Can Microsoft Out-Google Google?

faria24 writes "For the past decade, Microsoft has largely ignored the Web as an emerging platform for application development with fears that it could render Windows obsolete. But that will all change next week, as Microsoft unveils a new strategy for transforming its Web properties into an open platform for developers. As part of its new 'Web 2.0 Platform' strategy, Microsoft will expose application programming interfaces, or APIs, for MSN Search using SOAP. MSN Virtual Earth, Desktop Search and MSN Messenger will all be opened up for outside developers to extend." Coverage on CNet as well. From the article: "Microsoft's online rivals, notably Google and Yahoo, already provide the hooks that let third-party Web developers write applications that tap into their Web services, such as search and mapping. Because these Web applications rely on a Web browser, they can, in theory, run on any operating system. Microsoft, meanwhile, has always drawn third-party developers to Windows. But even with its commitment to Windows, analysts said, Microsoft needs to more fully address the growing popularity of online Web development. Having a healthy ecosystem of third-party add-on products helps drive traffic to Web properties. "

Comments

Can Microsoft Out-Google Google?

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Next question.

"Can Google Out-Microsoft Microsoft?"

Re:Can Microsoft Out-Google Google?

[Anonymous Coward]

No

Agreed. I worked for several years in MSN, starting from the beginning. I have to say that during the entire time I was there, I didn't see much strategic thinking going on. That's not to say that we didn't have some really good people, but Microsoft isn't a service organization. Microsoft is a product organization, and you just can't "productize" the Internet no matter how hard you try.

The biggest reason that Microsoft can't compete with Google is that it has become a big, bloated bureaucracy. Why do you think that all the top-flight talent is leaving? Sure, money has something to do with it, but it also has a lot to do with the fact that Google is a hot-bed for new ideas and actively fosters innovation. Microsoft, on the other hand, has become very risk adverse, so it's not willing to stake its future on new ideas. That's why we're seeing incremental changes in Vista. It's why Microsoft is reluctant to use open schemas in its Office products. The problem is that when you adopt this kind of thinking, you slowly rot from the inside out.

So I guess what I'm saying is that Microsoft is not a real threat to Google. The biggest threat to Google is its own hiring practices. As long as they hire people whose job it is to contribute then they'll be ok. The second that they start hiring "strategic thinkers" and "efficiency experts" then they're in trouble.

Re:Can Microsoft Out-Google Google?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not a big bloated bureaucracy. That's just Ballmer's paunch. Throwing chairs and making death threats always gives him an appetite.

competition

[42Penguins]

As much as I love Google, and as schweet as it is, I'm sure it could be even sweeter if M$ put up some real competition.

Whether that will happen or not, however, is another question.

Re:competition

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

I guess it's possible, but so many people who are great coders who kinda help Google out on the fringes of its business (and possibly even the center) absolutely hate Microsoft and won't contribute that it may be harder than Msoft thinks to accomplish this kind of facelift.

Re:competition

[w3weasel]

Be very wary of it being a real 'fair and open' kind of competition thogh... in the same way that MS tried to taint and skew Java, Javascript, CSS and other web technologies, you can be pretty sure that this 'open' web 2.0 scheme will ensure that you develop for use only on IE (which still doesnt fullort support a multitude of W3C standards), with a long term aim of steering you off of a dangerously open platform standard such as a browser, and back into the Windows OS proper (where you can be safely contained and gradually bled of your cash).

Re:competition

[SScorpio]

But Microsoft has their hands in so many things right now, it might be difficult to justify spending so much money on something that isn't going to make them any money

They will and have. Just look at the Xbox.

Re:competition

[toddbu]

Google has something that Microsoft doesn't - a brand name that's used as a verb. I don't care how much money you have, nothing beats having Jessica Simpson say "I googled for it" on national TV. Having a brand like this means that you have all the free advertising that you want.

Re:competition

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

Microsoft You!

Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google

[bigtallmofo]

MSN Virtual Earth, Desktop Search and MSN Messenger will all be opened up for outside developers to extend...Google and Yahoo, already provide the hooks

Exactly how is introducing web services months after Google has introduced them a possibility of out-Googling Google?

Wouldn't Microsoft have to actually come out with a web tool that people use that Google didn't already have to even have the possibility of that description?

Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google

[FatRatBastard]

Wouldn't Microsoft have to actually come out with a web tool that people use that Google didn't already have to even have the possibility of that description?

Nope. Its a matter of trying to cut off each other's revenue stream. If MS takes eyeballs from Google products then Google receives less advertising revenue (which is their bread and butter revenue stream). If Google can produce pivotal applications that don't require MS OS or applications to run then MS (in theory) would receive less revenue from selling operating systems and applications (which is their bread and butter revenue stream).

This looks less like a battle of "what can I build to make more money" than "what can I build to fark my competition."

Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google

[QuietLagoon]

Wait for us, we're the leader!

Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google

[dioscaido]

You misunderstand the game. It's not who gets there first, but who grabs the largest market/amount of traffic. Google has been coming out with some sweet services, but at the same time MSN, as it stands now, has many times more users and traffic than Google in those same applications (except for search of course). # of users: hotmail >>> gmail, msn messenger >>> google's chat, my spaces >>> blogger.com.

I'm glad Google is around because it woke up MSN, who was pretty lame and coplacent. And it definitely looks like they are gunning for Google, and have tons of resources all focused on that.

As long as both google and msn keep improving their services, we win, so god speed to both companies.

Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google

[ciroknight]

Number of users doesn't matter when it comes to amount of money made per user. Google's business grows faster because though they may have a smaller number of users, those users are generating a much larger part of their revenue (in fact, virtually all of it).

That being said, Microsoft's revenue stream is entirely Windows and Office, thus the need now to diversify, and quickly, as their upcoming offering is about to be outclassed in every way by the competition.

The game isn't "who gets there first", nor is it "who has the most traffic". The game is entirely "who makes the most money off people". MSN's artificial lead could be strapped from Windows all together with an anti-trust lawsuit ("Microsoft is competing unfairly by strapping MSN to the operating system" "But we can't remove it!!!!1 It provides core functionality!!"...) As for hotmail, you heard it here first: hotmail has been dying for a long time, and as for my "proof", every hotmail user I know shy of one has moved to Gmail (and she stays with hotmail because it's tied to MSN).

By the way, Myspace is owned by News Corp, who also recently bought GameSpy; they're trying to move these services out of the way of the oncoming Google/Microsoft war, as if either got into those positions, it is likely the surrounding businesses like Myspace would be absolutely slaughtered by the competition (anyone using myspace can tell you why).

This is war, the way that the web has been from the beginning. Just because Microsoft won some early battles doesn't mean that this war is over by a long shot; it's been brewing in the back alleys and corners all over the internet. And now (in the eyes of the Geek) the benevolent Google verses the evil Microsoft battle is going to be dominated by a player who's eye is more on helping the community than destroying it.

Can't wait for Google's reaction come next week.

Marketing bullshit

[RootsLINUX]

I like how they call it "Web 2.0", as if Microsoft were the ones that originally invented the web. Gotta love that marketing department!

Re:Marketing bullshit

[Manchot]

Actually, he never said that, though the GOP managed to convince many people that he did.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

Re:Marketing bullshit

[Bogtha]

Actually, "Web 2.0" is a buzzword that originated outside of Microsoft and typically refers to "next gen" web technologies, like web services, AJAX, etc. Google it for more information.

Still stupid, vague to the point of meaningless marketing, but in this case, it's not Microsoft's fault, they are just using the same terminology as a lot of other people.

