Gates on Google 755
EnsignExtra writes " A long and interesting article in Fortune on the battle between Gates and Google. 'Forced to watch Google's stock soar the way Microsoft's used to, and Brin and Page enjoy their roles as tech's new rock stars, Gates brings to the fight a ferocity that nobody has seen since the Netscape war a decade ago. Their popularity gets under his skin. "There's companies that are just so cool that you just can't even deal with it," he says sarcastically, suggesting that Google is nothing more than the latest fad, adding, "At least they know to wear black."...Trying to build a Google killer, however, has turned out to be truly humbling for Microsoft.'"
Microsoft's Underdog (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft's Underdog (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Microsoft's Underdog (Score:5, Funny)
It looks like you're trying to destroy another company! Would you like to:
a) Buy it and assimilate it into your company, then claim to the media that this constitutes "innovation."
b) Buy it and lock the employees into their buildings to starve to death once the vending machines give out.
c) Buy it and send Ballmer over to annoy the hell out of them.
d) Buy a country and send its armed forces to wipe all assets of the company from the face of the Earth.
There's no need to fear... (Score:5, Funny)
and break the laws that they should fear
and frighten all who see or hear
the cry goes up both far and near
for Underdog! Underdog! Underdog! Underdog!
Credits to: http://www.delorie.com/users/dj/tidbits/underdog_
Re:There's no need to fear... (Score:3, Informative)
there's a clip [amazon.com] here.
(amazon's clips seem to be mostly wmv, sorry)
Re:Microsoft's Underdog (Score:3, Funny)
Its ambitious new operating system, code-named Longhorn, is more than a year late, even after having been scaled back. Linux, the free operating system that Gates once scoffed at, is fighting Microsoft for share in both the server and desktop markets, forcing the company to do the unthinkable: offer customer discounts. Last year it had to spend $1 billion to rewrite thousands of lines of code to make its programs less susceptible to viruses. Its Xbox gaming console is winning raves from players but has yet
Not sure (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft, once it owned the bulk of the market, has been a second-mover.
Gates aims for the fat cash hump in the middle of the market distribution.
The real question is, will Google turn this second-mover strategy into a giant suppository?
Yep. The Google-branded Apple MacIntosh, coming soon to a nightmare near you...
.NET (Score:4, Informative)
Microsoft, once it owned the bulk of the market, has been a second-mover.
I don't know whether you do any business programming, but the momentum behind C# and .NET is just massive. There are on the order of terabytes and terabytes of code that have been [or are being] written for that platform.
Now you could say that Sun was the "first mover" with Java, and M$FT was the "second mover" with .NET, but my point is that just because M$FT has been working quietly behind the scenes on something like .NET doesn't mean they aren't innovating. It's just that they're innovating [and grabbing market share] in an arena that isn't quite as sexy as Google, iTunes, or Playstation.
Re:.NET (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, the
TFA article touched on the browser war from the standpoint of MS crushing Netscape on price.
Where there article didn't seem to go was into the anxiety in Redmond when they realized that the browser could diminish the importance of the desktop OS in a major way, which is where I was going with the point about Google partnering with Apple (admittedly unlikely, given the personalities in question) or Google rolling a killer Linux distribution (feel the waves of fear emanating from the NorthWest...)
Re:.NET (Score:5, Insightful)
So Microsoft keeps telling me.
But where is all that stuff?
What important software is written in C#?
Windows? Linux? MS Office? Apache? Autocad? Photoshop? ... Nope, no C# in sight.
So where is it? All I've heard so far is a few ASP.NET websites and a few demos like calculators, etc. Nothing really impressive and nothing really important.
So what are you talking about?
Re:Not sure (Score:4, Insightful)
New? Wasn't this the reason M$ took defeating Netscape so seriously after they had ignored the internet for years? They finally figured out that browsers could make operating systems obsolete. Now the same threat appears from a just slightly different angle and M$ passes a brick again. But this time, giving it away free doesn't help.
Microsoft's Customers (Score:5, Insightful)
I the only one smiling from ear to ear?
I'd be willing to wager that Microsoft's customers are pretty darned happy - everytime M$FT gets angry at the competition, their customers are rewarded with a vast new generation of ably-crafted products [often given away for free].
Re:Microsoft's Customers (Score:5, Interesting)
Never write off Microsoft... (Score:5, Interesting)
Or, put another way, Microsoft is competing on all fronts. You can bet your bottom dollar that's the way Bill Gates sees it and that he likes it that way too.
Lest we forget, Microsoft is still making money hand over fist, and its profits continue to rise. It might have missed its last profits forecast by some fraction of a percentage point but the Microsoft vs Everyone Else battle is still pretty firmly tipped in its favour.
The company is a behemoth. Apple isn't really a threat in the short or medium term because so many computer users (especially large corporates) are tied into x86-compatible architectures. iPods might and switching might help Apple erode some of the home market, but the business market isn't going to jump onto that bandwagon so easily. Besides, we all know that Microsoft will do whatever it takes to get the deal done when faced with the possibility of losing serious business to a competitor.
Firefox isn't really much more than an annoyance, because it will never have the marketing muscle to compete with MSIE - the reason why MSIE destroyed Netscape's dominance wasn't its superiority, it was because MSIE was just there, an easy mouse click away on every new Windows 95 PC, whereas Navigator wasn't, and needed to be installed from scratch.
Xbox might not have made any money but I doubt that Microsoft was expecting to get into the console gaming market and have made a profit by now. It's not in it for the short-term, it wants to be a long-term player, and the console gaming market, just like most things, is one in which you have to speculate to accumalate. The market was Nintendo/Sega, then Sony/Nintendo/Sega, now it's Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft (or maybe Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo): who's to say in five years time that it won't be Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo?
Never write off or underestimate what lies in Redmond. Too many companies have made that mistake - even mighty IBM - and learnt not to do it the hard way.
Re:Never write off Microsoft... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Never write off Microsoft... (Score:4, Insightful)
Firefox isn't really much more than an annoyance, because it will never have the marketing muscle to compete with MSIE - the reason why MSIE destroyed Netscape's dominance wasn't its superiority, it was because MSIE was just there, an easy mouse click away on every new Windows 95 PC, whereas Navigator wasn't, and needed to be installed from scratch.
Ah, but things change(TM), that's one of the points the article made too. Firefox isn't Netscape and nowadays the issue is quite another: what's the use of having IE a mouseclick away if running it makes you feel like bending over to pick up the soap in a prison shower? Features and security, not easy availability, that's the current browser tune.
Microsoft is relentless (Score:5, Insightful)
That saying should be tatooed in reverse on the forehead of every CEO of every company that competes against Microsoft, so that every morning they look in the mirror and see that message in bold black ink.
The aggressiveness and will to succeed that you find in the CEOs of so many technology companies tends to go hand in hand with the sort of hubris that becomes an iron anchor. They succeed temporarily against Microsoft, get happy about it and crow to whomever will listen, and a few years later they get solidly trounced by the Beast of Redmond.
It has been proven over and over again that Microsoft succeeds against opponents who become complacent. Those that don't (Intuit is a good example) can fend off Microsoft's attacks. But I'm seeing signs that Google is already getting too full of themselves. If they're not paranoid of Microsoft, they're screwed.
Re:Microsoft is relentless (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Never write off Microsoft... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not the case. Windows, Windows Server, Exchange, MSSQL, Visual Studio, Office, Mac Office, and a number of other products are consistantly profitable. The mobile division has recently become profitable.
Very "interesting" quote... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Very "interesting" quote... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that is exactly what the mean. I think it shows more what Microsoft is planing than what Google is. Microsoft is seeing that Netscape was right after all. Windows is rapidly getting to the point of not mattering all that much. Many companies have moved from running on Windows to using the browser as the UI for applications. Gmail and Google maps have shown that Google are the masters of web based interfaces. Let's look at Two of Microsoft biggest projects. XBox360 and
Why the break from Intel with
Often what people fear is what they themselves are planing.
Re:Microsoft's Underdog (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Microsoft's Underdog (Score:5, Funny)
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
I have no idea what that was supposed to mean. Mix in a few more metaphors and it might just make sense.
Actually, Microsoft is now paying for its (Score:5, Interesting)
There are almost no designers of PC chassis left. The differentiation comes with 'plastic panels' on the same box. Regardless of which panels you might buy, you're still stuck with the box underneath it all.
The Mac design team __designed__ the new iBook, PowerBook, PowerMac, eMac, MacMini and iMac to look, feel, work and be disctinctive.
In the case of the last two, the MacMini is arguably the smallest form factor white the latest iMac has suceeed in making the computer disappear entirely.
Gates will never be able to do that because of his success. There's NOBODY left who can do that kind of innovative design. He stuck with the same chassis with different coloured plastic panels stuck to them.
The ultimate fight (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft
Re:Maybe some truth there (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Maybe some truth there (Score:5, Funny)
If you want to beat the rest,
Medication's what you need..."
Re:Maybe some truth there (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm waiting for Procter & Gamble's search engine, though. It's going to completely destroy both Google and MSN.
Winning != Not Losing. (Score:3, Interesting)
But that is not the same thing as winning, at least as far as Bill is concerned. MS has only two major wins, OS and Office. Their DB offering is behind Oracle. Their online services are marginal. Media player is battling Quicktime and Real. They have not won any of those areas, though they are trying very hard. Simply having money does not guarentee a win.
In the case of Google, Google is v
Re:Maybe some truth there (Score:5, Insightful)
Office and Windows subsidize everything else that Microsoft does. This is
why Microsoft seems to desperate lately: their only two cash cows are under
the heaviest attack from OSS.
