Google is making wise decisions that will eventually bring them even greater leverage in the technology industry. They are operating as any good company would.
However, people who think that Google is not a business but some sort of benevolant entity will, in my opinion, find themselves to eventually be wrong.
I agree with the notion of absolute power corrupting absolutely... since you can't get that absolute in business, we'll just say more power means more corruption. It is only a matter of time before Google falls sway to it, just as any other company has.
===
They are making very good long term, strategic decisions to develop technologies that will serve them better. It will hurt their competitor's market share... and the goal of any company in doing such a thing is domination.
Like I said, it sounds like a bunch of FUD until they dominate the market share and start using their influence to keep that dominance.
Just look at Intel and Microsoft, our two giants, for examples.
I am not saying Google is 100% certain to fall into that, as nothing is 100% certain, but reviewing the list of companies throughout history... and going over human nature when humans are in power... it seems highly likely, that if their long term strategies work out... and there are no tech bubbles bursting... they'll follow the same path.
We may just have to wait 10 years for that to happen.
You are missing the point. That may be because I was not clear enough.
So I will detail my feelings in a story for you.
Once upon a time there was MS-DOS. It was alright. It got the job done.
Then there was a program called Windows, let us say, Windows 3.0. It was buggy and problematic.
Then an upgrade came out to what was, in my opinion, only beta quality software (that was released as a final release)... and you had to pay for that... and it would upgrade you to a more stable beta quality product... and so on... and so forth.
Google themselves don't have any plans because they don't have an office suite... but they just invested a ton of money into the open source community...... and if Microsoft's "live" beta does well... you'll see clones... open source clones, and if it is good enough, Google might do it... (but who knows, "copycatting" doesn't seem to be their style just yet, they've got a lot of creativity left in them)
===
From the POV I think Google is looking from...
It's a lot easier not to look like a bad guy when you are letting other people do your work for you, I think... Google's got a good edge on that... the open source community is large and just needs money to help it along... it'll edge in on Microsoft's turf while being respectful towards Google for helping it originally.
They don't need to branch into these areas because they are basically paying other people to possibly do it for them... putting them in a better position to indirectly influence that part of the market...
Google's pushing Microsoft into a corner... they've got a distinct edge in innovation...
I definately smell a hint of doom on Microsoft, though... but in business, as good as it seems now... we'll just be trading one tyrant for another... call it FUD, but I guess we'll all see in time:)
Indeed, old bean, they are all companies and were all out to make money.
===
I can understand the conspiracy... if there was something that was a threat to multiple companies, it is only logical to band together for economic survival.
On the other hand, a good discovery should be rewarded... but of course... trying to make out with more than one is entitled to should be punished.
===
Just elaborating on your original thought and mulling it all over in my head:)
You definately have a good point there... I have to wonder how the Google factor will contribute to this?
===
Google is contributing vast sums of money to the open source community and greatly diversifying their markets...
I have to wonder if Google put up some legal dough for open sourcers...
It makes them appear beneveolant to the open source community and hurts their eventual competition if they do start stealing code...
===
Likewise, perhaps they may be able to set some sort of investment precedent, since they are fronting a lot of money to the open source community... I am not sure on the laws there, however...
People actually stop and look at your (not you personally, but at your university)... chalked advertising?
Perhaps there is an overabundance of it on my campus (as pretty much anyone can draw on the sidewalks with chalk out here)... so most people don't even bother reading it.
I talked to one of those guys who go to bars and liquor stores... they basically get a hundred or two a night to just go out to bars and give away free stuff.
I've never seen them outside of those two venues... so I think it's pretty PC, the folks who are already inclined to drink just get free stuff (shirts, samples, buttons)... heck, I got some free Stoli that way;)
I have seen Apple use a lot of college plants here at Northern Illinois where I go to school.
Not only that, but I have, myself, been approached by Apple. Last year I ran a film festival for amateur film makers, they approached me about running it again, and changing it to use only Apple products and the iMovie format.
I have heard from a couple of dissatisfied members of the Mac support group here on campus that it has become little more than a sales convention every other week when it meets.
That same group had an event on campus called "Who is your Mac Daddy", which was basically just a tupperware party for Apple products.
