homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.22.173.58
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 58 message thread spans 2 pages: 58 ( [1] 2 > >     
Google 2006: How Will Microsoft's Longhorn OS Impact Google?
MS is apparently plans to build search into the OS to "netscape" Google
onlineshrine

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 2:46 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Continued from:
[webmasterworld.com...]


Reports are that Microsoft is planning to "netscape" Google by building Web search into its planned 2006 OS. I imagine if Web search is available easily right on the desktop, that this would grab major market share for MSN Search. It would almost have to, even if the search engine wasn't that good ... and if it was good, well, we are taking about a major threat.

What can Google do to prepare for this and prevent going the way of Netscape?

 

martinibuster

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 3:25 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

The date is 2005, and we've had quite a few discussions about this since the beginning of the year. In fact, webmasterworld had the world's first reported sighting of MSNbot.

europeforvisitors



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 4:40 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Don't forget that MSN was on the Windows 95 desktop from the beginning. That didn't keep AOL from eating MSN's lunch.

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 4:48 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

I am not sure that Microsoft is planning to 'netscape' Google et al in the same way it took care of Netscape. (I am anything but a Microsoft fan.)

From my limited understanding of Microsoft's plans, it seems to be developing a disk searcher/catalog program that is capable of directly connecting to Microsoft's search engine (possibly along the lines of a toolbar or even the Windows Update model). The key to the whole thing will be the dataset and how it is accessed.

I don't know if Microsoft would try to 'netscape' Google yet but they are very well positioned. The whole search model is moving from the point where people are looking for macro/generic results to highly specific (micro or geographical) results. Google is a very good macro search engine abut it is a lousy micro search engine. Microsoft could have recognised that with all these potentially installed versions of their OS and search client, it can localise its audience to an extent that Google can not. Thus it could begin to create a lot of potentially niche search engines for each of these locales. With the Microsoft search client installed on every computer running its OS it could make it a Microsoft only search engine.

Would this be the process of 'netscaping' the opposition? I am not sure. But if Microsoft's search offering is good enough, it risks locking in a lot of the Microsoft OS based search audience by creating its own search protocol - (an echo of the Microsoft 'embrace and extend' strategy?). If successful it would cut traffic from the opposition by a very significant degree. Users would be free to search Google or other search engines but if the whole search process is seamless on Microsoft OSs, then the majority of users may not bother with other search engines.

Perhaps Microsoft plans a more personalised search experience based on what how you have searched in the past and the kind of search results that you clicked on. Basically the Microsoft search client could be used to build a personal search profile.

After all, if you use a search engine that knows what you want, would you want to use another?

Regards...jmcc

vitaplease

WebmasterWorld Senior Member vitaplease us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 4:51 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

What can Google do..?

  • Triple the pace of innovation.
  • Forget profit, hire even more Phd's, install another 50.000 servers
  • Buy a browser (Opera)
  • Give away Hotmail-type 30 Mb free email account, only with use of the advanced toolbar.
  • Get every lab-function and advanced feature out of beta and into 200 languages soonest.
  • As missionaries, train 'n brain-wash every school on Google (advanced) search through free programs
  • Deep crawl twice a day - Fresh tags by the hour - real real-time rolling updates ;)
  • Listen to the Voice of Webmasterworld

Who knows, this competition could be great.

martinibuster

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 4:59 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Perhaps Microsoft plans a more personalised search experience based on what how you have searched in the past and the kind of search results that you clicked on.

Yes, Jim Allchin, VP of Windows development is on record waaaay back in February in the Seattle Times [seattletimes.nwsource.com] saying that what they have planned makes Google look pathetic.

Allchin said his goal is to have computers learn about the user, helping set the context for searches.

[edited by: martinibuster at 5:02 am (utc) on Oct. 8, 2003]

amznVibe

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 5:02 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

I am sure there will be a popular registry patch to make the MS search use Google instead.

Even if Google doesn't officially make one, I bet it will appear on the web well before the official MS release of the product.

All the MS search has to do is bloat themselves with graphics based ads, and everyone will fall back to Google.

If the consumer market is based on $200 800mhz PC's at the low end, they won't be able to comfortably run longhorn anyway.

percentages

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 5:07 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

A small observation: About 2 years ago I managed to convert a client's office of about 50 people (non technical average Joe types) over to Google from other engines based upon Google's merits at that time.

Today the entire office is using MSN....the reason, they all recently got new PC's and that was the default engine that came with the new computers. It has nothing to do with quality of results, ease of use or any other criteria, it is simply what was put in front of them.

Webmaster's, SEO's and the more technical will probably all stay with their personal favorite engine(s). The guy/gal in the street is heavily influenced by what they are given as a default.