BTW, did anyone else notice that MS slashed their R&D budget? How do they
expect to thrive in new markets if they don't try new stuff? You can only
leverage a desktop monopoly so far...
Re:Maybe some truth there (Score:4, Funny)
BTW, did anyone else notice that MS slashed their R&D budget? How do they expect to thrive in new markets if they don't try new stuff? You can only leverage a desktop monopoly so far...
I thought they had a free R&D facility in Cupertino, CA?
GOffice? (Score:5, Interesting)
Next, they'll come out with a GBrowser and add extra functionality for their new line of star studded packages in your Google account if you use their browser. Maybe that's why they've taken a bunch of Firefox developers...but who knows?
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, what google is doing is DoubleClick *10^100, and everyone's hunkydory with it because they *might* help runner-ups like OpenOffice or Firefox become more popular by morphing them into data collection mechanisms. (Which itself is an ironic business model for "free as in freedom software".)
Anyway, don't kid yourselves. Google is really an advertisement vendor -- their customers are increasingly ad agencies and big corporations. They want this data to build consumer profiles on you (and probably governmental profiles too), which they will sell in one form or another.
Re:GOffice? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:GOffice? (Score:4, Insightful)
Google, while what they are doing is becoming increasingly scary, is at least up front about it... "Our programs scan your emails and display ads related."
You don't have to use Google. You could be screwed and use something worse (MSN, AskJeeves, whatever) or you can suffer w/Yahoo, whatever newbie comes into the market...
You don't have to use GMail, GOffice, or any of the other various pieces of software they do/will offer.
Personally, I use them for now. As they become scarier and possibly grab a greater hold over us and start hiding their privacy violations I might change my mind. Until then just pay attention.
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Interesting)
Google on the other hand values my personal information. Their customers are still advertisers, but they are partnering with me and offer me value in exchange for my personal information. The offer me free services that are industry best, for the opportunity to present me advertisements. Its a win-win so long as I want to play. And since google's whole strategy is about advertising through services, there's a decent hedge against their abuse of this trust -- people stop trusting google, they lose eyeballs and thus their business strategy fails.
Also, to my knowledge, advertisements are presented at the time of information retreival...there is no master datawarehouse trying to compile the master "Ubergrendle" user profile where they can create a psychological model of my buying patterns. I'm very comfortable with a rules-engine providing me with contextually useful advertisements...its actually user friendly.
This is where Microsoft has their biggest problem -- after years of abusing EULAs, even if MS provided the EXACT SAME SERVICES and comparable technology as Google, most users wouldn't trust them based on their a) other interests, and b) previous behaviour.
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've always said this...
I don't mind commercials if it's for something I might actually buy.
I don't mind junk mail for products I might actually want.
I don't even mind telemarketers selling me something that I'm interested in.
I don't mind advertising when it's for stuff I'm interested in or curious about.
What I mind is having to sit through ads for "Desperate Housewives" and other pop/crap culture TV shows. What I mind is "American Idol" conspiracy theories on respectable news reporting web sites. What I mind is being hassled at dinner time to switch my long distance carrier. What I mind is getting junk mail for any Chevy product.
Yet, I get Dell's monthly/quarterly mini-mag all the time and I never fail to flip through it and review prices.
When I want to buy something on-line, I often hit www.google.com and type the item in and then click on the ads to check prices and on-line vendors.
Advertising isn't evil. It's just annoying when it's for stuff that you don't want. I wouldn't even mind spam if the spam I got was, first of all, not fully of elementary school grammar and spelling errors, and second of all, not insulting my intelligence. If I got spam for stuff I might actually buy, I'd object to it less.
So, if Google can find a way to target advertising at me for products that I am actually interested in, then more power to them.
Why do you think word-of-mouth is the best advertising?
You get the point. Word of mouth is highly directed personal advertising. If Google can reproduce that to some degree programmatically, I don't mind.
From a privacy perspective, I object to this data being collected without my knowledge, but that's not what they're doing. I _KNOW_ exactly what they can do with my information, and I continue to let them do it.
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the one I was thinking of. We don't trust a company that is telling us how great their product is because that is a conflict of interest. A friend isn't trying to get our money when they tell us how great product X is. Although there is the occasional person who is trying to justify buying something they regret by telling you how great it is.
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, I was wondering why my browser was so slow! With that many cookies, I guess I must just be running low on RAM
"Does anyone else remember the days when Slashdot ranted daily"
Yep... I think that was... ah, let me check my watch...
The "Some people on Slashdot ranted about X, thus X has been proved to be useful only for the forces of darkest evil" line of logic isn't really all that sound, you realize.
"everyone's hunkydory with it because they *might* help runner-ups like OpenOffice or Firefox become more popular by morphing them into data collection mechanisms"
No, I'm OK with what Google does because they have a track record of doing the right thing. They support open source projects, they have never disclosed my personal information, they write damned good code, their services continue to benefit the state of the art and my life is a bit more productive because of them.