You are right, it does cost money. There are certain things which are wasteful to make secret.
I don't feel that patents are one of them.
===
Of course, that assumes that putting the patent out there will drum up problems, who knows if it does.
By the same reasoning, though, let us use the analogy of a plane. You go up in a plane, it is nice to have the parachute with you, even if you are never going to use it.
Patents aren't "wasteful" secrets. It's not clerical laziness. I don't feel that it is a waste of money.
I'd like to hear why, on patents specifically, you feel it would be wasteful, however... (since that is the issue at hand)
===
Also, the Cold War era, as I inferred in the 1st post I made, much more paranoid than we are now... (but we're inching back up there)... I am not educated enough on the intricacies of our internal security, however, to make any comments to support or rebutte what you stated.
If you are going to try to negate an argument, I'd like to at least know why.
===
If you've never been in a position handling classified information, it may be hard to see security holes.
I garauntee, in that position, you see a lot more paranoia than declaring certain patents a secret.
I don't think it is out of line... the line "better safe than sorry" may be a cliche, but in my experience, when it comes to government security, the cliche holds true.
*shrug*
That's just my point of view, you are free to your own... but I'd like to know why you have it, there may be some element of your experience we could all benefit from.
It's gotta be the processor speed, Windows, or *somehow* related to being Microsoft's fault!
God forbid everything Open Source isn't perfect...
===
Look, gang, step one to correcting a problem is realizing there is one. Realize it, fix it, move on. Improve.
Everyone clamouring for reasons why OpenOffice isn't bloated, I'm not saying you are wrong... I am just going to say this (stiffling urge to say "You are not right" even though it would be funny)...
Even *if* it isn't bloated, wouldn't optimizing the speed even further be a benefit either way?
===
Sure, the article is lacking a bit in the specific test methodology department... but just because of that, don't assume that the guy is automatically wrong.
Final Fantasy Solar Jetman Super Mario 2 River City Ransom Super Dodge Ball
===
I can't count how many hours I spent playing these games, sadly... mostly because I wasn't keeping track when I was 8-14, but also because it was a godawful long time.
Well, sure, dependency on MS decreasing may increase diversity... but if all the diversity is just in a single group (i.e. if Google is talent-farming, for instance)... we might wind up with another monster in the place of the former one.
I'm rather cynical about any matter involving any form of power... because I know how human beings are.
But, hey, yeah, I agree... the interim period of competition will be very good at the very least:D
The WWCD comment was rhetorical, allowing people to make their own conclusions on the subject, but ultimately the various countries and agencies track records speak for themselves.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Google is making wise decisions that will eventually bring them even greater leverage in the technology industry. They are operating as any good company would.
However, people who think that Google is not a business but some sort of benevolant entity will, in my opinion, find themselves to eventually be wrong.
I agree with the notion of absolute power corrupting absolutely... since you can't get that absolute in business, we'll just say more power means more corruption. It is only a matter of time before Google falls sway to it, just as any other company has.
===
They are making very good long term, strategic decisions to develop technologies that will serve them better. It will hurt their competitor's market share... and the goal of any company in doing such a thing is domination.
Like I said, it sounds like a bunch of FUD until they dominate the market share and start using their influence to keep that dominance.
Just look at Intel and Microsoft, our two giants, for examples.
I am not saying Google is 100% certain to fall into that, as nothing is 100% certain, but reviewing the list of companies throughout history... and going over human nature when humans are in power... it seems highly likely, that if their long term strategies work out... and there are no tech bubbles bursting... they'll follow the same path.
We may just have to wait 10 years for that to happen.
You are missing the point. That may be because I was not clear enough.
... and you had to pay for that... and it would upgrade you to a more stable beta quality product... and so on... and so forth.
So I will detail my feelings in a story for you.
Once upon a time there was MS-DOS. It was alright. It got the job done.
Then there was a program called Windows, let us say, Windows 3.0. It was buggy and problematic.
Then an upgrade came out to what was, in my opinion, only beta quality software (that was released as a final release)
Does that make things more clear to you?