I've seen MSN traffic grow from 7% to 23% (without any L$ listings) over the past 18 months. I believe the reason is simply that when people buy new PC's a large percentage use whatever SE happens to come up as default.

While MS controls the OS it has a stacked deck, and that is going to be hard to compete with.

What can Google do..?
Well it can try all the things vitaplease suggested.....will it keep them infront by 2007/8?....I doubt it!

digitalghost

WebmasterWorld Senior Member digitalghost us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 5:16 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>AOL from eating MSN's lunch.

ROFL. Really? AOL is bankrupt.

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 6:04 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Yes, Jim Allchin, VP of Windows development is on record waaaay back in February in the Seattle Times saying that what they have planned makes Google look pathetic.

I knew I read it somewhere martinibuster. :) I was just waking up and only on one cup of coffee but even in that state Microsoft worries me. That kind of consumer lock-in is very dangerous.

With the Google PR gimmick having problems, Google have to do something to counter this quickly, or at least have something ready for Microsoft's onslaught. Though Microsoft has a history of announcing vapourware.

Regards...jmcc

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 6:19 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

* Triple the pace of innovation.

A good response but not necessarily the best. The best from a business point of view would be, while keeping the innovation going, to step up the pace of consolidating the market. The Google Adsense and Adwords are good examples.

* Forget profit, hire even more Phd's, install another 50.000 servers

No business can forget profit, especially one that may have to face Microsoft as an opponent. Just because someone has a PhD it does not make them smart. Adding more servers is a possibility but it probably something that Google will do anyway. It should commoditize its search by offering website users the facility of incorporating Google Search on their sites but with an incentive of a cut of the advertising. (Difficult to police but it would allow Google to get into the last segment of the market not served by Adsense.)

* Buy a browser (Opera)

Yesterday's battle. Not really worth competing with Microsoft on this unless the browser can be extended to offer some delux searching features - again getting back to what Microsoft is trying to do.

* Give away Hotmail-type 30 Mb free email account, only with use of the advanced toolbar.

Dangerous dot.bomb idea. Does Google really need to support that kind of infrastructure for a minimal return?

* Get every lab-function and advanced feature out of beta and into 200 languages soonest.

Putting it into every language is not the way to go. The targets should be high-payoff languages with a lot of potential revenue.

* As missionaries, train 'n brain-wash every school on Google (advanced) search through free programs

Difficult one this. Google is a brand now and almost every schoolkid who uses a computer knows it.

* Deep crawl twice a day - Fresh tags by the hour - real real-time rolling updates ;)

There goes my breakfast. :) Actually a frequent Deep crawl idea is not that bad if the core of the active web can be identified. At least 75% of the web does not change over the period of a year. (Figure based on my own research on Irish websites.) Another important question arises out of this: do searchers want accurate data or fresh data?

* Listen to the Voice of Webmasterworld

Definitely.

Regards...jmcc

shrirch

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 6:36 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

>> Context Searches

Google has the infrastructure (and perhaps the technology) to learn a LOT about the surfer. They know through their google ads which sites I visit and using their PhDs they can figure out contexts based on my web trails and patterns.

>> Location Searches

They're preparing location searches. Watch out for mobile phone / GPS co-ordinate based searches and 4 dimensional (atleast X / Y and T) contextual searches in the not-too distant future on handhelds (think google WAP proxy + GPRS etc).

Sure enough Microsoft could integrate this into their OS.. but I can see signs that Google has a plan, the infrastructure AND some key technologies worked out.

vitaplease

WebmasterWorld Senior Member vitaplease us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 7:07 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

jmccormac,

Google is a brand now and almost every schoolkid

I'd agree Google is the brand for almost every youngster, however, the so-called educated ones that come to work for me have no idea how to do any real search on Google. I notice it is once they really understand all the advanced features that they will really get hyped, hooked and loyal.

The targets should be high-payoff languages with a lot of potential revenue.

Thats what Yahoo does/did. Take the Dutch language (maybe the eighth used language in search?), Yahoo has no Dutch directory or language version. I think Google's current internationalisation and geo-localisation has been one of their best bets.

Buy a browser (Opera) Yesterday's battle

Will Microsoft keep on supporting IE with Longhorn?

Hotmail/toolbar - Dangerous dot.bomb idea. Does Google really need to support that kind of infrastructure for a minimal return?

I agree, I am all against a cluttered Google loosing its search focus, but one of the few reasons I surf to Yahoo is their free mail service. Just extra on-line addiction. I would pay another 10 dollars a month if I could upload my Google account with my favourite 250 pdf's and docs and thereby have them fully full-text Google indexed/searchable to me only.

I'm not sure the infrastructure would be such a problem with what Google already has.

I'd also bet Google would find all sorts of extra search options/extras that could be nicely built into their email service.

