| 4:02 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Really? What tools does Microsoft "give" to people?
If he had said "Our slogan is that we are going to sell people tools for $199 (discounts for site licences) to let them organise the world's information" then I would believe it.
| 4:06 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It is true... The companies are completely different. There can be no comparison between MS and Google.
MS creates tools (Word, Excel, PPT, Project, Access, Front Page, etc...) that allow people to create and manage data.
Google create tools that allow people to search information which they control.
I know that MS has MSN. I think this is a sidebar to their business. But it is similar to how Google Mail is a sidebar to the main business of Google.
Just my thoughts.
| 4:16 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Interesting that this is a CNET article/interview...
| 4:26 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is going to be a great showdown.
Remember - Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
Now that Google has BILLIONS of dollars, and the power to control the fate of many businesses (just read any newbie post here about PR and Google), we'll just have to see how they weild their power.
While MS is also a monopoly, it's an installed monopoly. I can uninstall it if I want to. But Google is always google.
| 5:02 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Gates is clearly going on a media offensive: he gives an interview, covering some similar topics, to today's Seattle Post too.
He makes (snide, in my opinion) remarks about Google being in a honeymoon period in that interview too.
I think Gates is rattled. The only thing Google has to fear right now is itself; it seems to have lost focus of late.
| 5:03 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|If he had said "Our slogan is that we are going to sell people tools for $199 (discounts for site licences) to let them organise the world's information" then I would believe it. |
That would have to be Microsoft-Approved InformationTM ;-)
| 5:06 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|MS creates tools that allow people to create and manage data. |
|While MS is also a monopoly, it's an installed monopoly. I can uninstall it if I want to. |
Microsoft is the one who uses propriety formats and deliberatley breaks compatibility with other people's software to hold your data hostage and force you to continue buying their software...
| 5:09 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I’m not sure if we can believe either side, but this has been discussed many times. In some “models” of the future, personal computers are so powerful that they are working all the time. Based on your individual patterns, they search for information that is related to things you do and deliver them to you or hold them at the ready.
So instead of shutting off your PC at night, we leave them to do their work 24/7. They are downloading information, organizing it and storing it for you. If you’ve ever thought about your CPU, the processor just sits around doing nothing most of the time - add to that your potential bandwidth.
Bandwidth is inexpensive and underutilized as is CPU cycles. Storage is inexpensive. So why not go to this model? It’s the age old debate around centralizing and decentralizing services.
| 5:40 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Gates sounds like a politician and his statements deserve as much credibility. I hope I do not have to continue to pay thousands of dollars every few years for "The Gates Empowerment" method. I guess that means the 80% of the people that cant afford the Office Suite are destined to be "underpowered?" Those same people now have more access to the worlds information though Google and search in general then they ever did through there copy of word or excel.
If their philosophies were the same, MS would be open source and Google would require authorization to download there search engine software to connect to their proprietary database.
| 5:45 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
as soon as money becomes part of the equation, everyone's motives are suspect.
| 6:04 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Why are there so many people that are down on MS? I know that a lot of webmasters hate Internet Explorer and various other products that MS makes. I personally use MS Office because it is great. Bill Gates formed a very powerful and successful company. He did it before anyone else did and that is why he owns most of the market he is in. Is he faulted for being a success? How many of us would love to become so dominant in our respective fields that our competition didn't have a chance? Now don't get me wrong I don't buy the crap of "MS wants to empower the Individual". The bottom line is they want to make money. Do we fault them for this? Isn't that what we all are trying to do?
| 6:19 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Love them or hate them, Microsoft have already created *real* tools that have enabled millions of small businesses / individuals to get started in business, and incidentally their tools have been responsible for colossal amounts of amateur and professional mom and pop sites that make up the web (and Google's index).
Google have actually given the individual pretty much nothing in terms of tools that are useful to the individual. A once almost flawless search engine turned corporate money pincher, categorically at the mercy of shareholders. IMO now “making a mess of and sandboxing the worlds information”.
If MS and MSN search continue to offer the little guy opportunities they will win the race long term hands down.
| 6:30 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm equally skeptical of both Microsoft and Google. When the head of Microsoft makes claims about what they "give" to the world I just couldn't resist the urge to comment. I suppose the billions of dollars that Microsoft has received FROM the world were spontaneous donations.
| 6:33 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Google have actually given the individual pretty much nothing in terms of tools that are useful to the individual |
Around our house we call Google "The Oracle of All Knowledge." When my son needs to look up information for a High School project, we start with Google and the world is at our desk.
When I was in High School, to find that same information required a trip to the Public Library, a search on Subject in the card catalogue, and a wade through many books.
With Google, a simple keyword search brings up hundreds of potential sources, many of which I can discount in an instant.
THAT is empowerment to me.
| 6:34 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Bill Gates formed a very powerful and successful company. He did it before anyone else did and that is why he owns most of the market he is in. |
Don't forget the illegal business practices Microsoft have been convicted of. They helped too.
| 6:35 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Google have actually given the individual pretty much nothing in terms of tools that are useful to the individual. |
These are 3 of the most empowering tools that the Internet has to offer!
Their video tools will hopfully do a lot to empower wouldbe directors, giving them a distrbution channel and revenue stream...
Let us not forget Urchin too... OK so it's not a unique service/tool but it most certainly empowering...
| 6:40 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|He did it before anyone else did and that is why he owns most of the market he is in. |
This doesn't necessarily mean he did it before anyone else. It just means Gates is an extremely smart man when it comes to business. There are capabilities of other great operating systems to be put on the market, but they have no chance because of Gates' brilliance in creating a monopoly. He purchased the rights to dos for $50,000 which was his smartest move. This is all a combination of being an extremly smart businessman, and being there at the right time.
| 6:42 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>> When I was in High School, to find that same information required a trip to the Public Library, a search on Subject in the card catalogue, and a wade through many books.
you should thank Google for making the computer part of each home. Oh....never mind.
| 6:54 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Your last comment is hilarious! Good One!
| 7:09 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Bashing Microsoft is off topic, but the man is to admired. He's not only accomplished a lot in his short life, but for a billionaire, he is about as generous as they get.
In case you've never heard about his foundation...
"The foundation was created in January 2000, through the merger of the Gates Learning Foundation, which worked to expand access to technology through public libraries, and the William H. Gates Foundation, which focused on improving global health. Led by Bill Gates’ father, William H. Gates Sr., and Patty Stonesifer, the Seattle-based foundation has an endowment of approximately $28.8 billion."
| 7:15 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Absolutely no use whatsoever to small businesses that can't compete with large corporate online marketing budgets.
| 7:25 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes, Bill Gates is the new Andrew Carnegie.
| 7:34 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Criticizing Microsoft is not off-topic if it concerns the subject here. As is the following.
Microsoft has always "empowered the individual" - that's exactly how it made its fortune. After a first windfall which enabled it to captivate (one can also say "endoctrinate") thousands of IBM Personal Computer buyers with its pre-installed software, it's been "user habit study" ever since. They know how to get people to use their wares and how many people are hooked. They know each and every fault of their wares, but they pay most attention to just how much abuse or "other product" enticement it would take for their users to actually take the leap and drop their product. So, since Microsoft's products are based on their observations and predictions about their user's habits, of course they will "give power to the individual".
Unfortunately Microsoft's lagging - in all but a few of its earliest endeavours - is pushing their users closer and closer to the edge of that "make the switch" envelope because, while other companies are getting sexier, what Microsoft won't do for its users is "make something better". And often when their users discover (really) what the competition is up to and how well (and simply) they do it, they never go back unless they have to.
Of course Google scares Microsoft.
| 8:07 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Gates Wants to Empower the Individual |
And good luck to him I say.
We all know where we are with MS - they produce software/tools we have a choice to pay for it or go without. Do you guys slag off your local petrol/gasoline sation when filling your car - no you don't because you have a choice.
Q) Who is paying Microsoft for the Research, Development and Production.
A) We the people that decide we NEED their product and therefore purchase it.
To me that is business, and something i can trust!
Q) When a company like Google rolls out new product after new product with no real money map who is paying for it.
A) I assume ultimately the adwords account holder.
This is something i can't trust! What's to say that five years down the line when we can't live without all these new google products such as 500gb (hehe) email accounts etc etc that they then hit EVERYONE with some ridiculous high ended subscription charges. Yes we will then have a choice but by which time could be too late since we actually NEED them for our everyday life.
| 8:37 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Q) Who is paying Microsoft for the Research, Development and Production. |
A) We the people that decide we NEED their product and therefore purchase it.
This is my basic beef with open source software too. Here on the boards we always tell people, when looking for cheap or free domains and cheap or free hosting that "You get what you pay for."
While the theory of open source is nice - free software for everyone, updated by everyone for everyone's benefit - the reality is that I'd rather people have more an incentive when they are working on something other than "the common good."
| 8:37 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Here's a trick:
Watch how some people are very earnest about propositions they are in practice doing the opposite of.
With Microsoft it's 'Innovation', when they copy or buy in everything.
'Empowermment' when they hold you hostage to the next bloated Windows 'upgrade'.
Microsoft wants to charge you a couple of hundred bucks to work your computer. Because of it, the average Joe thinks a PC is something that crashes once a day. I wish I had a quid for every hour I've wasted re-installing and de-bugging Windows.
Excel is good. Not much else is. If Microsoft went out of business tomorrow, it'd be no loss to computing.
I downloaded and installed SimplyMepis a few weeks go, just for fun. A pleasure to see something just _work_.
I fantasise about finding an IBM PC operating system I can work with, rather than 'round.
No harm if another company gives Microsoft a few knocks. _It's_ just another company, in the end. And a rather nasty one.
| 8:54 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Microsoft wants to charge you a couple of hundred bucks to work your computer |
No they don't - you can work your computer without Microsoft if you so wish.
| 9:09 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
There does seem to be a big competition between the two companies on the horizon, especially if Google pursue the OS and desktop market.
The fact that other companies are successfully muscling in on Microsoft's sale's area does seem to be stirring them into action (IE7 for example) which will hopefully be a good thing for the end user (with most still using Windows to run their machine).
Whilst it does seem MS have a huge amount of public hostility toward their company, I would also hesitate to praise Google. Of late their "Do no evil" motto has seemed to be wavering. Any webmaster who has had their site throw back in the SERP's can also testify to the companies growing power over users.
| 10:02 pm on Sep 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I too find "don't be evil" to be a bit vague. Especially since the word "evil" has definitions so varied and many. I also am a bit leery of Google's latest doings - I can no longer get a handle on what they want. It used to be "better search results".
If I would give my definition of "evil" as anything "coercive anti-evolutionary" (meaning anything that supercedes or eliminates innovation and work through tactics that aren't the same), you would understand why I have my doubts even for google. The purpose of a product should be clear, and if it works the best towards its purpose, it should win. Period.
Perhaps Google should come out with a communiqué outlining their intentions or "their big picture plans" - if their answer was clear, it would be all I would need to put them back in my good books. Microsoft would have to come out with a better product. This choice is my "power".
| This 58 message thread spans 2 pages: 58 (  2 ) > > |