"Anyway, don't kid yourselves. Google is really an advertisement vendor"
OK.... and? Did you think no one had noticed what their revenue model was?!
"They want this data to build consumer profiles on you"
Targetted advertising is not a problem except in that it's a type of advertising. If you have a problem with ads, targetted ads should be no more objectionable, and at least in my case, they're slightly LESS objectionable.
If Google were to start selling that database to anyone with cash, then I'd be pretty irrate. Google has demonstrated, though, that they are committed to a more reasonable course of action. A lot of people get upset because Google put "Don't be evil," in their S-1, but keep in mind that the standard retort to "they are doing good so far," is that they have an obligation to stockholders and will HAVE to do anything they can to meet that obligation. That's not quite true. For example, if McDonalds got involved in the diamond trade, they might make more money, but they don't HAVE to try to do that because it's not in their business plan, and thus not in their SEC filings.
Google's anti-evil statement in their S-1 is a fair warning to investors (and they go into detail on this in their S-1) that they operate at a disadvantage by applying ethics. This shields them from the obligation to do "whatever it takes" to increase shareholder value. They still have to work on the stockholders' behalf, but only within those parameters.
"and probably governmental profiles too"
Oooh, "governmental"! Sounds spooky. Of course, even you aren't sure what you mean by that, and it's certainly a wild guess.
Re:GOffice? (Score:4, Funny)
Hm, let's see.
googol
n : a cardinal number represented as 1 followed by 100 zeros (ten raised to the power of a hundred)
I guess they're finally starting to make apparent their business model.
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess this might be reallity in a few years. The challenge for google would be to switch the corporate marked, not the private market. But microsoft get most money from the corporate market in the office-land. So, if every single person switched to openoffice, while corporates stuck with office, it'd be relatively harmless to microsoft. But imagine if google comes with Glinux! That'd be very interesting, and as connections is getting faster, they might even run it as thin terminals. Google has the infrastructure for running a few million thin clients...
Re:GOffice? (Score:5, Interesting)
Gates has always insisted that his company could cease to be viable in a span of as little as 5 years, given the IBM PC experience (but at least IBM even in the 1980s was much more diversified). With a 3-5 year refresh cycle for desktop PCs this makes Microsoft even more vulnerable than IBM was.
If Google has the 'cool' factor and all of the sudden people start demanding Google desktops like they're demanding iPods, I can see a sudden shift. Unlikely, but possible.
INtegrated google world. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. And the funny thing is that Google has a real chance to do what MS has been trying to ram down people's throats for years - namely, "sell" web-based applications. Difference is google would rather just put inobtrusive ads on your workspace, while MS wants you to subscribe. Easier and cheaper always win.
The other thing is the potential to integrate all your communication and work tools. Imagine better collaboration, documentation, and email sofware seamlessly integrated. Guarantee you Google's already working on it. How MS has avoided making Outlook better I have no idea. Guess it's that whole monopoly thing, they don't have to.
The question is how and when they roll out GMail. It has to be close - I use it all the time and love it. I imagine they're still refining the business model? When the public at large starts using that and realizes that it beats the crap out of everything else, and starts having their mail forwarded to their gmail accounts because it's better...google wins.
I this way, Google can jump OSS as the biggest threat to MS. Imagine people running all their apps as java apps (or similar) served by google. It's hardware-agnostic. It's OS-agnostic. Watch MS try making a TCO argument there:
This has the potential to do in a *non-evil* way everything MS tried to do between the combined nebulous efforts of Passport and the failed part of its .Net initiative. And people will love it.
Re:GOffice? (Score:3, Informative)
I wonder why people cant see this ; developing and supporting major applications like wordprocessors and browsers are a total money drain. And that field is a mature field- there is not much innovation to be done there.
The innovation will be in the value additions. If you have MS Office 2k3, try doing an Alt+Click. A neat little Research pane pops up, within which you can do web searches, encarta lookups e
Re:GOffice? (Score:3, Insightful)
When that turns into a portal, then we worry. Until then, let them experiment with stuff. They are not just going to sit on their new wealth.
Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Obvious (Score:3, Insightful)
ie. Disparaging Google as using "antiquated" word searches when you can't even do that much yourself is disingenuous.
Microsoft is too gaudy (Score:5, Insightful)
The best Google Ad Ever! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The best Google Ad Ever! (Score:3, Funny)
(sorry, Douglas)
Re:The best Google Ad Ever! (Score:4, Interesting)
Innovate, not copy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:5, Informative)
They even admit copying the top dogs.
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:5, Insightful)
microsoft is good at only one thing - copying. innovating is a completely alien concept to them.
if they can't copy something, they assimilate it. the borg analogy works very well.