Re:Marketing bullshit

[Jeremi]

1. 
   Intelligent, forward-looking politician works for years to fund and shepherd through a new technology before anyone else has ever even heard of it
2. New technology comes to fruition and pays off big-time, leads to economic boom and years of prosperity
3. In the next election, said politician rightfully claims credit for his work
4. Opposition strategists successfully run smear campaign again politician, twisting his words to paint him as a liar
5. Smear campaign works, politician is discredited, loses election to folksy but brain-dead ideologue opponent with little experience and no capacity for critical thinking
6. Brain-dead opponent spectacularly mismanages the country into one avoidable debacle after the next (ignoring 9/11 threats, exploding the deficit, invading the wrong country, advocating torture of prisoners, eviscerating FEMA and other gov't agencies, abandoning environmental laws, etc)
7. Nation begins long, slow decline into penury and ignomy

I don't know who to blame -- the character assassins who managed to get an incompetent leader elected over a competent one, or the American public who fell for it, twice. But either way, our nation is a poorer place for it.

Wow!

[spiritraveller]

--- VERY IMPORTANT NEWS - VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---

Microsoft, the most innovative company in history is about to embark on a bold new way of doing things. They are going to open up the APIs for their search engine (that noone uses), their messenger service (that noone uses), and their Desktop search service (which surprisingly, nobody uses).

Oh wait a sec, this just in... they're going to open up the APIs for Windows users only.

Of course, Google and Yahoo, whose services people do use, opened up their APIs sometime around 1997.

--- VERY IMPORTANT NEWS - VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---

The Google Iceberg

[Anonymous Cowdog]

They can certainly copy the visible parts of Google, the products that are out (heh, mostly in beta) now.

But what about all the other stuff that's still hidden, that's in the Google pipeline? You could call it the Google Iceberg. The cool stuff that is yet to come. It looks like Google is pretty good at staying ahead by innovating.

As always, Microsoft is claiming to innovate, while actually just copying what they find out there in the marketplace already. They don't move the ball forward, they just keep the pressure on.

Great Question, Here's the Answer

[Ieshan]

For all relevant details and discussion, see "Netscape".

Re:Great Question, Here's the Answer

[ciroknight]

Netscape was different; netscape, though being the leading competitor, was also the far less powerful competitor. They had virtually no finances to fight the battle, and their development teams seemed to keep starting over, or getting pissed and spinning their wheels.

Google, on the other hand, has the lead, and the money, to fight Microsoft in this market. Their recent IPO has freed up billions of dollars to throw around as they see fit, and I'm fairly certain they are going to be expanding their bases of operations quickly. Alliances in SIP (VoIP), quick competition with Google Talk, and Gmail, and Google Earth's rapid media acceptance (see Hurricane Katrina for details) are all ways Google hopes to stay superior.

This won't be a battle like Netscape vs Microsoft. This time, the software isn't tied to Microsoft's infrastructure in any way (see the prevalance of cross platform tools from Google; they haven't completely full compatibility, but I insure you that they are working on it feverishly). Pair this with extreme competition from Microsoft in market dominance (Apple's catching up fast with the recent iPod successes), and you start seeing a really pissed off Microsoft.

It seems at this point, Microsoft, as well as News Corp, along with EBay, are all feeling the on-coming war, and are sweeping the playing field clear, buying up their places on the battlefield so that Google and Microsoft won't destroy them. See the recent purchase/intent to purchase GameSpy, Skype, etc.

This is war, and a war that Google can fight. Don't expect them to roll over and die like Netscape did.

Out-google Google? Unless the following happens

[bogaboga]

Out googling google will not be easy unless M$ creates the following environment:

Here it is:

M$ MUST make sure that the services Google and Yahoo provide at present do not work very well with IE. So in this situation if one wants to use Google's virtual Earth, it becomes impossible making this individual resort to Microsoft's offerings.

On the other hand, Google could fight back this way: It could create a utility that makes the dependence on IE for most of Microsoft's services irrelevant. I am still looking for a way to remove IE from my Windows box in a sane and neat way.

If Google can create such a utility, I can see most users removing IE. The trouble at present is even after making Firefox the default browser for example, looking at some link in some applications would still "call" IE. I guess this young man called "DVD Jon" can help here.

Goodbye Google!

[qualico]

Ballmer is going to f***ing kill Google. Remember. :->

Two references to Google...

