hides after a few seconds.
Re:Ironically... by Boiling_point_ · 2004-12-13 15:04 · Score: 4, Funny

I know how to fix that! Go to Tools, Internet Options, Security tab, then click the "Custom level..." button.

Scroll down until you see a heading "ActiveX controls and plugins", and then select "enable" for every option in that section.

Voila - problem solved! I hope this helps. :)

--
"If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of Administrator with no password." KB Q293834
Re:Ironically... by PalmMP3 · 2004-12-13 18:29 · Score: 2, Informative

Actually, there IS a way... Try the program called "Buzof", from Basta Computing (http://www.basta.com/ProdBuzof.htm). It's an extremely useful utility - it gives you a crosshairs icon which you drag onto the "OK"/"Cancel"/"Whatever the hell" button in any annoying dialog, and the next tme that particular dialog pops up, POOF! Buzof will press that button for you instantly.

--
Laughter is the best medicine, but in certain situations the Heimlich maneuver may be more appropriate.

What's the big deal? by 77Punker · 2004-12-13 13:44 · Score: 3, Insightful

Windows includes a search function. IE with SP2 blocks popups. IE has been auto-completing things for a while, too. I don't understand why Microsoft made this. Even if the features are improved in the toolbar, shouldn't they have just improved the backend and just distribted it via Windows Update?

Re:What's the big deal? by LiquidCoooled · 2004-12-13 23:29 · Score: 2, Informative

They will have tried it, but found (like everyone else thats ever tried to use Windows search) that it completely misses EVERY filetype that doesn't have a handler configured in the registry.

Source code files are a special problem for me using the windows search.

I know they are there, I know they contain certain strings, yet by default, windows search will NOT scan the file.

I've gone into this in detail in previous discussions, but it basically needs a shotgun registry update to tell it to use the default text search handler for all types of files (one reg entry per file extension).

It bugged the hell out of me when I got XP.

--
liqbase :: faster than paper

Popup blocker? by mind21_98 · 2004-12-13 13:44 · Score: 4, Interesting

Doesn't XP SP2 come with a popup blocker? Why would they put another one in (besides bringing popup blocking to earlier versions of Windows)? It just seems like a waste to me.

--
US businesses that currently accept chip and PIN/signature

Re:Popup blocker? by Stormwatch · 2004-12-13 13:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

> Why would they put another one in
> (besides bringing popup blocking
> to earlier versions of Windows)?

That could be a huge reason: to keep people with older Windows from adopting the "other" way to block popups... *cough*Firefox*cough*

--
Circumcision is child abuse.
Re:Popup blocker? by zakezuke · 2004-12-13 14:01 · Score: 3, Funny

Why would they put another one in ... It just seems like a waste to me.

Microsoft Messenger (TM)
Messenger Service of Windows (TM?)
MSN Mesanger (TM)
Windows Messenger (TM)
Microsoft Windows Messaging (TM)

Microsoft - Seems like a waste to me!

--
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.

Re:Google toolbar for Firefox by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 13:44 · Score: 3, Informative

Here's another link: http://googlebar.mozdev.org/

Another Microsoft Innovation by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 13:45 · Score: 3, Funny

"Oh, Google and Yahoo! did it? Well, then we better, too!"

target audience? by Poleris · 2004-12-13 13:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

so... who here is actually going to use this? no one?

so that means it's targetted to a less technically-adept audience, right? how is microsoft going to make them aware of the advantages of this toolbar? package it with softwar? a giant marketing campaign?

this thing doesn't look like it's going to be a huge success.

Re:target audience? by FlipmodePlaya · 2004-12-13 13:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

I believe IE's default homepage is msn.com, and therefore the page millions of people see when they open their browser. They could simply advertise it on that...
Re:target audience? by ziggy_travesty · 2004-12-13 14:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'm going to use it, along with many other people who haven't felt compelled to switch to Firefox.

I plan to uninstall the Google Desktop Search and install this, as I'm sure it will work just as well (the search technology comes from Lookout Software) and now I'll have search term highlighting (which wasn't in SP2).

So Microsoft releases cool utilities that will help people who won't/can't upgrade to SP2 and Slashdot pans them. I really should stop reading opinions, but morbid curiosity gets the best of me every day.

*sigh* by Meetch · 2004-12-13 13:45 · Score: 4, Funny

I told the google execs to patent all that, but would they listen? Noooooo!

Desktop Search? by ikkonoishi · 2004-12-13 13:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

Like what should have been in an OS from the start?

Re:Desktop Search? by dasunt · 2004-12-13 19:51 · Score: 2, Informative
Like what should have been in an OS from the start?

I don't remember the pre win95 days, but from Windows 95 onward, MS had a search utility.

The Windows 95 version allowed the following searches:
- Search by file name.
- Search a specific directory without subfolders.
- Search a specific directory with subfolders.
- Created or modified between $date and $date.
- Created or modified within $x day(s).
- Created or modified within $x month(s).
- Restricted to $application filetype.
- Containing $string.
- Size is at least $x kb.
- Size is at most $x kb.
Its possible to search with several of the above restrictions, but not all combinations are possible.

While it may not have had all the features of unix's find command (and did not have the in-depth filetype understanding of google's desktop search, nor GDS's other capabilities), Microsoft's find command worked well, and worked relatively quickly, even on older machines. For the average Microsoft user, it was probably more than enough.

In addition, Microsoft Office came with a "Fast Find" utility which tended to grind the hard drive to a halt while it periodically indexed Office files. Most people turned it off since it slowed the machine and caused other problems. It may have been useful for searching documents if there was an insane number of them. I never had to search a large number of disorganized office documents, so I am unable to comment on its effectiveness.

nice job guys by VAXGeek · 2004-12-13 13:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

See, even Microsoft gets to say ME TOO sometimes.

Future predictions for Windows features:

Expose
Tabbed Browsing in IE out of box
Rendezvous
Dashboard

--
this sig limit is too small to put anything good h

Re:nice job guys by generic-man · 2004-12-13 14:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

As opposed to Apple innovation, which has touted such advanced features as

Fast User Switching, just two years after Windows XP introduced it.

Video conferencing, which Microsoft introduced years ago with NetMeeting.

File extensions, once they realized that not everyone on the Internet uses a Mac.

Support for zip files in Finder without the need for third-party shareware, years after Microsoft supported them in Windows ME.

Mac OS X has many useful features, but don't start claiming that Apple only innovates and Microsoft only copies. Nobody's hands are clean there.

#include <xerox.rant.h>

--
For more information, click here.
Re:nice job guys by mcc · 2004-12-13 15:31 · Score: 2, Funny

You're honestly trying to argue video conferencing chat originated with Microsoft?

--
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Re:nice job guys by liangzai · 2004-12-13 15:34 · Score: 3, Informative

File extensions

File extensions have been used on the Mac since the first Macs were rolled out. It is just that they haven't been mandatory, and furthermore not limited to three characters. Currently, a file's content can be determined by a) extension, b) magic number, and c) resource fork information. Needless to say, there's no evil_knivel.exe.doc problems on the Mac. Furthermore, file extensions is not a Microsoft invention (Microsoft doesn't invent). IIRC CP/M and predecessors used file extensions, and Billy Boy just copied this method of recognizing file content.
zip files in Finder

I didn't know this. What's the point? ZIP has limited use on a Mac, since it needs special attention to preserve forks. It is used primarily for raw data, and has so many alternate compression schemes (b2zip, gzip and so on). The Finder is not supposed to do everything.
Video conferencing

It is an old feature on the Mac, as is speech recognition, text-to-speech and other technologies.
Fast user switching

Right, just that it didn't make sense before Mac OS X, since Mac OS 9 wasn't a multi-user OS.

Misc. notes by IO+ERROR · 2004-12-13 13:46 · Score: 5, Informative

Requires Internet Explorer and Windows 2000 or XP.

May conflict with other pop-up blockers and cause you to not be able to click on anything at all.

The toolbar has to be on-screen for pop-up blocking to work.

Needs administrator privileges to install.

Includes a plugin to search PDF files.

Includes desktop search.

Currently supports U.S. English only. Don't try to install it on a non-U.S. English version of Windows.

--
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?

I.. by sPaKr · 2004-12-13 13:51 · Score: 3, Funny

I for one welcome the coming of our toolbar wielding overlords.

