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. "

Comments

It'll never catch on...

[Jesselnz]

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

Re:It'll never catch on...

[$RANDOMLUSER]

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

WOOWHOO!

[RingDev]

Competition is good. Even you anti-Microsoft pundints will have to admit, this will only make Google have to work harder ;)

-Rick

Re:WOOWHOO!

[erroneus]

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.

Re:WOOWHOO!

[utnow]

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.

Re:WOOWHOO!

[Pxtl]

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.

Re:WOOWHOO!

[LeonGeeste]

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?

a vision through cataracts (well, he IS aging)

[yagu]

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.

Good luck...

[butterwise]

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."

Re:Sounds like Microsoft

[RingDev]

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

True test of Microsoft's search ability...

[nharmon]

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.

Unrealistic Ambitions

[agslashdot]

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.

It's not a blind ambition

[Spy der Mann]

... 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!

Re:Bland ambition?

[MightyMartian]

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.

Re:Google has smarter people

[MightyMartian]

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.