Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Takes Aim At Google
TiredOfCrap writes "People are underestimating what Microsoft is doing with search technology, says Bill Gates.
The head of the software giant told the BBC that its ambition is to be bigger than Google in search.
"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
The head of the software giant told the BBC that its ambition is to be bigger than Google in search
Yeah, and my ambition is to be an astronaut-playboy-robot-vampire that fights crime and plays lead guitar in his own thrash metal band on the weekends, but I don't think my ambition is terribly realistic either.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Telling someone to Microsoft for the answer just doesn't sound the same as googling for it...
Competition is good. Even you anti-Microsoft pundints will have to admit, this will only make Google have to work harder ;)
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Sounds like Microsoft alright. They are not trying to create a better search engine, they are trying to "beat the competition". Haven't they learned yet this rarely works?
Google is an enemy by choice. I get the impression that Google is a competitor simply because Gates thinks they are.
Is there a GoogleOS in our future?
Defecation occurs.
The article is expectedly mostly spin, but I'm surprised at how much rehash it is. Specifically:
I think that says a lot. Computers today are astronomically more powerful than ever before which is a natural consequence of the development and maturation of electronics and transistors, etc. But, Mr. Gates and Microsoft has promised year after year the power (delivered, but not because of Microsoft) but not the ease of use.
I do think (and of course this is just opinion) the software could have evolved much further than we see today if Microsoft hadn't been so dominant. There are/were hints of advances but often these were stunted early either by Microsoft essentially buying out companies and putting their own stamp on the technology (and sometimes actually advancing it), or by cooking up something similar and squashing the competition with price undercuts.
(Actually, technically, Mr. Gates is wrong here: you can talk to them. They won't do much, but you can still talk to them.)
I saw Mr. Gates say this same thing at a Expo Keynote speech in the '90s. I said it then, I'll say it now, we'll get real speech recognition in computers sort of, but it's not clear people really want to talk to them anyway. It's mostly amazing and a little disgusting Mr. Gates gets to get away with these promises year after year. I suppose it's partially the consuming public's fault for having a collective short memory and never calling Microsoft on this.
As for Mr. Gates' prediction MS is going to be bigger than Google, uh, hello, it already is. I think this is mostly code language for what they intend (hope) to do to Google. I'm not sure MS is positioned quite as nicely this time to accomplish this.
And, finally, from the article:
I'm not sure what Mr. Gates is implying here. But if I were on one of the U.S. campuses, I'd be pissed, and a little nervous.
> People are underestimating what Microsoft is doing with search technology, says Bill Gates. The head of the software giant told the BBC that its ambition is to be bigger than Google in search.
"Whoops, here's another hot application that we didn't see coming."
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
As someone much wiser than me once said, "The day Microsoft starts making a product that doesn't suck is the day they start making vacuum cleaners."
If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
"its ambition is to be bigger than Google in search. ""
,Google prepare for a smack-down
..OH YEAH . Were going to fucking bury them ..BALLMER SMASH BALLMER SMASH
.. Google your title reign is over
Which was the BBC Censored version of..
Gates: We will take them down and destroy their families and friends
Ballmer:THEY ARE GOING DOWN
Gates : yeah , See you on RAW
Ballmer : *Smashes interviewer over the head with a chair* DEVELOPER DEVELOPER DEVELOPER DEVELOPER DEVELOPER.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Google has the name right now. Microsoft would have to completely abandon MSN because no one wants to search from MSN. One problem they have is that they don't appear to want to go head to head. Their move for AOL shows that they appear to have the idea if they can force AOL users to MSN unawares then their numbers will go up and they will appear to be competing. Just my observation. This whole battle seems to be more of Microsoft's idiology that if it's a technology, they should be the main player. Some might say this is business but business should be, "We can do it better" not "We should have what they have." Google is out there growing and coming up with new ideas. Microsoft is following. This isn't new. They did it with the browser market and the server market. They will build on the technology with new ideas (or bought ones?) once they conquer.
Um, this has been the MS PR line for months. Slow news day?
this is getting old and so are you
blog
Who says I can't talk to my computer?
Is it just me, or is Microsoft "all bark, and no bite" lately?
They're going to do this, they're working on that, they're going to be bigger than [insert market leader here].
I'd like it if Microsoft would just STFU and show me the goods, rather than keep telling me how great they'll be tomorrow.
1) Black helicoptors
2) "Re-education"
3) ???
4) WORLD DOMINATION!!!