Well this is slashdot by Dominatus · 2004-12-13 13:54 · Score: 4, Informative

For the last time, Microsoft promised features found in Google Desktop and Spotlight, years ago as part of Longhorn. There are *plenty* of cases where MS steals ideas, but in this case Google and Apple got to the market first with a product MS promised about prior.

Yeah, I'm aware MS didn't invent the idea, but they certainly didn't steal it from Google or Apple.

Re:Well this is slashdot by the_2nd_coming · 2004-12-13 16:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

MS was not trying to be better than Spotlight, WinFS is on teh level of Spotlight, not this POS. this is a stopgap in order to keep Windows users from jumping ship on the search systems so when they do introduce the next search subsystem in Longhorn (WinFS) people will be using it rather than using a crappier search from a 3rd party.

--

I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:Well this is slashdot by RzUpAnmsCwrds · 2004-12-13 16:58 · Score: 3, Insightful

"but in this case Google and Apple got to the market first with a product MS promised "

Google perhaps, but remember:

TIGER HAS NOT SHIPPED

I love people who comparine a publicly-available Microsoft product to an Apple product that is not publicly available and proclaim that Microsoft is "copying" Apple.

Repeat after me:

* Microsoft announced WinFS *before* Apple announced Tiger

* MSN Desktop search can be downloaded TODAY. Tiger is only available to developers.

* WinFS IS NOT Spotlight.

Paul Thurrott's review by DavidLeblond · 2004-12-13 13:56 · Score: 5, Informative

I just checked out Paul Thurrott's review. I love reading his stuff... first he says that Apple copied Spotlight from Microsoft (because Microsoft said that they were gonna improve search before Apple introduce Spotlight), then he shows off MSN Search which looks suspiciously like Spotlight. And if thats not funny enough, he gives us this little gem:

And then consider that competitors such as Apple and Google tried to preempt Microsoft by announcing similar features, and yet were both unable to deliver final versions before Microsoft simply shipped the MSN Toolbar Suite.

Thats funny... isn't MSN Search a... beta? So "final version" = "beta"? Explains a lot!

Re:Paul Thurrott's review by Anonymous Coward · 2004-12-13 14:18 · Score: 3, Funny

I just took a look at this MS fanboy's site to look at his review of Windows ME. Check it:

It's easy to ridicule Microsoft for milking the Windows 9x cash cow yet again. But the reality is that this release is exceptional, especially considering its technological heritage. Put aside your preconceptions and give Windows Me a chance. I think you'll be surprised.

I'm sure this isn't the worst part of the review, but I can only take so much. I wonder how much MS pays this guy and his ilk to spout such drivel?
Re:Paul Thurrott's review by typhoonius · 2004-12-13 14:40 · Score: 4, Funny

So "final version" = "beta"?

Are we talking about the same Microsoft? "final version"="it compiles"
Re:Paul Thurrott's review by tb3 · 2004-12-13 14:46 · Score: 2, Informative

I'll nominate Rob Enderle of Enderle Consulting as a raving looney.

--
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

I don't need a toolbar. WHERE'S CLIPPY?! by chroot_james · 2004-12-13 13:58 · Score: 5, Funny

I want clippy to pop up and point to my search strings in the rendered pages. I also want clippy to say, "I see you're searching with google. Would you like help using microsoft search? How about a hotmail account?"

--
Reality is nothing but a collective hunch.

Re:Google toolbar for Firefox by AstroDrabb · 2004-12-13 14:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

Informative? Exactly what is the point of this toolbar? Firefox 1.0 has had built-in Google search for ages and you can add _tons_ of other searches to the toolbar at the click of a button. Searches like Dictionary.com, Amazon, Bible searches, recipe searches, tech searches, shopping, you name it, it is there, hundreds of search engince.

Popup blocking? Uh, Firefox has had that for _ages_. There are currently 175 extension to Firefox 1.0 covering everything from web development to bookmark sync, games, you name it. Who would install _any_ Firefox toolbar from some .com site? It is just probably some tracking code.

