Forum Moderators: open
What can Google do to prepare for this and prevent going the way of Netscape?
For the Mac OS, IE will be integrated into the next 'generation' of MSN messenger.
Just noticed a seach tab in MSN messenger (windows version) here. I don't know how long it's been there but I hadn't noticed it before.
But it's a sign that MS are getting people used to seeing a search box in everything...
The search engine wars begin.
Nomatter what anyone says of thinks, people are stupid - one thing I can't figure out they use software that comes with the Microsoft OS.
Witness Global Virus Distribution software like Outlook Express.
The masses with do the same and embrace Microsoft Search.
Google should be worried, very worried. They are going to lose a large slice of the market very soon - the mass market. There really is nothing they can do about it, if I was in the position of Bill Gates, I would have had Google sewn up by now. Microsoft are very late, but when then catch on, they go for it with an evil vengence. Witness
the browser wars and every company that Microsoft have gobbled up. That much money buy's people and buys power.
For once I'm on Microsoft's side. Google need some bloody competition!
The_Subtle_Knife
Microsoft are very late, but when then catch on, they go for it with an evil vengence.
There is some truth in this, but I'm afraid that you are guilty of buying into the myth that MS is invulnarable and bound to succeed.
A few months ago I took my nephew shopping for a games console. The MS X-Box was not a contender. Why? - As he put it, It's the only games console ever released that crashes.
No matter what anyone says or thinks, people are stupid - one thing I can't figure out they use software that comes with the Microsoft OS.
The reason is simple, to do otherwise typically means spending more money or spending time locating an alternative, downloading it, installing it and learning how to use it.
Very little of this applies to search engines so MS is by no means certain to succeed.
Kaled.
Microsoft has been following this licensing strategy for quite some time, now.
Few people realize that Internet Explorer was based on licensed code from Mosaic (unlike Netscape Navigator, which was cloned by developers who'd built Mosaic while they were on the public payroll).
For that matter, MS-DOS was based on an operating system that Microsoft bought and paid for.
IMHO, the main argument against a Google-Microsoft match would be culture clash: "Do no evil" vs. "Do what it takes." :-)
The reason is simple, to do otherwise typically means spending more money or spending time locating an alternative, downloading it, installing it and learning how to use it. -kaled
You've just contradicted your self, and proven my point.
QED.
Microsoft will win. Eventually.
It's the major OS out there in the mass market.
If they want to blur the line between OS and Searches,
they can do it.
full stop. Us debating it won't make the blindest bit of difference.
I suggest we all by apple macs. much better.. ;-)
I can tell you when longhorn hits, I'll bin microsoft
and use macs and linux. Can't be doing with all the Palladium crap.
Few people realize that Internet Explorer was based on licensed code from Mosaic (unlike Netscape Navigator, which was cloned by developers who'd built Mosaic while they were on the public payroll).For that matter, MS-DOS was based on an operating system that Microsoft bought and paid for.
IMHO, the main argument against a Google-Microsoft match would be culture clash: "Do no evil" vs. "Do what it takes." :-)
exactly, least some here know the full facts.
"Do what it takes" will win - it already is.
People quite happily use Outlook express to spread viruses, and they haven't got a clue!
Quite clearly no-one out there has a clue.
The search engine wars begin.
...Let this day be known as a day of infamy.
---
And on John Lennons birthday no less.
Being a Mac user I find it hard to even imagine an enviroment where the os is also an imposed browser, a search will search not only my hard disk but the web and other people's hard disks to boot. It makes the bounds between 'my stuff' and 'their stuff' fuzzy. Purposely? How far can one be led by the nose - Longhorn sounds like a mix between IE, MSN, Kazzaa, and AOL. Will people gob it and stay between the bounds that MS sets out for them? Because of the lack of an independant browser and a probably ever-present MSN 'search' field, google will probably loose a good percentage of the market - for at least a while.
"Do no evil" vs. "Do what it takes." :-)
...hehe, rather 'we sell what we say we sell' vs. 'you buy what we say we sell'
[edited by: Josefu at 8:24 pm (utc) on Oct. 8, 2003]
No matter what anyone says or thinks, people are stupid.
Kaled.
MS is also a vendor of server software,
and one of those is IIS.
So....
MS builds a indexing service into IIS
that does an xml feed to MSN for auto-inclusion.
Instant freshies.
Who here, as a webmaster, would not jump at this?
++++
Being a Mac user I find it hard to even imagine an enviroment where the os is also an imposed browser...
As a PC user, I find it hard to imagine why anyone would be a captive of a monopolistic manufacturer that controls both the hardware and the operating system. But I guess that doesn't have anything to do with Longhorn or Google, so I'll jump off my platform soapbox if you'll step down from yours. :-)
a monopolistic manufacturer
Mac? puh-leeeeeze ; )
a monopolistic manufacturer
True.
But as EFV said, let's jump off our soap boxes.
All I mean by 'being a Mac user' is that Mac users have no other choice but to 'find and learn' themselves - the 'follow the guide' mentality just isn't there. Longhorn will be nothing but it seems.
if you want to get into a mac/pc discussion perhaps start another thread elsewhere.
[edited by: Josefu at 8:42 pm (utc) on Oct. 8, 2003]
And to me the idea of a modern OS that doesn't have an included web browser seems ridiculous. Remember just because IE is there doesn't mean anyone has to use it.
As for Longhorn, remember people are already in the habit of using Google and other search engines. I can't imagine many people switching to an inferior MSN search just because there is a search box built into the OS. Google has little to fear unless MS build a SE that is as good or better than Google. However, that would be something for Google to fear even withlout Longhorn. SE users are well known for not being loyal. I remember when Altavista was king of the hill. Build a better SE, and they will come.
where the os is also an imposed browser...
...Imposed was the word, imposed. If it doesn't work or we don't like it can we trash it? No, we have to d/l and use another one with it still taking place on the hard disk. Enter W3C standards, versions of Javascript and CSS - to keep with web evolution (or even view things properly) we are obliged to buy the latest OS? I stress choice. Longhorn will impose and toss a barrier in front of its users wanting something else, thus, just for starters because of user laziness, costing Google a part of the market. But I repeat myself.
The same could be said of other features of Windows some people don't use. You could always run Linux if this bothers you.
The same could be said of other features of Windows some people don't use. You could always run Linux if this bothers you.
Many here already do, but we are not the M$ target market, rather its family members, friends, business associates and others who buy a turn key M$ system because its familar, yet they have trouble just hooking up the cables. These people are going to use Linux or download Opera? Yea, right.
Take a survey and ask for peoples top 3 responses to the following words:
1. windows
2. opera
My bet is that 75% of the time one of the three response for windows will be MS related. I would be surprised if more than 1% of the time the responses for opera have anything to do with browsers.
MS sells (appeals) to the lowest common demoninator and it works. Why do you think AOL has 30 million users?
MS sells (appeals) to the lowest common demoninator and it works. Why do you think AOL has 30 million users?
Microsoft Windows is the standard for a very different reason: MS-DOS/PC-DOS was the operating system of the IBM PC, which was the first personal computer to make serious inroads in the world of business, and Windows was the evolutionary successor to DOS. Until Windows 95 came along, Windows was an add-on to DOS, and it co-existed with DOS software. It made good sense for PC users and PC-owning businesses to migrate to Windows instead of throwing out their hardware and software to experiment with a new and untried platform (especially after the flop of Apple's Lisa computer, which predated the Macintosh by a year or two).
As for AOL's success, it was the result of nonstop marketing. There was a time when AOL was distributing floppy disks in cereal boxes and with airplane snacks, and some of us hardly ever bought diskettes because we got all the freebies we needed from AOL mailings.
If you want to talk about "appealing to the lowest common denominator," why not talk about Google? One reason for Google's success, IMHO, is an interface that's clean and easy to use. Want to search for something? Type a phrase into the blank and click a button. Presto! You get a list of search results. Google may be run by PhDs and loved by techies, but it was designed for Grandma and Uncle Bubba: the "lowest common denominator" audience that wants to use a computer and the Internet with a minimum of fuss.
A group of large companies like IBM, Sun, Borland, Adobe, CA, Corel, get together to take on Microsoft. "How do they do that?" I hear you ask. They produce an OS (perhaps based on Linux) that is easy to use and works straight out of the box. Instead of selling this new OS, they give it away, along with basic versions of office apps, etc.
After two or three years if the new OS was any good, it would become quite popular. It would take many years to overtake Windows in terms of installed base, but in terms of new units, it would be much quicker. This would drastically cut MS revenues. After ten years, MS would be simply another software company.
Eventually, something like this will happen. Software is very cheap to duplicate once it's been written. Hardware manufacturers cannot be cheaply surplanted this way, but with software this is entirely feasible.
Kaled.
The above is very much true. The IBM PC became the standard early on for office computers. And, due to a monumental design blunder, IBM made it easy for competitors to market PC clones cheap. Thus, the PC became synonymous with office computer. Apple's back then were expensive, and risky in that the viability of Apple for office computing in the long term was dubious. Not many business saw it worth the risk and cost to switch to Apple.
In which case, being at the top of any
engines serps might be totally pointless.
If MS or APPLE or IBM or SUN comes out
on top of GOOGLE, why you just switch
gears and optimise for whoever wins.
But at least MS helped create the market
by putting a browser on every desktop.
Remember when you had to go out and
download Netscape from Compuserve because
you couldn't click on a download link until
*after* you had downloaded Navigator?
Hopefully, you already had PKZIP on the
machine for some other reason.
Chicken and the Egg.
++++
The question isn't which search engine is best, but which will fare the best in a competitive environment. MS can gain tremendous ground competitively simply by being the most convenient, and overtime, it will be the only option new users will know. IMO, the burden will be on Google.
So back to the original question, "How will Longhorn Impact Google?".
If Longhorn is at least decent, Google will need to be innovative, stay ahead of the curve and avoid more episodes of Dom & Esmerelda, or it will become a fond memory.
If Longhorn is a repeat of MSN, then Google wont have to worry as long as it is innovative, stays ahead of the curve...
>If Longhorn is a repeat of MSN, then Google wont have to worry as long as it is innovative, stays ahead of the curve...
I don't believe Longhorn will be anything close to MSN or Win 95/98/NT/XP. I believe Longhorn will be something very different that integrates the web (WAN), LAN and local PC into one entity with no defined borders.
Control of search must be a target of MS, but control of the entire Internet has to be their real goal. Whether you run your favorite WP or Spreadsheet from your local drive or from a machine based on the otherside of the world should become irrelevant.
By controlling the OS they should be able to control the net, which is really just an extension, from there they should be able to highly influence every software product anyone chooses to use.
Ten years ago surfing the net didn't give many opportunities above a cool hobby, today it is a major economic force, in 5 years time I don't think the separation of local PC and the net will be apparent.....and if MS can capture this goal via their dominance of the OS, all the competition, search and software, are in serious trouble.
With the Microsoft OS lock, it has a guaranteed audience - something that no real search engine has had to date. The Microsoft OS is really the ultimate adware. The strange thing about the internet is not that it is an endless set of new battles but that it is an endless set of the same battles where only the opponents change. Microsoft seems to be adopting a strategy that is very similar to how it dealt with Netscape.
Regards...jmcc