Google themselves don't have any plans because they don't have an office suite... but they just invested a ton of money into the open source community... ... and if Microsoft's "live" beta does well... you'll see clones... open source clones, and if it is good enough, Google might do it... (but who knows, "copycatting" doesn't seem to be their style just yet, they've got a lot of creativity left in them)
:)
===
From the POV I think Google is looking from...
It's a lot easier not to look like a bad guy when you are letting other people do your work for you, I think... Google's got a good edge on that... the open source community is large and just needs money to help it along... it'll edge in on Microsoft's turf while being respectful towards Google for helping it originally.
They don't need to branch into these areas because they are basically paying other people to possibly do it for them... putting them in a better position to indirectly influence that part of the market...
It's a good long term strategy... very sneaky
Google's pushing Microsoft into a corner... they've got a distinct edge in innovation...
:)
I definately smell a hint of doom on Microsoft, though... but in business, as good as it seems now... we'll just be trading one tyrant for another... call it FUD, but I guess we'll all see in time
Ahh, it seems Google's betas have given the name buzzword status...
:)
I remember the good old days when Microsoft's "beta" products were full versions... ahhhh...
Good to see Google's eminent technological takeover is at least causing Microsoft to be a little more honest
Aye, such a transition would save countless trees...
:)
:)
It will certainly put some people out of work... but they will just have to transition to a new line of work. There is always some niche to fill...
The only ones I can see getting 'stuck' will be the poor 10-14 year olds... no more papers means no more paper routes
It'll be interesting when "Paperboy" is an anachronism
Indeed, old bean, they are all companies and were all out to make money.
:)
===
I can understand the conspiracy... if there was something that was a threat to multiple companies, it is only logical to band together for economic survival.
On the other hand, a good discovery should be rewarded... but of course... trying to make out with more than one is entitled to should be punished.
===
Just elaborating on your original thought and mulling it all over in my head
You definately have a good point there... I have to wonder how the Google factor will contribute to this?
===
Google is contributing vast sums of money to the open source community and greatly diversifying their markets...
I have to wonder if Google put up some legal dough for open sourcers...
It makes them appear beneveolant to the open source community and hurts their eventual competition if they do start stealing code...
===
Likewise, perhaps they may be able to set some sort of investment precedent, since they are fronting a lot of money to the open source community... I am not sure on the laws there, however...
People actually stop and look at your (not you personally, but at your university) ... chalked advertising?
... so most people don't even bother reading it.
:)
Perhaps there is an overabundance of it on my campus (as pretty much anyone can draw on the sidewalks with chalk out here)
Amusing placement though
"Are you stupid" ... not a good way to start, old bean.
===
I'll explain my position a bit, so you can see where I am coming from.
So, let's assume gas was $100 a gallon.
Then someone made a discount to take it down to $25...
Yes, the MARGIN of decrease looks good, but the original value (and as such, the discounted value) is still excessively inflated.
===
IMHO, if people are saying that Microsoft charges an arm and a leg, they are missing that companies like Adobe are charging all limbs and a head.
I talked to one of those guys who go to bars and liquor stores... they basically get a hundred or two a night to just go out to bars and give away free stuff.
... heck, I got some free Stoli that way ;)
I've never seen them outside of those two venues... so I think it's pretty PC, the folks who are already inclined to drink just get free stuff (shirts, samples, buttons)
Microsoft does make signifigant student discounts, though they certain could make more, Office is still quite expensive for those of us who are broke.
I'd love to see *ADOBE* really cut their prices for students... God forbid an graphic design student actually want to buy a copy of Photoshop...
I have seen Apple use a lot of college plants here at Northern Illinois where I go to school.
Not only that, but I have, myself, been approached by Apple. Last year I ran a film festival for amateur film makers, they approached me about running it again, and changing it to use only Apple products and the iMovie format.
I have heard from a couple of dissatisfied members of the Mac support group here on campus that it has become little more than a sales convention every other week when it meets.
That same group had an event on campus called "Who is your Mac Daddy", which was basically just a tupperware party for Apple products.
It's sick...
You are right, it does cost money. There are certain things which are wasteful to make secret.
I don't feel that patents are one of them.
===
Of course, that assumes that putting the patent out there will drum up problems, who knows if it does.
