| This 113 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 113 ( 1 2 3  ) || |
|Is Google Scared? Reactions or Planned Development|
When I look at some of the changes made at Google I wonder if they've changed their mentality from 'market leader', 'standard setter everyone wants to follow', 'simple and friendly' to 'what are we going to do to continue holding our visitors, revenue and market share'?
Many here have pointed out they are mostly garbage. We're these planned to be integrated all along, or were they integrated as a reaction to Bing?
Fading Home Page
Come on... Was this designed and planned well in advance, or was it a reaction to Bing being way 'cooler' than Google... (I have an idea Bing may be 'the choice of a new generation'(or one of them), because I actually didn't use it until a high school student said they tried searching for something on Bing and Google like it was expected for them to use both.)
Search by Submitting a Photo
Sounds like the use of some technology Microsoft developed I read about not too long ago, but don't remember where to cite the source. (Maybe someone else can shed some light on what it is. It had to do with Micorsoft's SilverLight technology.)
Long-term plan, or as Brett says, Bing Envy IOW a knee-jerk reaction?
People are against behavioral ad targeting, do they really think people want what are essentially behavioral search results by default?
Honestly, I think Google's started reacting rather than leading to some degree, because they're are definitely getting 'out cooled' by Bing just about every step of the way...
And what's even more interesting to me is they're not being chased by some start-up or someone they can buy out. They're being hounded and chased for market share by a company that crushes them in annual revenue and already has a worldwide user base, so I think they're going to have to keep doing it to keep up with the revenue pace they've set for themselves, because there's not much room for Google to go anywhere, except down...
Matt Cutts used to say when he asked people what they liked about Google they often said it was simple and easy to use... Maybe he should have been asking what they liked about the competition instead?
2010 could be an interesting year in the search market, me thinks.
Very much so!
However, Google has raised the bar to entry so high, that under the circumstances competitors may be able to claim only mere survival by following half-baked strategies, such as Bing seems to be following.
To challenge Google one-to-one under the current circumstances, requires great commitment and a full war chest, fully committed too. Who is prepared, or even capable, of doing this now, while at the same time Google seems fully committed to moving even further, in the field of "search"?
I honestly hate monopolies, and in particular the high-handed Google one. However, it must be granted, Google have gained their monopoly through technical and intellectual prowess - assisted by the incompetence and arrogance of their main competitors (Yahoo comes to mind . .).
Lets not forget, google got where it is today with only word of mouth advertising.
Could someone like Bing creep up on them using the same strategy?
All Search Engines exist because of the content we site owners have created. And any SE that is trying to make money is by definition, biased. We see that with the Google "Payday" update where Google is playing games and funneling traffic to their advantage.
There is no shortage of examples of mega, rock solid corporations going down in flames. Webmasters who don't feel they are getting a fair chance to compete on Google,just need to put up a banner that tells visitors to use Bing next time. Like the recent "quit Facebook" campaign, it attracts the media and gets the issue out in the the public eye.
The general public still believes they are getting the old unbiased results Google was founded on. But that went away when they went public.
All SEs are biased. The issue is, at what point does one go so far as to create a major backlash?
Let's not forget that we webmasters exist because of search engines as well. Our sites need to be found somehow correct?
Just because there are issues with Google it doesn't mean that Bing is a viable option for daily searching.
If Bing received a fraction of the attention Google receives on these boards, the flaws in Bing would become readily apparent.
So what are these flaws then? anytime I use it I see no problems.
|Let's not forget that we webmasters exist because of search engines as well. Our sites need to be found somehow correct? |
Chicken and egg? Actually website were around before search engines ... and it's commercial search engines like Google that drove this situation. They are the ones who turned the Internet into ad media.
I am a bit surprised that Google keep messing with their logo, usually companies defend the integrity of their logo above all else yet google messes with theirs at any opportunity.
This morning when I logged onto google there was just some mess where their logo used to be. A complete mess, I have no idea what they are doing.
I was just checking out Apple - they play with their logo a lot, too. I agree, it's not standard corporate behavior. Most companies even dictate the exact Pantone colors to use in print! I'm thinking it's essentially a very confident and also playful action that only a few companies would dare to take. (Google's unconventional IPO was also along those lines.)
Guess I just gave my answer the title question - no Google is not scared. If anything, they're confident and willing to play around. Of course, they definitely keep a watchful eye on Bing, but that's just being prudent, not scared.
I don't come across apple so much tedster, do they tweak their logo also, I didn't know.
And, I agree, I don't think google are scared of bing, but they might well be scared of microsoft.
At the moment microsoft is trying to encroach on google in search, but google is trying to encroach on microsoft in browsers (chrome) and email (gmail) and operating systems (whatever it is called) .. there is a competition between them..
I'm seeing turmoil in the process. Some major companies making efforts to capture audience, and recently google has flubbed. I've been using Bing for search for many months (like it) but then again I still hit Altavista from time to time. Google I don't worry about so much anymore because they have parsed the apple so much it has become sauce rather than results.
And I believe the leech critters (users) are beginning to see the same.
These days I see google reactive, not proactive, other than their attempt at world domination by buying up other companies to stuff their fluff, and then failing to capitalize on that expansion.
Without introducing a different argument, I suggest a study of AT&T's growth to market, monopoly and eventual bust (by government) and later reintegration (by government) to put a possibility in focus. Google, at this time, is on that same cusp...and has done some evil (wifi trapping, book deal, etc.) and futzed with the algos for commercial purposes (and taken money) which skews their ad services.
Google, these days, is not a search engine. They are an advertising company.
No ill speak in all the above, just a comment that if I want search answers, I go to Bing first, then Yahoo (if Bing didn't give it to me) then the gorg...
One of the problems of being "large" is being a target. :)
|One of the problems of being "large" is being a target. :) |
Or another angle is: the only way from the top is down!
|Google, these days, is not a search engine. They are an advertising company. |
On 16 May 2006 (four years ago) I posted in this forum a rather sophisticated new thread regarding Google, titled "Pay for Play", bringing forward the opinion that Google was deliberately evolving to something very different from being a "benign" search engine, or even portal, as we understood those terms at that time. That thread did not survive, deleted by the moderator immediately upon posting, as a mere "rant".
Fast forward four years, and only a naive minority currently is blind enough to not comprehend what "Pay for Play" actually implies.
At that time, I was forecasting what direction Google, and the market as a whole, were evolving to - and called for the need to *see* reality as it was, and to *adapt* to that reality. At that time people did not want to listen.
I will do you a favour now (yes, really) and call your attention to the following:
1.- Google is not AltaVista. They are truly smart, and possess immense human resources & immense capital.
2.- Google is here to stay, for quite a long time.
3.- Google will be the dominant corporation in search, for the coming 4 years, minimum.
4.- You cannot beat them (I am talking to *you*, yes, *you* !)
5.- Join them!
Well I have a gmail account, spend a shed load on adwords, am planning to play with adsense in sometime in 2010 ... and spend a lot of time on getting into the SERPS, yes even now I have not given up!
|4.- You cannot beat them (I am talking to *you*, yes, *you* !) |
|4.- You cannot beat them (I am talking to *you*, yes, *you* !) |
Just for that, I'm creating my own, completely original search engine to beat Google and prove you wrong!
Results so far:
"I'm feeling stupid". -lol-
If Bing made their search engine as the only one possible for all Windows, it would kill Google. Its easy to do and its not against the law... They have the right to do that. Simple as that
I think some lawyers would disagree.
After all they tried to do that with Internet Explorer and while Netscape had problems, the law suits that followed did mean that Microsoft were not permitted to only let Windows users use IE.
I am not a lawer but i believe its possible with good lawers Microsoft can afford. Its their product, not the government owned!
thats not the way i want things done though, i hate monopoly. Just saying Microsoft is way stronger in the it world
Microsoft has been forced to pay out massive fines for abusing its monopoly position in the operating system market, certainly here in the EU. I wonder if they would risk trying it in the search market? there would certainly be a response from google I would expect.
People in EU love boycotting huge monopolies, its good, i love your freedom loving minds. Its more difficult to brainwash you too. In general, you have less dumb idiots who would eat anything...
| This 113 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 113 ( 1 2 3  ) |