Regards, and also back to finishing breakfast.

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 7:26 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

This has the kernels of two excellent ideas vitaplease,
I would pay another 10 dollars a month if I could upload my Google account with my favourite 250 pdf's and docs and thereby have them fully full-text Google indexed/searchable to me only.

With bandwidth and connectivity being variables in any search process, having the data on a harddive takes a lot of these variables out of the equation and would make a daily crawl a far more attractive thing. It would also mean that Google could break into the hosting business offering a pay for (fast/frequent) inclusion as a bonus of signing with Google.

Now if Google could create a grub client (like Looksmart) and have hosters/webmasters pre-process their webpages and files that they would like to see spidered, it would reduce Google's bandwidth bills and potentially have competition for Microsoft's Longhorn client before it even gets to market. Such a thing may only appeal to webmasters and Microsoft, having control at an OS level would probably win in the long term. However if between now and the launch of Longhorn there is a pickup in the shift from fixed computing (desktop PCs) to mobile computing, all bets are off because nobody can say what will happen then.

Regards...jmcc

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 7:40 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

>> Location Searches
They're preparing location searches. Watch out for mobile phone / GPS co-ordinate based searches and 4 dimensional (atleast X / Y and T) contextual searches in the not-too distant future on handhelds (think google WAP proxy + GPRS etc).

Sure enough Microsoft could integrate this into their OS.. but I can see signs that Google has a plan, the infrastructure AND some key technologies worked out.

I've been working on a mobile phone based search engine for the last few months and I don't think that Google has got the key technologies section worked out.

Beyond US zipcodes, Google's geolocation services suck. (Look at the problems it has in identifying whether a site hosted on a US server is a US website or a website belonging to another country.) They are based on identifying the location of the website but have great difficulty on identifying the locale (city/streets etc) of the area to which the site is relevant. This is the big problem with mobile searching - is the search a macro search or is it a very specific local search?

Mobile phone based searching assumes the location of the handset is clearly identified. The problem is that even the telcos have problems reliably identifying where a phone is, apart from it being on a specific cell at a specific time. The crossovers from adjacent or nearby cells causes problems with this kind of location process. Though this is with 2.5G/GSM. I doubt that 3G will be any better though the cells will be smaller, perhaps reducing the error rate.

Regards...jmcc

trillianjedi

WebmasterWorld Senior Member trillianjedi us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 8:54 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Microsoft have left it too late - google *is* internet searching and will continue to be until it messes up, not some other competitor comes along. Even MS.

The internet has come of age - it's not how it was back in IE -v- Netscape days.

TJ

Josefu

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 9:06 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

...I just read the NY times article - thanks for the link. No matter how they blow, it looks like Microsoft will be once again compiling an app using elements they gleaned from their 'study' of the market's best or most popular applications.

I really think google will suffer because of this - there is a certain percentage of the population who will use what they see first; MS knows this and has always used any tactic it could to push to the front of the line.

One of their mistakes will be including both the web and a hard disk's contents in a search - this will be annoying. There is a big difference between 'my stuff' and 'what's out there'. I think Google should develop a desktop application of its own : )

Josefu

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 9:25 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Oh, and...

Buy a browser (Opera) Yesterday's battle

Will Microsoft keep on supporting IE with Longhorn?

...this I can answer with precision: IE is dead. I wish I could find the link to that article... anyhow the next MS browser will be an integral part of the OS - and inseperable from it. For the Mac OS, IE will be integrated into the next 'generation' of MSN messenger.

This is really odd - it almost looks like MS is trying to get the user to think of the web as a huge OS. A mistake, IMHO - but why does the thought worry me?

Google, the terms you should NOT forget in any innovations you make are "efficiency," "relevency" and (please please please don't forget about) "user habits". As things stand, the last term is the only place where MS can beat you.

kaled

WebmasterWorld Senior Member kaled us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 10:16 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

MSN exists today. There is no real evidence to suggest that their market share of searches will expand simply because they build their own search engine.

If MSN provides a better search service than they do now, then it is reasonable to assume that their market share will increase over time.

However, on a level playing field, I am not aware of a single product developed by MS that is better than the competition. MS have proved time and time again that all they are good at doing is creating bloatware with a pretty user interface.

Google may loose some market share (80% was never going to last forever) but there is no reason to panic.

Kaled.

PS
If MS play dirty, I imagine that bad publicity and the Justice Dept. will put them in their place.

mayor

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 10:59 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Despite some friction in certain areas, and some bad memories on both sides, Google has embraced the webmaster community and turned them into tens of thousands of spokespersons. As long as Google has a superior product their name will continue to be spread, literally by word of mouth from the guru's of the industry. Microsoft, with their buggy products, will have some catching up to do.