By the same reasoning, though, let us use the analogy of a plane. You go up in a plane, it is nice to have the parachute with you, even if you are never going to use it.
Patents aren't "wasteful" secrets. It's not clerical laziness. I don't feel that it is a waste of money.
I'd like to hear why, on patents specifically, you feel it would be wasteful, however... (since that is the issue at hand)
===
Also, the Cold War era, as I inferred in the 1st post I made, much more paranoid than we are now... (but we're inching back up there)... I am not educated enough on the intricacies of our internal security, however, to make any comments to support or rebutte what you stated.
If you are going to try to negate an argument, I'd like to at least know why.
===
If you've never been in a position handling classified information, it may be hard to see security holes.
I garauntee, in that position, you see a lot more paranoia than declaring certain patents a secret.
I don't think it is out of line... the line "better safe than sorry" may be a cliche, but in my experience, when it comes to government security, the cliche holds true.
*shrug*
That's just my point of view, you are free to your own... but I'd like to know why you have it, there may be some element of your experience we could all benefit from.
Honestly, the fact we know there ARE secrets is progress from the Cold War, in my opinion.
===
Having done a smidge of work for the government, I'm happier with secrets "just in case" than creating holes that might not have to have been made.
Does this mean that what is being kept secret *needs* to be? Not always... but it is better safe than sorry.
[obviously there are extremes, making an office supply order confidential for example, but patents are understandable]
Oh no! It *can't* possibly be OpenOffice! Nooo!
...
It's gotta be the processor speed, Windows, or *somehow* related to being Microsoft's fault!
God forbid everything Open Source isn't perfect...
===
Look, gang, step one to correcting a problem is realizing there is one. Realize it, fix it, move on. Improve.
Everyone clamouring for reasons why OpenOffice isn't bloated, I'm not saying you are wrong... I am just going to say this (stiffling urge to say "You are not right" even though it would be funny)
Even *if* it isn't bloated, wouldn't optimizing the speed even further be a benefit either way?
===
Sure, the article is lacking a bit in the specific test methodology department... but just because of that, don't assume that the guy is automatically wrong.
Just my two cents.
They lost a couple of key executives.
I guess they'll have to just go to ACE Hardware for their keys, now, just like everyone else...
===
It's not too much of a shocker, people DO come and go all the time, even at big companies... status quo, IMHO.
Some thoughts and observations, my good man...
...
...
:)
Wouldn't that just be "it has"
You'd be using a possessive pronoun, but it'd be possessing 'got'...
===
While this might be acceptable in spoken English, this sort of writing would not be acceptable in formal writing.
Not to mention the poor word choice in got.
(It's got --> it has got) [got is extraneous]
===
If it is an actual exception, it is one that formally shouldn't occur
Cheers!
That's a negative on that, old bean.
...
its is the possessive pronoun.
it's is *always* it is (no exceptions).
Just like we don't say her's or his' (unless we are intentionally using wrong grammar)
Easy enough mistake to make... it's just one of the weird ways that English has developed... cheerio!
Top 5 Favorite NES Games
Final Fantasy
Solar Jetman
Super Mario 2
River City Ransom
Super Dodge Ball
===
I can't count how many hours I spent playing these games, sadly... mostly because I wasn't keeping track when I was 8-14, but also because it was a godawful long time.
NES is dead! Long live NES!
USSR -- US ... Cold War...
... Search Engine Cold War!
Yahoo -- Google
===
Seems to be a game of 'who can do the most and seem the coolest'...
This is simultaneously good and bad for everyone... (kind of like the Cold War)
Well, sure, dependency on MS decreasing may increase diversity... but if all the diversity is just in a single group (i.e. if Google is talent-farming, for instance) ... we might wind up with another monster in the place of the former one.
:D
I'm rather cynical about any matter involving any form of power... because I know how human beings are.
But, hey, yeah, I agree... the interim period of competition will be very good at the very least
Sounds like a new and improved Sourceforge... interesting.
I'd like to know what would qualify you to computing resources...
I'd also like to know if this is intended as philantropy or investment...
The WWCD comment was rhetorical, allowing people to make their own conclusions on the subject, but ultimately the various countries and agencies track records speak for themselves. :)