--
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison

Desktop Searc Comparison by fupeg · 2004-12-13 14:01 · Score: 2, Informative

It will be interesting to see how this compares with Google's DS. I've been using Google's at home since it came out. I tried this one on my work computer. It definitely seemed to do its indexing faster than Google. Like Google, it only indexed when the CPU usage had been low for awhile. Search response also seemed a little better, mostly because of the results-as-you-type feature. It also seemed to do a better job finding music files, including AAC files I ripped with iTunes.

OSX by be11o · 2004-12-13 14:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

It occurs to me I have been able to do this with OSX on my powerbook for years

--
There are 10 types of people in the world, those who know binary and those who do not!

how long til hackers hack it? by p51d007 · 2004-12-13 14:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

I wonder how long it will be until hackers find a hole that will allow them access inside this?

Easier BHO-hijacker searches? by dragon_imp · 2004-12-13 14:08 · Score: 3, Funny

It's brilliant! I wonder if this will make the Browser Hijackers' work easier -- just call the desktop search routine in the IE Toolbar instead of writing their own code.

Maybe they could put some more of this creativity into locking down IE and Windows. On the other hand, I make some good money cleaning systems, so there IS a silver lining. <grin>

'desktop search' functionality? by CAIMLAS · 2004-12-13 14:12 · Score: 3, Informative

I just downloaded and installed this thing. 4.some megs for what appears to be an IE plugin. There doesn't seem to be the option to make the 'search' bar integrate with the taskbar at all (which was what my initial pre-install impression was).

I will say that I'd half expected for there to be a minimalist appearance. Nay, there's about 10 different buttons on the bar that gets installed in IE, and I was initially pestered with 2 desktop bar-specific nags. Additionally, the damn thing defaults to searching the web, not the desktop.

So I've been sitting here for about 10 minutes waiting for the thing to build an index. The Google Destop Search tool has about 40Mb of files on this machine, and I honestly don't think I've got much more than (if even) 1Gb of files on it. I've run a search for a couple files within the "My Documents" directory, and nothing turned up. There's no indication that the index is being built, or when it might be done, etc.

There also doesn't appear to be must customization ability for the actual search tool, either. Just build, or rebuild the index. No "exclude directory" type stuff.

The additional pop-ups look useful, though, for an IE user. It's all standard fare for a Firefox user, of course. Considering that most people that would likely use such a tool from MS are likely already using Firefox, I'd say chacnes are slim this sees much fanfare.

Can't say I'm impressed. It's got the same intrusive feel of Clippy, with the nice interface of MSN Search. Not impressed in the least.

--
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers

Re:'desktop search' functionality? by TildaBang · 2004-12-13 14:33 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have in on my taskbar just fine. There was an option at the end of the install that asked if you wanted to have it automatically enable it. Of course the IE bar should default to searching the web, and not the computer. Just as the taskbar search should default to your computer... which it does by the way. See that icon in your taskbar? Try right clicking on that to see if you can get it to index. It's probably not doing it because you're using the computer. It's not greedy with CPU. Overall, i'm not too impressed with your review. You clearly do not read anything during the install, check out the program options, or read the plenty of available help topics on the web and in the program. Not impressed in the least.
Re:'desktop search' functionality? by g0qi · 2004-12-13 16:47 · Score: 5, Informative

I can't believe there isn't a proper response to this. Only in Slashdot will people walk right past this silently.

I just downloaded and installed this thing. 4.some megs for what appears to be an IE plugin. There doesn't seem to be the option to make the 'search' bar integrate with the taskbar at all (which was what my initial pre-install impression was).
You know it's more than an IE plugin. Did you even attempt to look around? Right-click your taskbar, select toobars and you'll see MSN Deskbar there. It actually integrates very nicely with the OS.

I will say that I'd half expected for there to be a minimalist appearance. Nay, there's about 10 different buttons on the bar that gets installed in IE, and I was initially pestered with 2 desktop bar-specific nags. Additionally, the damn thing defaults to searching the web, not the desktop.

What are you smoking? The deskbar defaults to searching the desktop by default, and so does that IE page.

So I've been sitting here for about 10 minutes waiting for the thing to build an index. The Google Destop Search tool has about 40Mb of files on this machine, and I honestly don't think I've got much more than (if even) 1Gb of files on it. I've run a search for a couple files within the "My Documents" directory, and nothing turned up. There's no indication that the index is being built, or when it might be done, etc.