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:5, Interesting)
MS's only big software innovation has been integration. They realised that people don't want programs. They want a computer. One thing that does everything in a consistent joined up manner. That _WAS_ innovation. Everyone else at the time still thought it was a _good_ thing to have lots of little programs each with it's own purpose, UI, etc tailored to a specific job.
MS realised that this was crap, and to the annoyance of software people everywhere, MS was right. Most people want to buy a word processor and a spreedsheet from different companise in the same way they want to buy their hob and their oven from different companies. Not at all.
I would also say that ASP pages were innovative - not so much the idea of templates, but the idea of creating a proper web SDK, with a cohesive set of classes. It's not rocket science, but no-one else had thought of offering a complete solution to what was _still_ being viewed as a set of separate problems - a web server, a programming language, a database API, etc. etc.
However, where MS is _really_ innovative is in marketing. They have found ways to promote and market software that no-one else has ever thought of. Now, those ways may not be 'nice' but they are certainly innovative.
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:3, Insightful)
Y'mean like that research into search technology that was done at Stanford in the late 90s.
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:3)
And Longhorn will have the kitchen sink .. it promises to deliver everything Cairo [networkworld.com] promised to deliver in '96.
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:3, Insightful)
As defined by Eric von Hippel (MIT), innovation is commercializing a new change. It can be incremental and very small. Inventions, on the other hand, are unique and can be hidden away in your basement.
What Microsoft needs is a major breakthrough (invention), because Google has proven itself to be just as good at integrating services and incremental innovation. Microsoft can't use its famed tactic of integrating and incrementa
Innovation !== Invention (Score:3, Interesting)
I have my own personal theory that very few ideas are original. I wouldn't be surprised if collectively people all over the Earth has had every idea Google has manifested.
The importance of innovation vs invention is moot, as one is totally useless without the other.
My favourite definition of innovation (from the results returned by Google's define: operator) is "the process of adopting a new thing, idea, or behavior pattern into a c
Re:Innovate, not copy (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you tried other seach engines? Do you remember how bad Alta-Vista was when Google first came on the scene? They took a problem and mostly solved it unlike the "solutions" that came before.
Slashdot-think about inn
Revenue streams (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope Google expands into areas that generate revenue while competing directly against MS - that will put pressure on MS and hopefully bring down cost and maybe even improve quality.
Why is he so upset? (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no "market share" or distributed software that comes from people searching through your website... the only problem is that since people are going to Google, MS is loosing money in advertising.
It's not even about software, it's about ad revenues.
Tidbits (Score:5, Insightful)
*Chuckle*
"I remember when [Payne's team] showed off their first prototype in early 2004--people laughed because it was so much like Google," says a former Microsoft executive. "We had copied them. That's not how you lead."
Hmm..isnt that how they led with XP, copying Aqua?
One reason Google has been rolling out so many new or improved products is that Schmidt understands that innovation is the only sure edge Google has. The moment Google allows itself to slow, Microsoft could overwhelm it.
This is the reason why Odds are stacked so high up against companies such as Google or Apple. All their success depends on their ability to innovate constantly and continuously, that any letup will cost them both users and provide enough leverage for competitors to one_up them.
"Microsoft can play its old game to compete with Linux and Apple. It has to play Google's game to compete with Google."
And that sums it all. Google has proven to Microsoft that they cant compete on the same level. Microsoft has bureaucratic issues that needs to be resolved in terms of its size and the products it push through, and in their direction. Google has its own such as growing pains, the push to constantly innovate and the drive to outlast a cash cow ten times bigger.
Hidden tidbit in your post (Score:5, Insightful)
How many fronts can Microsoft take on, at once? They're used to competing in "steamroller mode" where they mobilize the company against a smaller (or larger but less focused, like IBM) competitor, and run them over. But now Linux and Google are recognized as major threats, Firefox and Apple are chipping away at market share, and OpenOffice is sitting in the wings, especially considering IBM's embedding it, and other such efforts. They can't mobilize the company against any one of these things without taking the finger off of the others.
If I were Microsoft, I'd have a small focus group figuring out how the company can survive and thrive as "just another highly successful company" rather than as "The Industry Dominator," because it just doesn't look to me as if they're going to be able to keep that position in the long run.
different league (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks googledot! (Score:5, Funny)
No small thanks to our very own googledotdotorg :).
typical Microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, a great deal of luck and a huge war chest is also part of it: Microsoft got away with that sort of behavior for about a decade because they set the standards and because they could pump money into failing projects for as long as it took. It didn't matter whether Windows reinvented the wheel, because Microsoft made all the cars and because Microsoft could outspend everybody else until they got it right.
Will it work again? Perhaps, perhaps not. Microsoft can try to push their search product to market late in the game, with enormous effort and an enormous investment. But that alone isn't enough to unseat Google; they would have to leverage their Windows near-monopoly, but in a way that doesn't attract the attention of regulatory agencies around the world. Good luck.
Re:typical Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Its quite funny to see linux, ipod, google, etc drive bill into fits of rage.
Are they completely out of touch? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems to me that the high-ups at MS are completely out of touch with the real world nowadays. This quote from Gates is just like all their recent releases comparing Longhorn to Tiger.. their perception of what MS's products offer is way inflated from what they actually do, and they seem to be persuading themselves that empty promises of what a future product will do is somehow better than a product which is available here and now, today.
Is there anyone outside of MS that thinks they have the slightest chance of beating Google at the search technology game? Google are far closer to natual language searching than any of MS's efforts, and comparing past trends of how MS promises stack up against reality, I think we can all be sure that by the time MS gets anywhere close to what they're promising here, the competition are going to be offering searching by telepathy from within Duke Nukem Forever.
Re:Are they completely out of touch? (Score:5, Insightful)
That really seems to be one of the keys to not only the folks at Microsoft, but a lot of the die-hard fans too.
For instance, one of the developers here is a die-hard Microsoft fan, and he loves Visual Basic. But the frightening thing I've found is that whenever he talks about it, he always talks about "the next version." We should go ahead and use more of it in our production systems because of what they're going to put into it "soon." Nevermind that all the features he's pushing already exist in other languages, ones that we already know and use. He also talks about other apps that Microsoft has made. Unfortunately, they are all either in Alpha or Beta, or are planned to come out soon.
Fortunately, the head of development is a sharp guy, and a programmer himself. We'll stick with features we know and can test right now, thanks.
Job Advertisements Tell The Truth (Score:5, Insightful)
I first saw Paul Graham mention this -- he would read the job ads of his competitors. If he saw C++, Oracle, etc. then he knew the people didn't matter (and wouldn't matter).
If he saw Perl, Python, etc. he took notice. [He never saw Common Lisp, of course]
Graham's said that no matter what Mar-Com (marketing communications) bozos have to say, the job ads tell the real story.
Re:Job Advertisements Tell The Truth (Score:4, Funny)
Ahem.... Without MS applications? (Score:4, Interesting)
You can use Google software with any Internet browser to search the web and your desktop for just about anything; send and store up to two gigabytes of e-mail via Gmail (Hotmail, Microsoft's rival free e-mail service, offers 250 megabytes, a fraction of that); manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there; and, through Google's Blogger, create, post online, and print formatted documents--all without applications from Microsoft.
Emphasis mine. Nice notion, but rather inaccurate. Google Toolbar is for Internet Explorer only. Google Desktop Search is available only for Windows XP and Windows 2000. Picasa Photo Organizer requires Internet Explorer and Windows XP or Windows 2000. Same for Google Deskbar and GMail Notifier. You can use Google's sites without applications from Microsoft, but you sure can't use any of their downloadable software without a good dose of fairly recent Microsoft product.
There Can Be More Than One (Score:3, Funny)
Too many fronts for Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that this section says a lot:
But Microsoft isn't exactly in fighting trim. Its ambitious new operating system, code-named Longhorn, is more than a year late, even after having been scaled back. Linux, the free operating system that Gates once scoffed at, is fighting Microsoft for share in both the server and desktop markets, forcing the company to do the unthinkable: offer customer discounts. Last year it had to spend $1 billion to rewrite thousands of lines of code to make its programs less susceptible to viruses. Its Xbox gaming console is winning raves from players but has yet to make serious money. Meanwhile, Apple has stolen the show in online music with its hugely popular iPod and iTunes Music Store. Plus, the recently released Firefox browser, which can be downloaded free, has forced Gates to reconstitute an Internet Explorer development team. Indeed, four years have passed since Microsoft released a piece of software that generated the kind of buzz Google seems to generate every month.
So Microsoft is competing with Linux on the overall OS, with Sony and Nintendo in the gaming market, with Apple for music related things, with Mozilla for browsers, and with Google (and Yahoo) for search. The battle is being fought on too many fronts. All of these companies that are succeeding in competing with Microsoft are succeeding because they're trying to do one thing well. They may have other projects they work on, but they devote themselves full out to that one arena in most cases. Apple isn't trying to write search engines. The Moz folks aren't getting into digital music. Too many fronts...
Google by choice,MSsearch by force (Score:3, Interesting)
It took me a while to find uninstall instructions. I knew I could have used control panel, but I was wondering how the home user with no knowledge of computers could get rid of it.
I don't know if users of XP (I use 2000) have had the same problem, but if MSSearch is automatically installed on users' computers, it may get used more by the unsuspecting and those that don't care what they use. If MS can put MSSearch on all XP computers without the users' permission, it will gain market share. This would be another similar case to the IE-Bundled to give it market share, but this time MS would be able to say the users have choices.
Re:Google by choice,MSsearch by force (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft Will Fail - Tales From The Inside (Score:5, Interesting)
Though he's in complete denial about his position he projet is nop nearer to rollout then a year ago. Why? Because M$ has turned from a team of highly skilled engineers to a mass of bumbleing corporate sycopnts.
The tales he tells about the project are astounding. Engineers are suin the company and being transferred about like cattle. Far, far more time is spent on interoffice politics and CYA then ever is done on engineering. Teams get reshuffled and project specs get redone. My friend had to get a lawyer just to threaten the company enough to keep his own job there and the weird thing is....the significance all this seems to be completely lost on him.
He maintains that the new search engine peoject will knock the socks off Google even and he's been maintaining this for almost a year now....with nothing real to show. Looks like the reality distortion field isn't just restricted to Jobs.
My prediction...M$ will drop this project after another year after spending dozens (hundreds) of millions on it and the let the finger pointing and firings begin! M$ no longer has what it takes to carry an innovative project to completion. They're too fat, too decadent, too full of disloyal temp workers and too busy trying to cover their own asses.
Mark my words...the M$ search engine project and it's (imho) inevitable failure will be the death knell for M$.
Tiger anyone ?
Re:Microsoft Will Fail - Tales From The Inside (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, just google for worst search engine [google.com].
Not first? (Score:3, Interesting)
Excuse me.....when has Microsoft ever really gotten there first? Their signature business method is to buy some small or unknown software company in a given market and then use their monopoly influence, price undercutting, and FUD to drive out or hinder competitors while they hurry to catch up with whatever software they bought. Years later, they have little competition and a product that is "good enough" (read: Marketing has convinced enough people to buy it and put up with all the bugs that remain).
They've already bought their search [com.com] technology [nwsource.com] but apparently it's harder than it looks. Of course, they would have preferred to eliminate [guardian.co.uk] the competition outright.
The real problem here is that Microsoft can't cut their price below free and Google has at least one software generation or so head start (that, coupled with the other Microsoft bug-a-boo -- FOSS). Billy boy is never so pissed than when a company points out just how uninnovative Microsoft really is...
Their next slogan? "Microsoft -- following the leader like usual."
What, all this time there's been no development? (Score:4, Insightful)
Now there is a telling quote...no competition, no development? Someone needs to send this to Congress...
Information is power, don't they get it? (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, I am surpised by Bill Gate's suprise that Google shares value increases while Microsoft remains at the same level. Google is an information company, i.e. it helps find information. Information is the most valuable asset today. Doesn't Microsoft get it?
Secondly, I am surprised by the statement that "Microsoft always hired the smartest engineers". For me, Win32 is piece of crap. Who the hell designed that? Whoever did, is worthy of public humilation and torture.
Thirdly, I am suprised by the fact that Microsoft thoughts of themselves as 'innovators' (as the article says). Come on guys at MS! what innovation? aren't you the guys that dismissed the internet until you saw how much demand there was for Netscape?
Finally, I am surprised that each time I say on Slashdot that 'an distributed information management operating system' is needed, everybody dismisses that...but now Google is about to become the next Microsoft, with products that do just that: they manage information for us.
Microsoft fails to recognize the 4 primary operations for a computer:
a) creation of new information
b) deletion of information
c) display for information (including search)
d) update of information
If Microsoft was the innovator they thing they are, their operating system should be a giant model-view-controller process, where each 'application' could register itself to any kind of information available to the system (either local or distributed).
Who ever can produce a product that can seamlessly intergrate the above 4 operations with a programming language and an operating system over a distributed environment will win both the desktop war and the computing platform war. Google seems to be ahead, simply out of the process of evolution. It's not too late for others to jump on the bandwagon, but I doubt Microsoft can be one of them, since they are like a big slow-moving dinosaur right now compared to Google.
picasa (Score:3, Informative)
Well, I'm not even entirely through the article, but when you read something like: manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there;..., the author does much to discredit him(her)self. First, there aren't many products that qualify for the descriptors "easily the best" in anything, and second Picasa isn't, (and third Google didn't even write Picasa, they purchased it). It's a great piece of software, but it ain't the best, and it ain't even close.
Google is doing some great stuff, but let's not genuflect when they sneeze.
Gates has shown poorly-camouflaged fear before (Score:5, Interesting)
The PR garbage flowed from him, everyone made nice, and then questions were taken from the floor. Someone asked about Linux. That was when things got surreal.
Gates made a point of screwing up the pronunciation of the name, trying to give the impression that this OS was from a foreign planet or something. Then he set about ridiculing the available apps, the ease of use, etc. He threw a handful of ill-considered (to anyone who knew anything about Linux) criticisms against the wall, hoping something would stick. He tried to make fun of the whole thing.
And he sweated bullets. Literally and figuratively.
It dawned on me at that moment that the guy was flat-out scared. He saw this THING bearing down on him and he clearly didn't have a clue how to respond. "Barely-concealed panic" is how I would characterize it. I get the feeling this Gates character really hates to not be in control and this Linux thing was giving him ulcers.