[urdine]

...in the title of an article about Microsoft. A /. classic!

Whew

[Overly Critical Guy]

Whew, I was getting worried we weren't going to have YAGS (Yet Another Google Story) today. And this one has Microsoft in it. Bonus!

Headline

[R.Mo_Robert]

I'm not trying to rant, but...

Normally, BetaNews rips stuff right off the front page of Slashdot, but this time it looks like it went the other way around. I mean, was it really necessary to copy the exact headline, word for word, from the linked BetaNews article?

Microsoft cost me months of lost life.

[Helpadingoatemybaby]

I'm a developer and look at Microsoft's actions from my point of view.

I just spent the last two weeks building a replacement Microsoft's ADO/DAO in our product using sqlite. Why? Because on rolling out we discovered that ADO would fault on half the machines, and DAO would fault on the other half of the machines. Weird error messages. Strange unrelated machine problems. Both implementations ran fine in the lab, but in the real world they would fail. Who has time for that?

So we ripped out both and replaced them with a brand spanking new sqlite version. Wasted a lot of programming and testing time, but it was the only way to make sure that our program would work in the real world. In a similar vein, we had to remove all the Microsoft calendar controls from our product because some of the machines in the real world would fault. Working around Microsoft's problems is not what programmers should be paid for.

Now, given a choice between Google's products, which are generally stable and just work, and Microsoft's API which will potentially lead to a lot of uncomfortable surprises on rollout, which would I choose? It's a no brainer.

No thanks, Microsoft, but you had your chance. When we got to the point that we had to set a policy to minimize the use of Microsoft controls as much as possible you lost any chance of ever getting us back in the fold.

Re:Microsoft cost me months of lost life.

[MemoryDragon]

Working around the myriads of problems imposed by shoddy or non standard compliant microsoft software is what programmers are paid for 90% of the time, the bosses or customers simply do not see that directly. If Microsoft would comply to web standards for instance around 50% of all web programmers probably would lose their job because the worktime could be cut by half... Usually if you do html programming it is like that, make a page, which works on every browser, spend the rest of the time (which is somewhere between 50 and 90%) to get it up and running in IE as well...

Re:Question Translated:

[Antique Geekmeister]

I'm afraid the API's really are not open. They're open only under very restrictive licensing that very specifically prevents the developers from releasing an updated version of the Microsoft tool with the developer's desired features added.

Microsoft has also been caught, repeatedly, including unpublished operations in its kernels and its software that do specific functions much faster than the published API for those functions. It's fraudulent and deceitful and monopolistic to do so, since it's like having a secret back door for your airline that lets your customers skip going through customs, thus making your overall trip time much shorter.

Re:Question Translated:

[hritcu]

Who every thought that Google would ban CNET because CNET used Google to do research on Google Execs?

They did't ban anyone, you can still search CNET on google and it will work. They will just not make press announcements to them. This is a very different thing.

Why would we want to lock-in to Microsoft again?

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Microsoft isn't the sweetheart of the developer universe anymore. Anything they offer now is too little, too late. Nobody trusts Microsoft anymore. And besides, would you want your "Web 2.0" apps to depend on Microsoft products and services? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you use Microsoft tools and API's, you're not going to end up with "web applications" -- you're going to end up with "Windows applications that are delivered via the web."

Around the turn of the century, the phrase everyone was spewing was "whoever controls the browser, controls the Web." Microsoft proved that this isn't true. They had a near-monopoly on browsers for years, and they blew it. They just let the browser stagnate while they went back to focusing Bill Gates' pet projects, like tablet computing and putting a database in the filesystem. Now Google is finally realizing the Netscape dream of turning the web into a pervasive computing platform, and suddenly Microsoft has to go into react mode again. Microsoft does not innovate. Microsoft reacts. And Microsoft gets pissy whenever someone other than them starts succeeding in the technology world. They're a bunch of spoiled brats. Is it any surprise that those of us who are building the next generation of applications are hesitant to go anywhere near Microsoft?