That's not to say Microsoft can't step in and dominate the market with their technology, their near-monopoly on the OS and browser markets and their advertising budgets. Google will still need the management skill to win against the now-bureacratic giant. It can be done. Just ask Bill Gates!

I do think Microsoft's play will force Google to go public to provide a source funds for the ensuing battle.

Josefu

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 11:33 am on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

...we are all spokespeople for sure, this forum proves it.

...but... don't forget how fickle users are. Remember Yahoo, AltaVista and HotBot... RIP. Oh, and burn in hell, AOL : )

Are you sure that Google needs to compete profitwise with MS to stay on top? MS is rich because of the huge profit margin it tacks on the low-cost production of its software product. Are you sure this applies to Google?

Chndru

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 12:15 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

I think Google holds upper hand in technology and MS in marketing and strategy. It will finally boil down to achieving the technology and internet user understanding for MS and the ability to market its products for Google. Whoever wins will have a booty of $s ;)

but remember, G is more than a company..It's a cult!...and no one understands its online users better than G

Josefu

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 12:42 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

...scuse me for trolling I work at home today : )

...Google and marketing? You know it's funny, I compare Google's evolution to a webmaster who checks his website logs every night - sees a 'user behaviour', makes a tweak to the site to make things better for it, checks back again the next night: note, tweak... sort of naiive in a way : P Doesn't seem to change day to day but when you look back at what it was a the start - wow.

Because of that Google deserves every cent it makes - because the people paying Google for exposure will themselves be making money on Google's talent for 'knowing users'. I would hate to see the 'idealess giant' step in and skim the results of that experience for its own marketing use.

I really think that example (sorry, by who?) of a whole office switching to MSN from Google 'because it was there' is almost a final word on this subject - my (humble) advice to Google is to develop somehing 'kapow' and save it until after Longhorn's release, to better inform the 'Longhorn installers' that there's still something outside of - and better than - the 'incorporated' SE that MS is dangling in front of their face.

[edited by: Josefu at 12:56 pm (utc) on Oct. 8, 2003]

michael heraghty

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 12:42 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Is what Microsoft is planning, then, a sort of "peer-to-peer" search, where users will be able to search information that is labelled "open to search" on other machines -- regardless of it is on the web?

mayor

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 1:32 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Yeah, peer-to-peer search ... possibly could idle Google's 50,000 or whatever search servers. But I see it as a supplement, not a replacement for the advanced capabilities of search server technology, at least in the foreseable future.

Peer-to-peer search is probably the sandbox for some startup, like where Google was a few years ago, to play in. Probably better to start with a clean slate, by someone who sees over the horizon, and does not carry any baggage.

europeforvisitors



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 2:17 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

digitalghost wrote:

ROFL. Really? AOL is bankrupt.

You're comparing apples (profitability) to oranges (market share). In any case, the MSN online service was a financial sinkhole for Microsoft. I know--I was there. :-) The MSN brand name survived, but the "MSN" that we know today has little relation to the MSN online service that tried without success to out-AOL at its own game with the help of an MSN icon on the Windows 95 desktop.

kwasher

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 2:47 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

...yeah, and does anyone remember 'channels'? Anyway, MS will end up either partnering or buying into Google... adding it to the MS OS (WINGLE... or Googlesoft... or MSNoogle). Counterpoint: Or maybe Google will join with Yahoo (Yahoogle?). And there will be a great battle for us to watch.

--Kenn (who has 'search engine burn out' and is going to go back to just making simple pages for real life people)

jmccormac

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 3:04 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

...yeah, and does anyone remember 'channels'? Anyway, MS will end up either partnering or buying into Google...

Channels were a good idea. But I think that the people behind Pointcast will always remember them - those lusers turned down an offer from Rupert Murdoch to buy their company before the bubble burst. It did invert the whole web model from a pull to a push model. But hasn't RDF and RSS largely occupied the whole 'channels' space?

I am not sure about partnering or buying into Google though. Microsoft either takes over and destroys or buys the smaller companies necessary to destroy the leaders in a market it wants to enter. This means that Google could be in for a very tough fight.

Regards...jmcc

martinibuster

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 3:28 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Microsoft either takes over and destroys or buys the smaller companies...

That's currently a myth.

Their defrag and firewall technology is licensed from other companies in a "limited" version. Thus, the defrag is a "limited" version of Diskeeper. This extends to MS Office where some of the functionality was licensed from smaller companies.

Microsoft has been following this licensing strategy for quite some time, now.

john316

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 17474 posted 3:31 pm on Oct 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Who says Longhorn will even have a browser?

If MS can't "get it their way", it looks like they kill the technology. Think MS-Web [netimperative.com]

No browser, no google. MS wins again.

This 58 message thread spans 2 pages: 58 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved