Amazon Dumping Google for Microsoft?

theodp writes "How do you reward Google for letting your CEO buy stock for six cents a share? If you're Amazon, you dump Google for Windows Live Search to power subsidiary Alexa, who has not yet commented on the switch. Other Windows Live Search sightings are being observed at Amazon subsidiary a9.com." From the Search Engine Lowdown article: "The Alexa toolbar's gotten Alexa a bad rap from privacy advocates, though in function it's effect on search results is similar to click stream data that Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask may or may not be using in their determinations of relevance. Wall points out that 'A9 is still powered by Google...' A9 is Amazon's primary search project. Wall wonders, however, if the change in Alexa indicates a larger coming change in Amazon's relationship to Google. I agree. In fact, I see the move as the first Google Dump in the post eBay's-seeking-partners-against-Google era."

Comments

Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*!

[pla]

The Alexa toolbar's gotten Alexa a bad rap from privacy advocates, though in function it's effect on search results is similar to click stream data that Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask may or may not be using in their determinations of relevance.

While that may (or may not) hold true, the key difference there involves how much we trust the company getting the data.

Google has proven itself, time and again, to act in the best interests of its users, even going up against the DoJ to fight for our privacy rights. Yahoo and MSN don't quite have the same good track record, but they at least don't have a reputation as outright spyware.

But Alexa? C'mon, Amazon, give us a frickin' break here!

Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*!

[John_Renne]

Allthough Google might have a better reputation then Yahoo or MSN (and certainly Alexa) they're not saints either. The privacy policy for Orkut for example wasn't all that too.

Despite that, this sounds like a first class mindslip from amazon

Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*!

[ajs]

How to detect loonies:

"the most EVIL business ever... ADVERTISING"

Ok, now step back, and think about that statement. In a world full of people who build nuclear weapons (e.g. G.E.); research fragrances by injecting bunnies with toxic chemicals; patent genetic sequences; squeeze the third world for cash in exchange for patented, life-saving drugs; grind up tons of sea life per day; build systems to gather all Internet traffic for domestic spying; etc. ... this guy chooses to point the finger at people who attempt to sway your opinion about what to buy as the "most EVIL business ever".

Think about that.

And why does he say this? Because it pains the average paranoid to have a large business that spends its time worrying about the impact of its actions.

Keep in mind, Google has:

* Moved the banner ad from Internet dominance to second-class status.
* Contributed substantially to open source development efforts.
* Countered the growing dominance of Microsoft on many fronts.
* Revealed government efforts at privacy invasion (did MSN or Yahoo!?)

Complaints about Google amount to: well, they could do MORE for me!

If Google bothers you, you need to serious look at your priorities. Sure, they're large and public which makes them more of a source of concern than your average convinience store, but there are companies that spend their time and effort trying to KILL PEOPLE. Google doesn't show up on the evil company radar because there's already too many companies fighting for the right to be there.

Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*!

[Irish_Samurai]

Actually, I don't think it's advertisers. I think its PR people. The two are not the same.

Actually - the terms Marketing, Advertising, and Public Relations are all switched in and out as if they were the same - they're not. These are the definitions as they function in how I use them in my business. Your mileage may vary.

Advertising - The art/science of building/designing media that best leverages the media vehicle's strengths and weaknesses to deliver a message developed by marketing.

Marketing - Analyzing the current business/economic/social/cultural landscape to create/discover/define a target for a product or service. This target is in turn analyzed for the purpose of creating the most effective message to motivate the target to take a desired action.

Public Relations - The art/science of using Marketing and Advertising as applied methods for influencing public opinion, injecting a designed piece of "common knowldge" into a population, or damage control to make the consumer/revenue generating Marketing and Advertising initiatives of a company easier over the long run.

Inherently there is nothing evil about any of these things - the way companies use them is where the evil begins. Just as the wedge itself isn't evil. Its also not evil when you sharpen the edge and strap it to a stick. It still isn't evil when you cleave someones head with it - the weilder of it is. AND - the weilder is only evil if the cleaving was done out of malice or spite. Somehow I don't see self defense as evil.

Quit blaming disciplines as being inherently evil/good. Not only is it inaccurate, but it takes soe of the blame away from the companies who do evil things with these tools and distributes it amongst everyone using them - regardless of their use is ethical/moral or not.

a9 is now also powered by windows live search

[Kamran]

a9 is also now powered by windows live search.
Jeff Bezos shouldn't be criticised for buying class a stock at 6 cents. it wasn't a gift from Google, at the time it was Google needing his money.

Google vs. Amazon

[Metabolife]

Froogle is quickly becoming a popular selling portal, I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon believes that Google might overtake it eventually. I for one love the increased competition.

Disgusting.

[Rachel Lucid]

Does anyone actually FOLLOW Alexa?

My guess is that this is (the first of) a heavy-handed backlash at Google, orchestrated more by Microsoft and others trying to regain their momentum versus any actual competence for a change on Microsoft's part.

With the exception of Google Calendar, almost everything Google's done has been high-quality, search-related, plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face applications, and to dump Google for their core product (indexing the internet and keeping track of data, something that Google should PERSONALLY be in the best position to execute, is at best a misguided executive decision to get a kickback from Microsoft and at worse a direct pimp-slap to Google for pure spite.

Bezos leads Amazon, he is not Amazon

[Ohreally_factor]

"How do you reward Google for letting your CEO buy stock for six cents a share? If you're Amazon, you dump Google for Windows Live Search to power subsidiary Alexa, who has not yet commented on the switch.

Jeff Bezos is not the sole proprietor of Amazon. It would be unethical for Bezos to award business to Google in exchange for a personal favor that made him more wealthy. As head of Amazon, Bezos has a responsibility to the other shareholders of Amazon. If dumping Google for Windows Live Search to power Alexa is going to maximize shareholder value, then so be it.

Just because Halliburton gets no bid sweetheart contracts from friends in the government doesn't mean that this is how business should be run.

Re:I actually used A9 until this

[Lewisham]

I too, was one of the A9 crew. I loved having web results/image results/wikipedia all in one search. When Windows Live came up, I switched Google back. Now they've abandoned Google completely, and you can't search for web-wide images (from *anyone*) at all anymore.

I tried to live with Windows Live search, although it's results weren't so great. But the loss of image results as well was a deal-breaker.

A9 has lost it's edge in some bizarre powerplay. They should have been shouting about their service, and instead you got there by accident from IMDb or Amazon. Now I have to go back to Google, and it's oh-so-bland results.

*sigh*

Partners...

[kibbled_bits]

If anyone hasn't read the Google interview in Linux Format (Chris DiBona) I highly recommend it. It really does a good job of conveying Google's position on many issues. Regardless I can't see how most people on this forum would consider Google <= M$.

In a nutshell:

LXF: In what ways would you say that Google is sponsoring open source?

CD: Actually I don't like the word 'sponsoring'. I don't like sponsoring, I don't like 'subsidising', I don't like 'giving back'. The words I like are 'working with' them. We see them as our peers in computer science...

Maybe you don't believe this is 100% true, you can at least agree that Microsoft's position are opposite of this. Not only they not our peers in computer science, but they seem arrogant enough to think they can dictate computer science.

"Letting him buy stock"?!?

[tji]

> How do you reward Google for letting your CEO buy stock for six cents a share?

Either this is an intentional troll, or you have no clue about financial matters.

Bezos was an early investor in Google, when they were just getting off the ground. He gave them money ('angel funding') to allow them to expand. The agreement in that situation is that Mr. Bezos then owns a percentage of the company, giving him stock at a low price after an IPO.

Google didn't "let him buy" stock. Bezos invested in Google very early on, and he got big $$ when Google's stock went through the roof.

