Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Google the New Microsoft?

Posted by samzenpus on from the Imitation-is-the-best-form-of-flattery dept.

ericjones12398 writes "Google's come up with its solution for Dropbox: If you can't buy 'em, copy 'em. The search engine and online advertising giant replaced its popular Google Docs service with Google Drive, a cloud computing storage service designed to directly compete with start up Dropbox. This raises the question, has Google become the new Microsoft? Us ancient folk who remember the 1990s and the Microsoft anti-trust trial can certainly notice some parallels. A big, dare we say monolithic, company doesn't bother innovating on its own. It just waits for other companies to innovate, makes some changes for legally significant distinctions and enters into competition with the innovator. Sound familiar?

8 of 492 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe, maybe not. by multicoregeneral · · Score: 5, Informative

    All big companies do this. It's not proof that Google is Microsoft. It's proof that Google is big. What made Microsoft distinct was the way it competed. Google doesn't compete with the same level of carnage that Microsoft did. There has been some bloodshed, but the fact that Google+ is where it is, would be a good way to demonstrate the argument that Google is not Microsoft. Have there been allegations of predatory behavior? Yes, of course. Do you hear about it happening all the time? Not really. Google drive is kind of like Dropbox, but Amazon Drive is a lot more like Dropbox. Why is everyone talking about Google, when Amazon stole the service and copied it lock, stock, and barrel? Amazon is Dropbox's ISP for hosting this stuff. And yet, despite the fact that the case of Amazon is predatory, everyone's so concerned about the case of Google, which isn't? Why, exactly do people who care about predatory business practices care more about Google than Amazon? The mind boggles.

    --
    This signature intentionally left blank.
  2. that was a patent issue by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 5, Informative

    It wasn't so much they stole as they infringed on patents.

    Stac felt their patents covered software Microsoft bought from Vertisoft, improved upon and rolled into MS-DOS.

    Stac was found to steal from MS though.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:that was a patent issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Stac was found to steal from MS though.

      Nope. Stac was found to have reverse engineered M$ software to be able to figure out the hooks needed to make their software work with DOS, since M$ said, those interfaces were never documented for 3rd parties to use.

      Timeline for Stac (as I remember it.. Good friend worked there)
      1) Stac releases stacker for DOS
      2) M$ copies it.
      3) Stack sues and wins $23M from M$
      4) M$ counter-sues Stack wins $3M from Stac for reverse engineering to enable interoperability with undocumented M$ software.
      5) M$ buys stac, and guts.
      6) M$ claims in anti-trust case the opposite of (4)

      M$ is in its own league when it comes to sleaze.

    2. Re:that was a patent issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Really? Because I'm looking at a dogshit summary here on slashdot that goes the opposite direction. Worse, it's derived from a shit "article" by a nobody on some god-awful site we wouldn't normally visit.

      Google didn't replace Docs. They changed the name and added a bunch of features. All your docs are there, all the online productivity components are there just as they always were, etc. They tacked on storage for all other file types. So... that part is just straight-up wrong.

      And as everyone on earth knows, there are no completely new ideas. Dropbox didn't invent cloud storage. They didn't even invent the way they handle cloud storage. Any offer to buy them amounts to a courtesy, at best. So the question, as always, is who does it best, at the best price, with the least evil company running the show.

      Google has proved itself to be extraordinarily ethical. The only things they have in common with Microsoft is that they're big and they're a technology company. Bullshit articles like this are just meant to rile people up with flaccid speculation.

      So suck it up, wipe away the tears, and next time bring your A-game.

  3. Re:That depends... by Terrasque · · Score: 5, Informative

    Have you ever tried to get a document or spreadsheet out of Google Docs and into one of the other on-line office suites? How about exporting your entire Google Mail archive and importing it into Hotmail?

    Trolling much? I just tested.

    Google docs :
            File -> Download as -> Word, ODT, RDF, PDF, Text, HTML (Zipped)

    I downloaded as ODT, and it looked exactly like on google docs. You can also batch download docs.

    And Gmail support both POP3 and IMAP.. What else do you need?

    Contacs list... CSV and vCard export.

    --
    It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
  4. Re:Since Google wasn't the first search engine by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes, even their Search Engine wasn't really that novel.

    Bullshit. Their algorithm, page rank, was something brand new that was a significant improvement on the two standard approaches to search engines: hierarchically organized oracles (Yahoo) and keyword matching based on relative frequencies (Altavista).

    Seriously, I'm sorely disappointed by the amount of basic information that techies here are getting just plain wrong. I'm starting to think that the astroturfing/trolling is having an effect on people. How does it go? A lie gets half-way around the world before truth gets its pants on. As said, I'm pretty disappointed by the posts here.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  5. Re:Let's just say by Vintermann · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gmail has search and spam filtering capabilities that no native client can remotely match. (Outlook's search functionality is a joke).

    Searching and spam filtering are the two main features I need out of a mail client. The labeling system in gmail is just gravy.

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  6. Re:That depends... by asserted · · Score: 5, Informative

    no, really, all you need to migrate off GMail is IMAP and it's right there. if Hotmail doesn't let you import via IMAP, it's their problem.
    if they really want to go after GMail's users, they should implement it and write instructions on how to do it, including how to enable it in GMail - which takes exactly 4 clicks (Settings -> Forwarding, POP and IMAP -> IMAP = Enabled -> Save Changes).
    IMAP makes it possible to migrate messages *and* folder structure.
    what else do you expect Google to do? write a document on how to migrate off GMail? don't be silly!.. well, in fact, there is such a page. http://www.dataliberation.org/google/gmail

    have a look at http://www.dataliberation.org/ in general. Google goes above and beyond anyone else in the industry with respect to providing ways to export data from its services.