That was the ridiculing stage. The fighting stage came soon after. But that was also the moment that I realized Linux was here to stay.
GLinux? (Score:3, Funny)
Imagine if Google did indeed do this, but took it a step further and made their on WM (GWindow Manager?) so that Google's services were integrated into the distro. Clicking the mail link on the desktop would lead you to GMail (possibly read through their GBrowser). You could do google searches directly from a taskbar widget. You would use Picassa for your pics. A future "GOffice" to word proccessing, spreadsheets, etc. Maybe the future would see a Gplayer?
Oh shit, this is starting to sound like Windows...except it would be free...but you would probably have an AdWords pane in your file manager...I think my head is going to explode now
What's up with Longhorn? (Score:3, Insightful)
Methinks Microsoft has totally lost focus. One of the cover articles in this weeks Computerworld is an article on Microsoft adding virtualization to Longhorn.
What's up with that? The rate they're going they will never get a release of Longhorn out. At some point, you've got to draw a line in the sand and say this is what we're going to release. Then DO it! Save the virtualization for a follow-on release!
I'm so glad I bailed on Wintel a couple of months ago for my personal machine. I've got a 15" PowerBook with Tiger on it (blow me TigerDirect!). I know I have a predictable product release cycle ahead of me. You can't say the same with Windows.
Google's "help wanted" ads (Score:3, Interesting)
The REAL battle is people (Score:5, Insightful)
THIS is the real battle, not software, not market share, but people. I can't see any other reason why Google setup an office just down the road from Microsoft other than to siphon off their talent. When the industry believes the smartest and brightest are at Google and not Microsoft, confidence in products, market share and ultimately the future will follow.
Make no mistake, Bill is livid because Google is stealing sheep from his cherished flock of programmers.
Maybe this is sour grapes (Score:5, Interesting)
I look around at guys who are making a lot more dough, and I think to myself, they aren't any smarter than me; usually they're less smart. I'm just not willing to do what they did: primarily spend a lot of their time and energy thinking about how to make more money. I'd rather do something beautiful, or fascinating, and to work with people I really like being around. The rich aren't like you and me -- and the difference isn't just money.
Bill Gates is a the example of this in the extreme. I deeply respect his philanthropic work. But there is something to his outsized competitiveness that I find disturbing. It's almost as if somebody else's success amounts to a personal failure to him, and that positive attention to others is a personal affront to him. Of course, it's this competitiveness that enables him to do the fantastic philanthropic work he does, but it strikes me as almost, well, insecure and a little sad.
As an ordinary person when I look at Sergei and Larry of Google fame being successful, I'm delighted that a couple of nice guys are getting positive attention for being smart and decent. I'm not sure this is a feeling Mr. Gates can ever share.
Some psychologists are now suggesting that people have a kind of "set-point" for happiness; a level they happen to gravitate towards despite things that happen in their lives. Success can make them more happy briefly, but they tend to return to their baseline. So, I suppose if I ever do decide to put my mind to making serious money, I'll still be as happy as I am today. But I doubt I ever will get a chance to put this to the test.
Re:Maybe this is sour grapes (Score:5, Interesting)
He'd do this to WHOMEVER was the hot new thing. He really got off on it. It wasn't just a fuel to win, a competitive drive, it was vindictive and it was personal. Michael's trash talk was considered some of the most mean spirited talk in the league for many years. He'd talk about your mother. He made it personal.
I think for some guys, the Gordon Gekko Sun Tsu thing is just there. Business is war. You msut hear the lamantations of their women. Ellison at Oracle is like that. He launched a smear campaign aginst the Peoplesoft execs that were holding out on him, he wiped them out.
FOr Gates, it's weird. He knows most people hate him. He has a huge, very generous and very well directed foundation that does a ton for AIDS in developing nations, but it seems to buy him no PR. He has no personal charm or charisma at all. He's petulant and vindictive by all accounts. Everybody would like to see the guy get his. Even customers.
I'm trying to think of another historical figure in the United States history who was that powerful, that philanthropic, and yet that reviled. Andrew Carnegie maybe.
Re:Ugh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:One statment in the article is not true... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:One statment in the article is not true... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:One statment in the article is not true... (Score:5, Informative)
You are wrong, and I dub thee "fuckbeak" for the error...
Google Toolbar Firefox Extension: (there are actually multiple flavours)
https://addons.update.mozilla.org/extensions/more
Re:Another day.. another google story.. (Score:3, Informative)
I have. They look like this [inluminent.com]
Re:WTF with Google anyway? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:WTF with Google anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am having a very hard time believing that your non-technical friends read the Terms and Conditions. This is something that I have never seen. The whole spyware industry is based on the fact that most people do not read or understand EULAs.
Re:WTF with Google anyway? (Score:3, Insightful)