Forum Moderators: open
Microsoft's way of creating a better search engine will consist of telling us over and over that they are the best with online and tv ads with crappy music and happy people, i doubt they'll change much of the inner workings of MSN.
I can also remember when Microsoft first entered the browser market with slow, clunky and overwhelmingly buggy Internet Explorer. I can remember telling people that Microsoft could never beat out Netscape. Within three years, Netscape was the clunky, crappy browser and Internet Explorer had over 90% of the market.
If Microsoft says it wants to dominate the search engine market, it probably will. All it takes is money, and Microsoft has a phenomenal amount more than google, along with a dominant position in the browser market. Google can't set all the browsers to load itself as the default home page -- Microsoft can.
We all know google is vulnerable -- there is already a lot of grumbling about how google trails what is actually happening on the web by several weeks. There is no reason that a search engine could not crawl and update constantly without a discernable update schedule -- it just takes more resources. Microsoft has got those resources.
I'm just saying that one day we will view google like we did Word Perfect and Netscape -- vanguards that dominated before being replaced by something better, even though it seemed improbable at the time. I don't think we really want to be sitting around waiting for the next google update ten years from now. Google will be replaced by something better -- almost certainly run by Microsoft, since it is the only player that can credibly challenge it.
They then did a quick about face when the folks that they sent IBM to flat out told IBM to get lost....and Gates bought that first op sys for $50,000.00..thus establishing a very distinct pattern of delivering to market "what works and gets the job done" before anyone else can dominate, instead of delivering high-thinking, high-artistry, superb products....you could basically look at any large successful company for these type of "emotionally charged" underpinnings to their successes...
For Microsoft to buy out Google would mean that they would have to break their pattern of success and delve into something they haven't done...buy at the the top of the market (except what they disgracefully did to hotmail...you know the story...they bought hotmail because it was "THE" email address to have at the time...they then canabalized some of the code and created some security issues through the backdoor...they got hacked....millions of email addresses where hacked and Microsoft's response was "see what you get for free software"...why not pay for hotmail and get better security...and, of course, they are playing this same game with their current user base and hotmail accounts be uncorking their spam filters for the free user base and offering better filtering to subscribers...nothing terribly wrong here...just trying to find ways to monetize their properties)...it's just business beckoning to have it's way...
Would this possibly mean that if Microsoft bought out Google they would canabalize the algo/technology to belitte the Google accomplishments and steer the user base to the MSN engine and interface (the "make this your home page" is already moving to the MS side...of course they spend millions to accomplish this...)
Also, with Microsoft paying out their first stock dividends recently their coveted cash cow is now actually more in control of the stock owners base than ever...which means that any purchases with cash will be scrutinized ever more closely...for the highest possible return because of the lackluster nature of the tech industry and stock prices for the last couple of years...
The other issue Microsoft faces if they buy Google is the radically different cultures of both companies...Google being strictly and religiously dedicated to open-source solutions and Microsoft, of course, open-sores...(oops...I couldn't resist..)
Tis interesting times ahead...
Go public and own your own stuff Google and continue on with your established tradition of eloquence and innovation or let Microsoft wag their dollar tail at ya and succumb to the fast money...?
ROFL. Yeah, right. Where may I find the source code of the Google algo?
If Google keeps up what they are doing they will dominate the web at least IMHO.
Server clusters up to eight nodes are available only in the Enterprise and Datacenter Editions of Windows Server 2003.
[microsoft.com...]
Compare that to the cluster of thousands of Linux boxes Google runs. Granted, in an MS architecture that would be implemented as multiple clusters -- web server clusters & DB server clusters at multiple sites ... but I'm not sure a Windows solution can scale out so far as Google has scaled their Linux solution. And I can't see MS running a high-profile system like that on anything but Windows.
Compare that to the cluster of thousands of Linux boxes Google runs. Granted, in an MS architecture that would be implemented as multiple clusters -- web server clusters & DB server clusters at multiple sites ... but I'm not sure a Windows solution can scale out so far as Google has scaled their Linux solution. And I can't see MS running a high-profile system like that on anything but Windows.
Google is way ahead of Microsoft. And I am sure your right. They may even leave IIS on one of their clusters and not only crash it, but get hacked.
From my experience, Micro$oft represents the Miracle of Modern Advertising. Many of those in charge of IT purchasing have no real idea - but they see the preponderance of Micro$soft advertising and think that is the best solution. So the buy it and fall into the trap of massive outlays for liscencing (sp?) and periodic software updates.
Then we go to school and use Micro$oft products and become proficient with them. This makes it difficult for us to use anything else. We are loath to try anything different. It is self perpetuating.
Truth is, Open Source Rocks. PHP,Perl,Apache,MySQL, Linux. Sure Windows GUI and FrontPage wysiwyg editors seem easier at first ( and you may think better) but so didn't training wheels when you tried to ride your first bike.
Do yourself a favor. Deep six those training wheels. Your capable enough. Go Open Source. Spend a little time on that learning curve and then you can do anything you want for 10th the cost and 10-times better than going the Micro$oft route.
Now I think they may discover that Google is one egg which is too big to swallow, and it is an egg with too many clucking hens around to let it happen.
Yes... I guess I just categorised myself as a clucking hen! One of countless others I reckon.
I stole that from another post.
Its true.
...and it is an egg with too many clucking hens around to let it happen.
When the corporate food processing plant buys the farmers land, all the clucking hens get their heads cut off!
Regards,
Brent
I assume you quoted the last Zsar of Russia. My point was ENTIRELY that on the net the days of food processing plants buying land to kill opposiion have just about passed.
Obviously you failed to get it.
Have you guys/gals ever heard the term "unix geek" before?
Booksmarts will get you "Google".
Streetsmarts will get you "Micro$oft".
It's like the story of (you know who) and FreeBSD. He had much to do with it's foundation. But when I met him, I think he had two different shoes on and lollipops in his pocket.
Pull back the "Eew, Bill Gates is so bad and mean" curtain and marketing is the ultimate key behind Microsoft's success. Then go look at Google's jump page and smell the geek within.
Google stands very little chance of fending off competitors, unless they fire their entire executive management. At least the ones that know anything about their "algo". Yuck. Great search engine though.
If you're reading this Google, fly my out there so I can splash water in your face and scream at you, "it's time for the next cycle to begin!".
Oh, and open-source is code for "sucker". I didn't say it wasn't a little sad.
Regards...jmcc
On another note, I do not think it would be possible for Gates and Co. to buy Google. I think they have had enough trouble with anti-trust laws recently as it is.
J
In the next 5 years M$ will be the power house in the computer field that IBM is now.
I agree. I was looking at a web server the other day that has a ton of stuff running on it. With FreeBSD it had a 0.00% load on it. That was with MYSQL, Sendmail, and a bunch of other programs running on it.
I am gearing up to totally ditch my Windows OS's. If FreeBSD can do that I am all over it. Off to cut my teeth.
D'oh! [google.com]
If microsoft go into cometition with google big style, will they use a similar model to msn (PPC,etc). If this is the case I dont think it will work as google gets more of a spread of results because they dont insist on sites commercially advertising.
If however, they buy over google, do you guys think that they will ruin it by making it like MSN / PPC, or will they continue to run it like it is...
Im hoping there isnt too much of a change as i rely on google and its partner sites for a hell of a lot of my business.
Google is currently everyone's darling, but remember the position/s once held by the likes of av, excite, infoseek, webcrawler, galaxy and all the other fine forgotten algos now on the dust heap of dotcomdon.
Regardless of what happens (or doesn't) to Google ... like the # 10 bus ... there'll be another SE along any time real soon now ... shall we bring on the dancing horses while we wait?
hooroo.