Why people Google-bash

[typical]

I've decided that Google-bashing comes down to largely two areas:

* SEO people and website proprietors bitter that they don't have a higher ranking.

* People who are alarmed by the growing influence and power of Google and want to cap it.

The "China thing" was possibly the most absurd slam I've ever seen, where people were complaining that Google was horrible because it followed a country's laws within that country. Good lord. Google doesn't finance private armies to overthrow China's leadership, either. Darn them for not forcibly spreading democracy and promoting revolution. [rolls eyes] I'll take Google's approach over Bush's approach any day, and let the mass of the Chinese people decide whether to revolt or not on their own.

Google is making an incredibly useful set of products in a highly competitive market and still stomping the competition. While doing so, they are not using underhanded business tactics, they are providing funding to a number of highly-cost-effective open source efforts, and so forth. They have generally done a better job of advocating the privacy of their users than their competitors. They promote interesting CS development. They helped reverse the slide into unusable "media-rich" flashy, slow websites.

As you said -- they may not be perfect, but they're one of the best things you're going to run into. Maybe someday, when the growth slows and they hit a (real) scandal or two, there will be good reasons to dislike them. Until them, I'm going to sit back and enjoy.

Re:Why people Google-bash

[TheCrayfish]

So if a company follows the law of a country they operate in, they are free of any ethical considerations? How bad must they get before it's enough?

From an ethical perspective, companies, like governments and individuals, must consider which actions result in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In the case of China, most governments and companies have decided that engaging the Chinese government and its people helps more Chinese people than leaving China "to its own devices" would. Many people believe they are acting ethically when engaging in commerce with repressive regimes because they believe the exchange of goods and ideas will lead to more openness and less repression over time. Sure, you can question these beliefs -- and you may choose to believe that disengagement and isolation helps more people than engagement does. The point is, if you can on your beliefs as to what will cause the greatest good, and Google acts on their beliefs (though different from your own,) you are both acting ethically.

Google's search is less relevant than Microsoft's

[dada21]

Because Google is (one of the?) most popular search engine, I am finding it less and less relevant when I do searches. The top 10-20 results are more spam than relevant and good information. MSN, on the other hand, is starting to be my preferred search tool because it doesn't seem as "keyword stuffed" as the Google responses. I know this isn't the case for everyone, but almost all the geeks I know are starting to shift away from Google en masse. I much prefer Google as a company, of course, but just being #1 (or close to it) seems to make it a target for the spammers, sploggers and Made-for-CPC websites.

I'm not hoping for a shift for anyone to Microsoft's search technology but if Google continues to lose the battle to PageRank chasers, they'll find themselves slipping as users automatically attach Google to spam sites rather than relevant sites.

My home page is still Google (due to the customized interface), but I am more often using other search engines to combat the spammers. Is Amazon seeing a similar problem?

Powered by Google? No..

[brunes69]

Wall points out that 'A9 is still powered by Google...' A9 is Amazon's primary search project

Doesn't look like it to me

Top right corner - "Powered by Windows Live"

There isn't even the ability to add Google anymore. And their news search is now MSN News rather than Google News.

Google Still the Best

[pavera]

Ok, so I'm a programmer, I write code in at least 10 different languages and often times I'll forget "How do you do X in Y?"... Well I just ran through my last 10 such searches on google... ran the exact same searches on a9, and directly at live.com.... Yeah so "determine distance between zip codes", Google results: first 5 hits open source, freely available code to perform that calculation in PHP, python, perl, and C. Windows Live: 1 hit on the first page that was PHP related however, its a $200 closed source script, all others pay for web sites that offer a form to type in 2 zips and get the distance, but nothing that would allow me to understand how to do it.

The other 9 searches were similar. On google, I never go past the first 10 results to find the answer I'm looking for, regardless of language, technology, whatever Google always has the answer. On windows live, the first page is stuff with people who are paying for their links, or just by MS's bias they list "commercial" sites first in an effort to hold open source down. I never have used A9 but I never will now.