Actually I think there's too much indication. First when it starts off it says it's starting. Then when there's too much processor use, it says it's going to wait a while so you can get done what you want to get done. When it's actually indexing, you get a nice blinking maginfying glass. And finally when it's all done, it says it's done with a messenger like popup icon. All through this process, at any time when you hover over that icon, it tells you what the hell it's doing.

There also doesn't appear to be must customization ability for the actual search tool, either. Just build, or rebuild the index. No "exclude directory" type stuff. Come on man. Right-click that damn thing and select Internet Options...

Not impressed in the least.
You have an IQ of a peanut. I don't think they're going to care if you're impressed or not. Who modded you up +4?

--
Yea. I know.

Re:Well, by antifoidulus · 2004-12-13 14:14 · Score: 2, Funny

But I love bonzi buddy, there is nothing better than a computerized monkey reading porn stories to help one go to sleep at night.

--
Monstar L

Re:M$ disk arrays, anyone? by chris_mahan · 2004-12-13 14:15 · Score: 4, Funny

I personally think that microsoft should take the content of the HDs and store them on their VerySecure (TM) servers, and do the indexing there.

Then you could search your hard drive from any computer.

Furthermore, you could retrieve any search result files off your hard drive via their FancyP2PProtocol (TM).

Finally, you could then, while browsing with Internet Explorer (TM), get your MSN (TM) news, entertainment, and Hotmail(TM).

But wait, there's more! For a low monthly fee, you'll be part of an Exciting Online Community (TM) and get Amazing and Incredible Offers (TM) from our Most Valued Partners (TM), including but nor restricted to Fantastic Deals (TM) on software, music, and DVDs!

So what are your waiting for? Join the Microsoft Revolution(TM)! Be All You Can Be(TM)! And answer that age old question "Where do you want to go Today(TM)?" with a resounding REDMOND!!!

[note, segue into "Developers developers(TM)" if more than 2 visual basic users are in attendance]

--

"Piter, too, is dead."

Mozilla/Linux Not Good Enough by snookerdoodle · 2004-12-13 14:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Durn. It sez, "Warning! Your browser does not meet the minimum system requirements. You are recommended to use the MSN Toolbar Suite with Internet Explorer 5.01 or later."

Guess I'll have to, ahem, "upgrade" to IE/Windows so I can get the neat toolbar. Heh heh heh...

Mark

So innovative ! by Etyenne · 2004-12-13 14:21 · Score: 4, Funny

This brings true desktop search to Windows (for those who don't have Google Desktop Search or similar software running already) and also includes features like search term highlighting in web pages, auto-completing of forms, and a pop-up blocker.

Wow! I wish FireFox was that innovative !

--
:wq

MSN toolbar hides and disables the Google toolbar by FiNnZ · 2004-12-13 14:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

So I decided to install this POS to test it out. The final straw for me was that it hid and disabled my google toolbar in IE. That is:
1) shady
2) annoying
3) typical Microsoft

Do not install this.

Microsoft is doomed. by rindeee · 2004-12-13 14:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't say this as an anti-MS zealot or anything. It's just that I've noticed over the past two years Microsoft has gone from a market leader to an almost purely reactive organization. It's amazing to see a company go down hill that quickly.

Re:Microsoft is doomed. by dioscaido · 2004-12-13 14:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

Unfortunately, as reactionary as Microsoft is, it works. They take existing ideas, improve on it, and make a killing. The Xbox, .NET & ASP.NET, IIS6, Tablet PCs, Embedded Windows, etc... are neither original or revolutionary, but taken for their merits outside of the Microsoft specter are fantastic applications/platforms. Much like many v1 pieces of software, they had somewhat inauspicious starts, but have slowly matured into solid platforms.

Microsoft is not doomed. Even with the, frankly, much needed, arrival of customer friendly alternatives like OSX, newer linux desktops, Firefox, etc... Microsoft continues to expand into new markets and grow. Even with some horrible embarassments like the constant e-mail viruses, their profits this year were up 11%. Why is that? Is it just because they have a monopoly? Or could it be that even with the issues companies see great value in using MS products?

Being on the inside, I'm quite confident that things look *really* good for the future of MS. They've got quite a few fantastic features in the pipeline for existing products and quite a few new products up their sleeves. And as 'evil' as the company has been, they've realized that they will get eaten alive by Linux and other competitors if their products can't compete on a level playing field -- their monopoly will not last forever. So they have honed in on the one thing that *kills* them now -- Security. And in the past year have totally overhauled the company. All their products are being deeply analyzed for security flaws using threat modelling and other techniques. A huge pain in the ass for my team but much needed. SP2 is a step forward, as have been the patches to many desktop and server products. It sucks that it took this long for Microsoft to realize it, but they have, and the proof is in what's continually coming out of their doors in recent years.

Anyway, enough of a rant. I'm very glad Linux is in the picture. Microsoft can't afford to be a sleeping giant, and in the end we all win -- with killer strides in the Linux Desktop, and with leaps in security in Windows servers. Competition's where it's at!
Re:Microsoft is doomed. by Neo-Rio-101 · 2004-12-13 15:00 · Score: 3, Informative

You misunderstand. It became market leader due in part to being a purely reactive organization.

One might argue that Microsoft cannot innovate to save itself, or you could say that Microsoft fills a huge gap by taking best-of-breed IT concepts and working them into a viable solution for customers.

Depends on who the spin doctors are.

--
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Re:Microsoft is doomed. by mrchaotica · 2004-12-13 17:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

So, how's Palladium going?

See, that's the thing -- regardless of how good their future projects might be, Microsoft needs to die. It's not about the quality of their software, it's about control. It seems to me that Microsoft is bent on controlling everything it gets involved in, and when the stuff it's involved in is information itself, that's unacceptable.

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

Argh - Moral Dillemma by Mr.+Cancelled · 2004-12-13 14:32 · Score: 4, Funny

The optimistic geek in me says "This is the desktop search engine you've been waiting for. It's been built by the same company that built the Windows operating system it'll be running under, so you know it'll be more optimized and stable than those other '3rd party' search engines".

While the techie part of me is screaming "It's Microsoft Maaaan! Are you fucking nuts considering this!?"

Re:So Basicially... by xpl_the_myst · 2004-12-13 14:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

It does improve somewhat on the Google desktop search syntax.

Check out regex searching and "from:john" kind of email searching at http://beta.search.msn.com/docs/toolbar.aspx?t=MSN Tbar_PROC_CompleteSearchSyntax.htm

--
This sig is empty.

Microsoft Releases Toolbar Suite by passedaway · 2004-12-13 14:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

Pop-up blocking is not the touted feature of this toolbar release. Also desktop search is nothing new - Google, Copernic, X1 all have stable offerings. What may make MSN desktop search popular is the fact that it allows users to search directly from windows explorer. Now when searching for files on my dektop, windows explorer is the first place users tend to look for (Users are used to pressing F3 in explorer).
I tried my hands at the suite and on the face value, it doesn't seem special or radically different from its competitors. But I am yet to find anything seriously wrong with it.
And though it claims to index and search my Outlook emails, it is not fast and flexible enough to make me want to replace my Lookout toolbar.

Re:So Basicially... by Belsical · 2004-12-13 14:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

Have you actually tried it? It could be better than the Google toolbar. For instance, I've noticed that it keeps track of items being moved around in Outlook a lot better. I also like its Advanced Query Interface.

How about it not turning your computer into a web server? It took me an unreasonable amount of time to install the Google toolbar because of my firewall settings; this was a breeze (Google still says it won't work on my computer whenever I start up, even though it does).

As I compare the two, they seem to each have their pros and cons. Like any other decision regarding which piece of software to use, I'd imagine it will depend on the user...or users will use both.

--

"There are no such things as mutual fantasies. Yours bore us and ours offend you."
- Bill Maher

Re:So Basicially... by generic-man · 2004-12-13 14:46 · Score: 2, Interesting

Google Desktop Search was aimed at everyone

Google Desktop Search was aimed at everyone running Windows, like all of Google's standalone programs (whether developed in-house or bought from another vendor).

Around here, "everyone" includes people running Linux, Mac OS X, and any other operating system you can name.

Besides, I didn't see you complaining when Google released a toolbar for Internet Explorer only -- Firefox and Opera had to develop their own toolbars to search Google.

--
For more information, click here.

Re:So Basicially... by scragz · 2004-12-13 14:56 · Score: 2, Informative

Must not be aimed at me. But Google Desktop Search was aimed at everyone.

The funny thing about that statement is this line on the Google Desktop Search download page:

* Requires Windows XP or Windows 2000 SP 3+

Re:Well, by fireman+sam · 2004-12-13 15:14 · Score: 3, Funny

Your's read the articles? My bonzi buddy simply jerked off then went to sleep.

--
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.

Re:MSN toolbar hides and disables the Google toolb by Dr.+Sp0ng · 2004-12-13 15:18 · Score: 3, Informative

Didn't do that for me, Google toolbar (and Google Desktop) is still there and working fine.

Just tried it... by Khuffie · 2004-12-13 15:41 · Score: 2, Informative

And I have to say this: it's a fast bugger. It takes less than a second top open up the window and display the results, and if you narrow it down (say you change it from Everything to Emails), the results are basically immediate. Google DS isn't anywhere near as smooth as this. It seems to search everything: emails, attachments, PDFs, folders and all hard discs. Its great.

I dont care for the toolbar (I use Firefox anyway), but the little taskbar search button is quite handy. I just type, and see the results right there. This gets a thumbs up from me, whereas I didn't much care for GDS or Copernic.

Re:Google toolbar for Firefox by SubcomandanteTorta · 2004-12-13 15:46 · Score: 2, Funny

Jesus I thought for a second there there was a _2600_ toolbar.

Re:How they did that ? Easy. Buy a company. by toddestan · 2004-12-13 15:52 · Score: 2, Funny

"We are delighted to announce that Microsoft has acquired Lookout Software!"

Damn, and I always thought that "LookOut" was the name of Microsoft's email client.

My Review by Czmyt · 2004-12-13 16:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

I tried it out and though that it was a good program, similar to the Google Desktop Search, until it started crashing my Outlook. Kept getting errors within Outlook that I could not view certain folders because another program that had them opened had crashed. After a couple of Outlook restarts, it got to the point where Outlook would not start at all. It would just freeze at the opening screen. I did like the ability to tell it what folders to search, a feature that Google search is sorely lacking. Of the four search programs I've tried in depth (Google Desktop, MSN Desktop, Copernic, and dtSearch), dtSearch seemed to work the best overall, though there were still files on my server that would crash it during the indexing phase. Copernic did almost as well on indexing, but would frequently crash while searching. Generally, the program seemed fragile. You know, those programs that you can't rely on because they crash way too often that it's hardly worth using them. Google was good, but useless since I couldn't customize it at all. MSN was generally good, but seemed to have a lot of problems related to indexing Outlook e-mail messages. Can someone please come out with a decent desktop search program that understands lots of file formats, does not crash during indexing, do not crash during searching, and works well with Outlook and Outlook Express and other e-mail programs?

Guess What? It works better! by wwahammy · 2004-12-13 21:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

It may be made by Microsoft but the program is better than Google. You can actually interact with your search results similar to the way you could from Windows Explorer from a folder or what not. That is something that had annoyed me with Google's. SOmetimes I want to find every file that has something in it to delete them all yet to do so I have to use the crappy search functionality built into Windows. It also searchs more things (contacts in Outlook is an example). I may not like the company behind it but you can't say that they didn't do a better job this time. Hopefully this just convinces others to upgrade and innovate more.

Microsoft's power is programming by musicmaster · 2004-12-13 22:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

Microsoft has always been a nerd company. Their books about how to program and do a project are famous. Their organisation is top. Their people are top. They don't have the fast-growing shares and organisation of the past, but they are still very attractive.

They are weak on new ideas - they have always been. But when they take over an idea they do it with a perfectionist zeal that usually sooner or later leaves the competition in the dust.

At the moment they have a defensive period in which they have to invest much in making their products more secure. This won't bring them much money, but sooner or later they will find a new markets to grow in.

I still hope that some day a company will make a toolbar that offers cards, emoticons and all the other gadgets that seduce people to install those nasty adware products.

Slashdot Mirror

Microsoft Releases Toolbar Suite

88 of 476 comments (clear)