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
That wouldn't be so bad if their preferred method of getting there weren't borrowed from Tanya Harding.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
You're forgetting the two key features that work in tandem, thus insuring Microsoft's success in a good deal of previous ventures:
Embedded in Windows: you betcha!
Good enough: yeah...it takes too much effort to do otherwise.
The only real uncertainty is how well they can pull this off on the internet; a place which has proven to be a difficult area for MS in many ways.
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
The reason Google is on top is NOT because of the best search engine technology. It was because Google presents a non-tyrannical alternative. Gates can't see that though, because he's too wedded to his tyrannies...
"We are stronger than ever because we have a research lab in Cambridge, we have one now in China, one in India and that is where the top problems in computer science are going to be solved."
Apparently, none of the top problems in computer science are going to be solved in the United States.
So finally we know what William wishes for his 50th birthday.
Hey guys, we need to collect some more dimes for the gift!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
When I can go to microsoft.com and search about the problem I'm having with Exchange and get better results than by searching google.com using site:microsoft.com, THEN Microsoft can tell me how great their search engine is.
Until that happens, its all FUD.
Competition is good. Even you anti-Microsoft pundints will have to admit, this will only make Google have to work harder ;)
Sure. If Microsoft had the reputation for being a fair competitor I would agree with you. My guess is that they will resort to their traditional sleezy tactics to impede Google and flog an inferior search capability using monopoly assets (like IE, Windows, Office, MSN). Microsoft is now firing at random. They are clearly off balance.
an ill wind that blows no good
People are underestimating what Microsoft is doing with [ANY] technology, says Bill Gates. The head of the software giant told [ALL WHO'D LISTEN] that its ambition is to be bigger than [COMPANY X] in [WHATEVER COMPANY X DOES].
Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
Clippy: Did you mean, you would like an honest comparisson of the Linux-TCO and the "Windows Server 2007"-TCO?
Clippy will redirect you in 5 seconds, unless you click NO
[Yes] [Yup] [OK]
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
Mr. Gates writes "We have a research lab in Cambridge, we have one now in China, one in India and that is where the top problems in computer science are going to be solved."
Really ?
Here's some of the top problems in CS.
Here's the research lab in India - working on technology implementations, certainly not top CS problems.
Here are the 10 innovations that will blow you away - coming out of Beijing. Again, some very sound implementations, but not exactly top 10 CS problems.
But yes, Cambridge is looking at some of the top 10 CS problems. However, MS is no Bell Labs when it comes to taking on research problems. They end up successfully monetizing tech solutions, but that is quite different from pioneering fundamental breakthroughs like inventing a transistor or laser.
He must have been so satisfied when he had "Windows 95" as a phallic symbol.
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
He may be defeated by the public in their mindset as it currently is, which for many is that Google are a great company who are always coming up with free stuff and more features for their users (which they do).
Many people see Microsoft as profiteering and would rather keep using Google, as would Firefox in the search box. As long as people see Google as a more customer friendly and open website for the user then they will continue to use it.
Business Voyeur
Microsoft will likely never beat Google at it's game unless Microsoft spun off search and un-emcumbered it allowing it to do the right thing.
.NET, host it on Windows, integrate it with IIS, leverage MS SQL, utilize WinFS...etc basically slowing them down and making them un-competitive. In the meantime Google engineers could take the same ideas and implement them much quicker with less restraint because they wouldn't get a black eye if suddenly they wanted to leverage Solaris, or Zeus, or python...or you get the idea.
One of Google's key success factors has been their open source approach to delivering and developing their product offerings. The very foundation of Google is Open source backed which is the antithesis of Microsoft.
Even if MS engineers came up with a whiz bang search technology, they would force their search division to write it in
I do say though that it "feels" like we are finally living in some interesting times again in IT where there are some serious players competing in the industry...
I don't think that Microsoft will try to outgoogle Google by making their search engine a beacon of simplicity as it appear to be right now, but instead they will try to solve everyones problem by putting every feature they can think of in the user interface and making their search box appear everywhere they can.
Meanwhile, Google will continue to evolve their ui to be even more simple and easier to use and add new technology as new services instead of putting it all on the search page.
How much better than Google does MS Search have to be to start pulling over users from Google? Does MS have any new technology that Google don't have access to? I don't think so.
"He admitted Apple had had the biggest bite out of the digital music business with its iPod and iTunes success, and wished that Microsoft and its device partners had a bigger share.
But he stressed that, in most part, Microsoft was not about making devices.
"Our success is overwhelmingly greater than theirs [Apple's] is - they are learning from us every step of the way and we are learning from them," he said."
Huh. How can their success be greater when the iTunes Music Store has a 85% market share?
Nice pep talk Bill! The problem is, no matter how good you make your search, or how flexible you make your software to share media, the flood of advertising in your search and restrictive DRM locks you put on the sharing, will only leave a bad taste in our mouths.
Media needs to be free, not slightly shared.
Searching needs to be relevent and unobtrusive.
MS fails on all accounts.
And I suppose the White Sox are going to win a World Series?
...oh wait...
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
Get a f'n clue Bill - I don't want MS (or anyone else) to be the only name in my household and workplace.
Enlightenment is a pipe dream. So where's the pipe?
JFC, Microsoft, just give it up already. You lost. It's over. Your search portal will NEVER catch google. EVER. The only thing you can hope for is that there's a prolonged power outage that hits all the Google servers, thus driving people to MSN search.
Even *IF* MS's search is better or bigger, or whatever. Google is in the lexicon. It's the first stop for a million percent of people who surf the web, and it's pretty decent. Nothing short of a week long power outage would disconnect the millions from doing their search at Google. Saying you're aiming to overtake them just .. makes you look foolish. Like you don't have anything better to spend your money on. Which is probably true.
My only experience with Microsoft's "search" capabilities has been in their MSDN Library; where I rarely, if ever, find anything of relevance.
Unless they start from scratch and implement some kind of keyword search, instead of the current random result generator they are using in their MSDN Library, I don't think Google has much to worry about.
well, seeing as I can't get decent results searching on microsoft.com, I don't see how they can think they are even close to competing with Google. Most of the time when I need to find something at ms I use a 'site:microsoft.com' from Google and much better results than the MS site search.
Anyone see the similarities between him in that picture, and Kryton?
http://www.javascrypt.com/spike-o-rama/kryton/
A search for "Linux" at msn search comes up with 90,043,606 while at google comes up with 445,000,000 so yeah I think we know where microsoft is going with its search engine.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
That's how they plan on beating Google. By killing them. The only thing I can't figure out is how to kill a search engine. Perhaps throwing chairs at their fiber backbone? Maybe a few more chairs thrown around in their server farm?
Perhaps now would be a good time for Google to start researching what to do if Steve Ballmer decides to kill you.
Content Management System: A pretentious way of saying "text editor."
Microsoft's past successes in arenas with competition has been to under price the other guy. Since people who use web searches don't actually pay for them, they can't do that. I suppose Microsoft could offer cheaper, even free, advertising links from their searches, but that won't make them more popular with the actual users of web searches. In publishing, your ad rate is determined in part by your circulation. Even if Microsoft gives away ads, they are only worth as much as the amount of use the search engine gets, at best.
I don't think it's possible for Microsoft search to trounce Google, because there is no ability to wage an effective price war. That effectively takes the most successful MS strategy off the table. Even with obscene R&D money at their disposal, they haven't been able to make a profit with X-Box. How are they supposed to make a profit on a service end users don't ever pay for? Google almost never fails to find what I'm looking for. What is Microsoft going to find that Google misses?
How many markets has Microsoft failed in?
- File and print took 5-10 years, but they own that.
- Word and Excel's initial releases were "suboptimal", but they own that.
- Web browser market is a similar story
- Exchange's first release followed a similar path. they may not own messaging, but at ~50% and climbing, they're well on their way.
similar stories in other markets.
What impediments are there to MS owning search? maybe not this year, but 5 years from now. Sure Google has cash now, but so did Netscape.
Sheesh! Billy G. & Co. just CANT stand any kind of competition. It's a megalomanical desire to own the entire planet and subjugate all it's inhabitants into using Microsoft products. Just look at the crap going on in Massachusetts over their decision to adopt Open Document format. Open - as in published standards.
They are about to explode that their propreitary, patent encumbered Office XML format is not the standard and they are pulling out all the stops.
Sorry, Billy - we need competition. We dont need your dictating to us. Google does what it does quite well. If you can build a better "mousetrap", well fine. The market should choose.
... for Microsoft to be bigger than Google in SEARCHing.
See, the alchemists have SEARCHED for the Philosopher's stone for centuries.
FINDING, on the other hand... is a very different business!
It's little wonder that Ballmer's throwing psychotic hissy fits. There's a real live Windows-killer on the horizon for the first time in over a decade.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Google currently has the edge on web searches and several other handy apps
I switched to Google a few years ago because when I used another SE like Yahoo! they wouldn't have it but Google would. But now when I google I don't always get a result but when I use Teoma or Mooter I do. So I may switch again, though I'm not sure if it will be to Mooter or to Teoma. As for any apps Google has, I have yet to use any.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It seems the average slashdotter has forgotten about the common user. Sure, many of us use google, or whatever our engine of choice is, it's rarely msn I would venture to say...but slashdotters are not the norm, and we should all know that because it's likely many of us are developers, sysadmins and the like. The average user will, for ages, use the search engine that their windows computer comes preprogrammed to use, if msn is the default front page, it'll stay that way for a good long time with many, many users. How soon we forget how simple the average user is.
dB Masters
1. Get Mom to buy you subscription to Slashdot so you can get first post.
2. Google topic and link first three returns as "Article is short on details, more info can be found here, here and here. And Zonk sucks."
3. ^_^
4. KARMA!
Persistence is futile. You will be metamoderated.
I don't think you used that correctly. To "Microsoft" means to blow something out of your ass.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's "to tubgirl".
Isn't the whole point that Microsoft wants to be bigger than anyone, doing anything at all? You can hula-hoop - Microsoft can do it better. You can produce desktop software that runs on Microsoft's own platform... er... well, Microsoft can do it better. They just didn't, to start with. They're trying harder now.
What is it with Microsoft? Even people who adore Microsoft's products hate the company. Even Steve, bless his heart, manages to make them all look like pillocks while he prances about the stage proclaiming his intense love for everything microsoft.
Anything which makes them take their head out of their arse and look around for a moment has to be good. At present, just about every aspect of the real world has this property.
"Microsoft Takes Aim at Google"...... shoots self in foot.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
If Microsoft thinks google is a search engine company and a website then they have really missed the boat.
Google is an advertising company. Google makes more money on AdSense than on AdWords. Google won't get rid of google.com anytime soon but the reality is that the search engine was just a platform for eyeballs (even if only in hindsight) to show ads and to build a massive and intelligent advertising platform. -david
# Hack the planet, it's important.
-Tez
Haskell, the static-typed, lazy, polymorphic, programming language.
Microsoft is good at playing catch up. It is one of the very few things it is very, very good at.
.Net and C#, MSN Search. But they're all things that catch up to something that was already top dog. Best case scenario, it breaks even.
But not by innovating. Their comeback tactics have always been marketing and economics.
First there was personal computer OS and applications. Make MS-DOS, Windows and Office a good enough OS and spread it using an ubiquitous platform on the rise. Make people, the ordinary but many people, afford them. There goes UNIX or OS/2 as Microsoft takes over the desktop. There was more money in the collective pocket of the little people than in what you could get from corporations, and they got it.
Then there came the Internet and the Web. Make Explorer a good enough browser and give it away for free. Bundle it with your OS so people never care there's an alternative. There goes Netscape.
Then here comes their 3rd big challenge, and I don't know what it is. If I did I'd be famous, or sought after by big money. It has to do with mobility, and distributed computing, and online services, perhaps. But it's here and Google is here and this time Microsoft doesn't seem to find that one thing to take over. It seems to be something that cannot be taken over.
This requires a fundamental change of strategy and I don't think Microsoft can do that. For once, they can't just throw their weight and money at the problem, and there's no catch or moment they can exploit, because they missed the train.
They are not alone. Let's not forget that the Google way of doing things has been a shocker for most of the IT world. I've always wondered why, since there are so many corporations out there with so much freaking money, they seem to produce so little. What the hell are they doing with all the dough and resources? Sure, we're getting new and better stuff, but sometimes it just shines through the cracks that it's not nearly what it should be.
Yet Google throws it's weight at furious innovation. It brings out new stuff weekly, for God's sake. It hires all the greatest minds, and they are eager to go with Google, because it's what they always truly wanted, furious innovation for the sake of it.
It's not like Microsoft isn't trying. They push out all these things as fast as they can think of them: IE7 with decent capabilities, XAML and XForms and Avalon,
I don't know why they can't shake it. Maybe they really have grown too beaurocratic for their own sake and can't react fast enough. I'm sure that Gates and the top dogs see all this pretty clear. And there's still nothing groundshaking but empty promises, and time passes and more innovation floods IT from other sources.
They still have Windows and Office and Explorer, for now, but how long is it going to last? The day the PC starts going and something new comes up, they're all gone.
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer