Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Takes Aim At Google

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the battle-of-the-deep-pockets dept.

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. "

40 of 576 comments (clear)

  1. Bland ambition? by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    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

    1. Re:Bland ambition? by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >>I think he just might have the resources to do it.

      He may have the resources, but he'll never have the talent.

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    2. Re:Bland ambition? by shotfeel · · Score: 4, Funny

      If Bill Gates has enough money to create a real vampire then why doesn't he have enough money to make Windows stable?

      Considering the role he's played in creating zombie armies, I don't think becoming a blood-sucking creature of the night is too far off.

      OTOH, a stable Windows? You think he has supernatural abilities or something?

    3. Re:Bland ambition? by ILikeRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are wrong... it was AT&T Bell labs, but other than Bjarne Stroustrup, who went to Texas A&M, most of the Bell guys are now at Google. These are people Microsoft could never hire away, but Google did.

      --
      I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress -J Adams
    4. Re:Bland ambition? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I suppose Gates had to say something sensible after the "fucking kill" incident of his henchman, Stinky Ballmer. It's like some corporate public relations version of good cop bad cop.

      It's fine to have ambition, but Microsoft seems to have let a competitor get the upper hand to such a degree that the name "Google" is becoming to search technology what Coca-cola is to carbonated drinks. In fact, I'd contend that Google is aleady there and that anything short of a total disaster is going to render any other search portals, Billy Gates' mighty MSN Search among them, a small time player.

      It's strange, because a few years ago I would have thought something like KDE or Mac-OSX would have been the MS-killer, but Google has shown the way to take on Microsoft, via the web itself. Google's got the holiest of holies; brand recognition, and it's going to use that to push out web apps of all kinds. Microsoft is in a game of catch-up here, and not only is it currently losing the race, it isn't yet even in the damn stadium yet.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:Bland ambition? by whereiswaldo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Microsoft is in a game of catch-up here, and not only is it currently losing the race, it isn't yet even in the damn stadium yet.


      Because Microsoft is not a real innovator, it is destined to always be chasing its competitors. In the past it has had some victories but those hey days are gone now that it has been convicted of abusing its monopoly powers and has its hands somewhat tied.
      The other aspect of this situation of Microsoft vs. Google is that Google has been redefining the playing field over and over again in rapid time. This race is a relay race where the Google team is on the 8th relay and Microsoft is still trying to get to relay #1 - web search, purple in the face and panting.

      Besides, even if Microsoft did manage to kill Google (which I think is highly unlikely), the wheels have been set in motion. The open source community and other competitors are also carrying their own torches. Maybe that's why Microsoft has been trying to get in bed with large web companies lately - so it can stay in the game.

      Anyway, I think it's pretty funny for Gates to site his ambitions as something he is bringing to the competitive table. They've had years to bring their web technologies into mainstream use and have failed to do so. I think their "we want it all", "open source hackers need haircuts" attitude is costing them big time. Adapt or die.
  2. It'll never catch on... by Jesselnz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Telling someone to Microsoft for the answer just doesn't sound the same as googling for it...

    1. Re:It'll never catch on... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. Googling for something is to search for it, but microsofting something is, well, lets just say anally painful...

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:It'll never catch on... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful


      That's because you usually get the problem via Microsoft, and the answer via Google. ^_^

      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

  3. WOOWHOO! by RingDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:WOOWHOO! by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Competition is good. I am just not sure Microsoft understands the area they are trying to overtake. Hotmail is a really good example -- they bought hotmail and for quite some time never really knew what they wanted to do with it. In the end, I don't think it gave them much of anything.

      In this case, they can't buy Google (did I just say that?) so they will try to 'compete' in an area where they just aren't prepared. They lack the culture to really do anything like that from what I can see. Google's way is really like an amoeba... little projects everywhere -- the good ones grow and fill with resources, the others disappear. Microsoft's is just a bit too carnivorous and aggressive by comparison.

    2. Re:WOOWHOO! by utnow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      for the less computer adept... having the company that "made their computer" say that their search engine is better than that college-startup named "Gafoogle" or whatever is pretty convincing. Not to mention it'll prolly be the default engine in the next version of IE and will probably search straight from the location bar. Google may be better, but MSN search is nothing to scoff at. I think they'll have their work cut out for them if they want to stay on top of the popularity curve.

    3. Re:WOOWHOO! by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So long as Microsoft search returns intentionally incorrect answers google will not have too much to worry about.

    4. Re:WOOWHOO! by Pxtl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, but Microsoft does not have to compete - Google must show a profit in their endeavors, while MS can burn cash while living off of their OS and Office revenues.

      For example, Microsoft search can be adless (or charge less for ads) and hyperfast thanks a server farm 100x Google's size. Hell, they can throw in prizes for prominent users, whatever. They can quite simply outspend their competators. Not saying that's what they will do, but it's what they can do. They can do so until Google no longer exists, and then they own the mindshare and can relax. They've done it before a hundred times.

      Plus, they can integrate it into their ownership of the OS and browser markets.

      Google has neither an endless mountain of cash, nor a 90% of the browsers, nor 90% of the desktops.

      The simple fact is that MS does not have to win - they can lose, and lose by a wide margin (in terms of profits) until Google is starved out of business. And then they win anyways by default.

    5. Re:WOOWHOO! by LeonGeeste · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For example, Microsoft search can be adless (or charge less for ads) and hyperfast thanks a server farm 100x Google's size.

      The other advantages you listed are substantial, but not this one I'm afraid. Google's searches are already on the order of 0.2 seconds. I can't imagine anyone "on the margin" switching to MS because they get their results in 0.002 seconds plus download time rather than 0.2 seconds plus download time. I could be wrong though: Are there people who do rapid searches in succession and can process the data from those searches at that speed?

      --
      Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
    6. Re:WOOWHOO! by Senzei · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Search appliances for intranets and the like.

      Exactly.

      This is where I see microsoft being able to get an advantage. Remember, regardless of any monopoly considerations microsoft's other tactic is to go after the developers.

      I could easily see them coming up with a high developed useful api to their search system/appliances. They could easily integrate the whole deal into practically everything they make. Imagine an active-directory aware exchange/sharepoint/office integrated search appliance running on an api built into visual studio.

      Do I think they can actually beat google in search, no. Google gets too much in the way of ad revenue based on being the best search engine (and thus the de-facto standard). At the same time I don't think they need to beat google in search. All they have to do is adequate search and product integration. This is a big deal, and will probably be a much bigger fight for google than most people here on slashdot expect.

      There are too many selling points for this to think that the only way to attack it is "beat google at search results".

      --
      Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
    7. Re:WOOWHOO! by node+3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Google must show a profit in their endeavors

      So must Microsoft. Microsoft won't try to dominate the search market if there is no money in it (either directly, or indirectly). But clearly there is money in it, and Google is the leader. That's a large reason why Google's market cap is so high.

      Google owns the market right now. With regards to MS's ability to funnel money from other parts of the company, that just means MS can be the "competitor that won't go away", nothing more.

      For example, Microsoft search can be adless [and a few other things...]

      But MS won't do any of these things, so they are non-issues. It's sort of like saying MS can use Firefox as its default browser.

      Plus, they can integrate it into their ownership of the OS and browser markets.

      They already do this. I'm sure Vista will integrate MSN Search even greater.

      Google has neither an endless mountain of cash

      Google's market cap is just barely under $100 billion. Cash is not a problem, and as long as they stay ahead of the game, it won't be.

      nor a 90% of the browsers, nor 90% of the desktops.

      Google's services are more compatible with more browsers and more OS's than Microsoft's are.

      The simple fact is that MS does not have to win - they can lose, and lose by a wide margin (in terms of profits) until Google is starved out of business. And then they win anyways by default.

      That's not even remotely logical. If MS doesn't win "in terms of profits", but Google does, how, exactly, is that going to translate into an MS win over Google?

      The only way Google loses in that scenario is if they lose their competitive edge over Microsoft. The ability for MS to funnel money from Office -> MSN Search doesn't mean MSN Search will outcompete Google, it just means MSN Search can stick around.

      Imagine a poker game where the rich kid keeps buying himself in after repeatedly losing all his cash. Having more cash doesn't mean he's going to win. In order to win, he will actually have to learn the game and become good at it.

      And that's exactly what MS is good at.

  4. Basically... by sandman935 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Basically... by MoonFog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google constantly moves into new areas, they've received a solid name for themselves and outdid Microsoft (MSN) on search. I don't think it's that weird that they will "fight" Google, they see them as a threat to their position. Perhaps they really are scared that Google will officially support a Linux distro or something like that. Few companies have the money to compete with MS, they may be scared that Google will achieve just that.

    2. Re:Basically... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the OS is the very, very last thing that Google would aim for. They'd go for all the application and framework space first.

      As long as there is a legacy of 10+ years of games and media on Windows, I'm afraid that there is always going to be a Windows OS somewhere in my life. However, if the OS were the only bit of Microsoft software that I had to worry about, and if MS took a role more or less equivalent to a BIOS developer and otherwise dropped out of userland, that would be a good thing.

      Ultimately, Google is about an entirely different metaphor. It's post-OS viewpoint, and post-file-system. Once you start "working Googlishly" - using Google desktop, Picasa, etc. - things like organizing your file system heirarchically start to feel archaic and limited. If you wanted to get philosophical about it, it's a move from a 'great chain of being' metaphor towards work and information to one of a distrubuted network of nodes that don't have strict set-theoretical relationships.

  5. a vision through cataracts (well, he IS aging) by yagu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article is expectedly mostly spin, but I'm surprised at how much rehash it is. Specifically:

    • Mr Gates said that the PC of today is still not the PC he dreamed about 30 years ago however, and that was a challenge he would continue to pursue.

      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.

    • "They can do lots of things, but still you can't talk to them, and that is one of the things we will get this decade," he predicted.

      (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:

    "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."

    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.

    1. Re:a vision through cataracts (well, he IS aging) by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Mr Gates said that the PC of today is still not the PC he dreamed about 30 years ago however, and that was a challenge he would continue to pursue.

      Here's a hint: power to weight ratio. As the original poster said the pcs of today are stronomically more powerful than ever before but at the same time the amount of weight they have to move (the OS) has also increased. Why? Because either it's a feature or it's part of the OS. Look at the requirements for Vista. Why not just go out and see if you can get a used render farm from Pixar to run that monster.

      If Gates and Company would focus on streamlining things then the ability of a pc to do more wouldn't be so compromised. Yes, that means they will have to stop backwards compatibility for the oldest programs out there but that's a sacrifice which will have to be made.

      On a final note, just because Microsoft wants to be bigger than Google doesn't mean they'll be better. As a poster up the page a bit lamented, trying to find an answer to a Microsoft problem on Microsofts own site is practically a death march. Until they can clear up that mess of a search process, let alone their useless MSN search, Google has nothing to fear no matter how big Microsoft gets.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    2. Re:a vision through cataracts (well, he IS aging) by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 4, Funny

      "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."

      I don't know why they spend so much on these research labs. All of Microsoft's best ideas come from the unofficial Microsoft Research lab in Cupertino, which they don't pay for.

      --
      Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  6. Good luck... by butterwise · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?"
  7. Re:Sounds like Microsoft by RingDev · · Score: 5, Funny

    Err yeah, I'm sure the richest man in the world has learned all about how his 'beat the competition' business plans are doomed to fail yet again ;)

    -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
  8. It's hard to beat a name by jav1231 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  9. All bark, no bite by Teckla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  10. Re:So like everything else ... by Iriel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  11. True test of Microsoft's search ability... by nharmon · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  12. Competition is good by amightywind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  13. template by moviepig.com · · Score: 4, Funny
    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.

    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
  14. Re:This is news? by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Funny
    That wouldn't be so bad if their preferred method of getting there weren't borrowed from Tanya Harding.

    Dear God, NO, not the Bill Gates wedding night video!!!

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  15. Re:Leave it to Microsoft to miss the point... by zoomba · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Technically minded folks may flock to google over MS for the ethical reasons, but that's not the reason Google rules the roost right now. Google wins through better tech and ease of use. Technologies like search engines and anything else that depends on volume of use depend on public acceptance to be truely successful.

    Techies drive tech advancement and improvement... but we don't drive wide-spread adoption, and we don't determine market success. The average Joe User does.

    Most people don't care one bit over if the company they purchase from is "evil", just look to the success of Nike and WalMart to prove that point. They go with what works best, and Google works best.

    That IS why Google's on top.

  16. Unrealistic Ambitions by agslashdot · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  17. Re:Hmmmm by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently, none of the top problems in computer science are going to be solved in the United States.

    At least not by Microsoft...

  18. Microsoft might fail. by thevil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

  19. get their own site search fixed first by boomerny · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  20. It's not a blind ambition by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... 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!

  21. Re:Google has smarter people by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful
    MS does have a pool of enormously talented people. Look at who works for MS Research (or whatever their R&D division is called). But for some reason, they don't seem to be producing what they could. I've heard MS Research described as a roach motel- lots of genius' check in, but none are ever heard from again.
    Microsoft's problem is that Google is fighting in an arena that Microsoft has never had much success in; the web. Yes, Windows is running on the unquestionable majority of computers out there. Yes MS has made big in roads in the server market. But it has always been behind in its web presence. How long has Microsoft been trying to push MSN? Must be near on a decade now, and it's always been behind. Alta Vista, Lycos, Yahoo and Google in turn have always had one up on it, and Google is the 800 pound gorilla in the portal and search marketplace. And now with its push towards web apps, the long term picture has it threatening the Windows and Office flagships which are, when push comes to shove, the regions of dominance that Microsoft has in the market place.

    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.
  22. Google isn't a search engine company... by davidu · · Score: 4, Insightful


    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.