Slashdot Mirror
MSN Virtual Earth to Take on Google
Jim Bruer writes "Microsoft sends news today that founder Bill Gates has announced a MSN Virtual Earth service is to debut in the summer. The service is promised to provide:
*Satellite images with 45-degree-angle views of buildings and neighborhoods
*Satellite images with street map overlays
* Ability to add local data layers, such as showing local businesses or restaurants
The service will allow users to choose from a number of different data types plus allow people to contribute their own information."
I prefer the very unhyped way that Google launches its services, when they are ready! It seems that Microsoft marketing allready has caught up with Google Maps, now it's time for the programmers to do their job.
What is more important, bug-free functionality or the launch date?
extern warranty;
main()
{
(void)warranty;
}
Microsoft could gain an edge over Google Maps by providing global coverage since the beginning. Otherwise I'm not sure the 45-degree images would bring much added value to the service. Google would probably continue to be #1 in this segment with their yet unmatched UI
Microsoft are doing exactly what they have been doing with great sucess for the last few decades. They find cool technology, create a cheap knockof, and leverage their OS monopoly to push the original innovator out of buisness. The only difference is that Microsoft hasn't been able to leverage their OS monompoly against Google yet. I'm sure they will think of ways eventually. All they have to do is integrate MSN search, maps, etc. into the core operating system.
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
Like a lot of things in life, it cuts both ways. Just like cyber-stalking.
Back on-topic: last week we had to send someone to a different city, so we printed out a route map using google maps; we left off ALL the satellite data - its too confusing leaving it in. Plain maps are still the easiest to use, even if they aren't "cool".
uh yeah...cuz Google was the first company to offer a map program....oh wait....but it was the first company to offer satellite images...wait wait no....I'm pretty sure it was the first company to have free web based email...or then again... um but its DEFINITELY the first company to offer a personalized portal with your news and stocks and sear...oh wait wait no....hmmm.
Why would Microsoft do that? It's not their business model. Sure, you may like them to be innovators, but M$'s strength (like it or not) is taking other people's ideas and beating them at their own game - whether through adding more features, integrating it into the OS, or just simply out-marketing them (Win vs. OS/2, anyone?).
Five Dolla Moddy-Moddy?
So was Google leading or following when they provided a map service with a few cool enhancements over the competition?
Is Microsoft leading or following when they provide a map service with a few cool enhancements over the competition?
Oh, I see. Because it's Google, they're INNOVATING, but because it's Microsoft, they're RIPOFF COPYCATTERS!
Hey, Bill - what you're saying sounds really cool and all... but how about showing us a product you've got now, rather than telling us about the groovy stuff you're gonna have someday?
#DeleteChrome
I think its more interesting how these are released, and how MS is taking a bigger risk.
Google didn't tell anybody. They just added a link to their maps page and said beta. No anouncement, nada. Just a working product, and no expectations.
Microsoft is making an anouncement before they are putting a working product in peoples hands. This may create a lot of expectations, and they will get more critical treatment when bugs are found, if they miss the release date (not MS), etc.
However the MS product turns out. Google will probably end up looking better because they simply released a working service. They didn't hype it up and generate false expectations.
Either way, I think we win as these companies fight one another by making their offerings and products better.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Google innovated by making a search engine that was an order of magnitude better than any that had previously existed.
Google innovated by making a online mapping app that contains an order of magnitude more data than previous efforts, by making tha data hackable, and by making a much, much better user interface.
Google didn't really innovate by buying Dejanews, AFAIK. Google groups is kinf of bleh.
Google innovated by making their image search contain an order of magnitude more images.
I don't know about how Google compares with other local specific content providers.
I'd say Google does it's fair bit of innovations.
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
In fact, M$ has ALWAYS followed. Any other way is too expensive.
They let others bust their balls trying to develop something that survives out there in the market place.
If and when it does, they swoop in, 'integrate' it into their system and steal the market.
Their R&D is not for 'creating new products' but 'how to integrate new options' as there come up.
They are quite content to let others do the innovating and they take the cream of the crop and then produce a knock-off which takes at least three tries 'till it works.
That's how you make money. And the worst part is that is the strategy for maintaining 'world domination.'
Notice how long Longhorn has been in the paddocks?
Microsoft is waiting for a credible threat until they release Longhorn. The threat is not here yet.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Google isn't the first map provider. Google is the firs map provider to do it right. To take a good idea and implement it in a useable, technichally sound way often requires much more innovation than simply coming up with an idea.
I'm sure a lot of people though 'Hey, wouldn't it be nice with a search engine that actually finds the good stuff on the web' before Google, maybe some even though alkong the lines of Googles pagerank. But taking that idea and turning it into what Google is today - that is innovative. On the other hand, when Microsoft looked at the pagerank algorithm and said 'Hey - we can copy this and make our own site', that was not innovation, because they are copying an implementation, not an idea.
Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
I think Google is trying to beat Microsoft using the classic cold war economic strategy.
We used to do a lot of crazy things to make the Russians think our military was bigger and more mobile than it really was. As a result they had to keep spending enormous amounts of money to try to "keep up". They eventually drove their economy into the ground.
Google, gives its workers 20% time to work on personal projects. Some of these go live. Their search cluster basically gives a project unlimited disk and cpu.
When a project goes live, it comes as a surprise. Microsoft, (and others) finds itself caught off guard, and has to work feverishly to make a "better" product before they even have a competing or functioning one.
Since the projects start off as "personal" projects, and considering the number of employees, even corporate espionage can't be very effective, at getting a heads up, because of the noise ratio.
The last part of the strategy is the quiet, surprise releases. No advance anouncements, no press conference or press release. Just a simple link. The media goes crazy because there is a new link on a google page. They get a reputation of producing instead of promising.
The satelite imagery is a great example. They buy a profitable business, Keyhole, and leverage the access to imagery and for a small amount of development effort, integrate it into the mapping service in a very similar way that the mapping service already works. Even though the satelite stuff in maps might lose money, Keyhole is still earning them money. The imagery becomes a value-added feature.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
I know this is a bit offtopic, but I'm curious -- how come Microsoft has to compete with everyone who's making good progress in particular areas? Do they have a team of people who do nothing but read technical articles and news to see what everyone else is doing so they can target them as a potential competetive prospect?
I'm not a Microsoft basher, nor am I a rampant supporter of them. I have an XP machine at home for gaming, and a Mac for pretty much everything else (OSX for the win!).
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn