Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: bill
"We need to do some work to fundamentally reinvent the search business model," Ballmer said during a dinner at the Churchill Club in Silicon Valley. "You don't brute-force your way into a market. You only make great strides when you redefine the category for the user."
And that will take some time. "It's a five-year task," Ballmer said. But Microsoft is ready to spend a lot of money trying. The company told its shareholders recently that it was prepared to lose "5 to 10 percent of total operating income for several years" to improve its position in search, Ballmer said.
The CEO offered little in the way of new insights during the evening, except that Microsoft will discuss "Project Red Dog," its secretive cloud computing initiative, at the Microsoft Professional Developer Conference next month.
Cuil couldn't do it.
None of the others have.
So now it is a battle for #2, #3, #4 and #5.
Microsoft, you might want to stay away from the thought of overtaking Google in search, that will not happen with just your efforts. It would need to be you, Yahoo!, Ask.com, and some of the other 2nd tier quality engines. I think you should go after Cuil and the others and bring them all under the MS brand. Then you can figure out what to do with them later. That appears to be the current MO for many. Buy it, get it off the market and then see if it can be used. If not, trash it never to be seen again.
You can spend all the money you want on finding an Answer to Google. Why not earmark some of that money and grease a few palms, you might get your answers in a shorter time frame and at a fraction of the cost. Hey, it's campaign season, when in Rome, do as the Romans do! :)
Live is pretty much a ghost town... Vista flopped... The new Word/Excel/etc were not well received... Most companies I work with decided not to upgrade to any of these products.
I agree with some of the others. We have heard this before... and it will be money well wasted for Microsoft.
They have become too corporate to "re-invent" anything these days... unfortunately.
I'm pulling for an XP version 2.0! ;-)
The solution isn't a larger collection of luzers in black suits, and therefore it really isn't something that can COME from a larger company. After all, if YOU were a genius with a new idea for a search engine, would you be caught dead going to work for MICROSOFT? Or would you be getting some of your genius friends together like Sergei Brin did ... or, for that matter, like Bill Gates did?
As Microsoft started crawling to build up their seach index in the summer of 2003, haven't they had five years already?
5 years ago Google had 4 bln pages indexed and things were a lot easier than now - the main problem with catching up Google is that they don't stand still and you have to run very hard to even maintain the gap, yet alone close it.
Would you be caught dead going to work for MICROSOFT?
I really wouldn't be going to work for anyone anymore. But, I wouldn't mind being a part of the Microsoft growth moving forward. I think its time we share our love a little bit because we've been loving the wrong one for too long! ;)
Is Microsoft Search really that bad? I mean, if you use the 2nd tier search label, are they really any worse than Yahoo! or Ask.com? I don't think so. In fact, I think the three of them do pretty good overall. There is always room for improvement.
Google have lots of improvements to make in its own search properties. I don't see the same high quality results I used to see. The results are becoming blurred and they are starting to become Google dominated. Organic results are slowly taking the back seat to other things going on in The Gorg.
If MS are going to get "really serious" about this, I'm ready to provide some support. I have an allegiance to Microsoft as that is what I grew up with. And, there are a whole bunch of other people out there that grew up with it too. Ya'll talk about MS around here like they are a company that has moved past its prime. While I agree they have failed at search from a Google competition perspective, they continue to excel in many other areas. MS is just not search, they have a totally different business model than Google, or they used to anyway. And yes, I understand that G is the total dominating force in all things Internet. I'm trying to come to grips with that... ;)
Most people don't even know there is a search engine battle going on. As long as there is the internet and people are typing searches on computers Google will be number one. MS and Yahoo are not even close. Anybody who runs a major site knows that google is at least 70% of all search traffic. I have seen polls on here where it is in the 80% area.
I run a website that was mentioned on a CNN talk show the other night. The website has a really long hard to type domain name so there was a lot of traffic from searches. 73% of searches came from Google. I have seen log files from 100's of different companies and it is always like this. I would even bet that at MS most of their traffic that comes from search engines is from Google.
Faced with that, and more, you'd want to chase after the company which is doing well in this changed climate too. I can't see Microsoft being around in twenty years if they don't crack this.
software development is only dirt cheap as long as you not require that software does actually work. Developing software that works properly is not cheap.
Browser-hosted software is also on par to Microsoft's products of 90s as far as usability and stability are concerned (that is, problematic to use, sometimes to the point I would fallback to pen and paper).
Star/Open Office is under development for what? ten years? and still not able to compete with MS office even in basic usability.
MS SQL is still pretty useful product combined with Access, Server and integration with desktop software. The death of MS will be when they lose this market to MySql and Java in desktop front.
MS has already lost to LAMP, so it wont be long. So either MS Search becomes a player or Balmer sinks the ship in near future.