Forum Moderators: mack
"Speaking to a packed auditorium at Stanford University in Palo Alto, Calif., on May 12, Ballmer trumpeted the ripe opportunities around Microsoft's sprawling business and questioned the ability of Google to maintain its edge. Clearly alluding to Microsoft's key Internet search rival, Ballmer said: "The hottest company right now -- the one nobody thinks can do any wrong -- may just be a one-hit wonder."
-------
Personally I think G needs to diversify it's revenue source. Right now everything is going great, but if the economy starts to slow, the first thing companies do is cut advertising (and business travel). It happened a few years ago and it will happen again...leaving Google exposed.
quick question, other than Google search, do you use any other product of theirs:
- Gmail (most will say yes, but how extensively?)
- Froogle
- Google News (one of their great products)
- Alerts
- Catalogs (a big investment produt)
- Groups
- BLOGGER
- Maps
- Mobile
- Special searches
- adwords
- Picasa
I don't use any of the above (some I never even heard of] - though I'm sure I'm probably an exception ( at least among webmasters ).
Mac is at 5%
Apple has never had 5% - they were around 4% in the beginning, when they were giving away hardware to schools - recent analysis:
[macobserver.com...]
As far as MSFT being under fire and losing share: Yeah, they are. They'll change a few things, force to upgrade IE and they'll be back.
Most people don't like change, that's why they'll stick with IE, Windows etc., unless they really suck (using each person's judgment). Changing a bookmark and toolbar (google) is so much easier than switching to an alternate OS.
<Where would MSFT be then? If PC's came out OEM with Linux or other operating system?>
They do:
<edit>By Receptional: Sorry - you know I had to do take the link of! :)</edit>
[edited by: Receptional at 3:03 pm (utc) on May 19, 2005]
"I do think Ballmer is right here, Google is a great company, but lately it looks like they are getting a little loose on there core business the search and they DO have to get a OS system online or software CD, it a must because Microsoft new OS with build in search will rule this business, not many will type google and then make a search there."
=====
100% - Google is dropping the ball and has already gone corporate America... aka:kiss a**
Hollywood
The url that one uses for checking gmail account is gmail.google.com and not www.gmail.com. It is only the first time type ins, that would go to gmail.com. In Alexa, there is no way to check the rank for gmail.google.com independent of google.com
<Apple has never had 5% - they were around 4% in the beginning, when they were giving away hardware to schools>
My mistake. I would have thought they would have been a lot higher when they were giving hardware to schools.. that's before PCs really took off.
Google has had one innovative product, their search engine. It became popular because it was leaps above the competition. Right now, you could argue that they are pretty even with other search engines in terms of quality.
Longhorn will have search built into it. Right there they will nab a good percent of your novice surfers who type a search into the closest search bar.
Let's not forget that Microsoft also has the budget to severley damage Google in the advertising realm. They will take a loss for years to kill a company like Google. Don't be surprised if they go in and offer companies like AOL and Ask Jeeves to use their PPC products and provide them rates that Google couldn't fathom. They can go out and offer publishers ridiculous rates to steal them from Google.
This is how Microsoft works. They have hardcore, shrewd businessmen who've been in these battles before. The question is whether Google can handle the storm and come out on their feet.
<Longhorn will have search built into it. Right there they will nab a good percent of your novice surfers who type a search into the closest search bar.>
I'm not sure how much of an impact this will have. Those same novice users also open up IE and see msn.com with its search. I think that anyone that ignores this search and types google.com into the address bar will continue to do so in spite of a new version of Windows.
Given Microsoft's history of delivering OSes years after deadlines, Longhorn may not hit the shelves until 2007. (Interestingly I saw Microsoft registering windows07 in a cctld recently.) With the rise of Linux and the shift away from Microsoft in the public sector, Microsoft is finding its core markets to be shrinking. A recent survey of CIOs apparently revealed the idea of "good enough" software and equipment. Microsoft has always made money out of screwing the punters for upgrades. But if the software does the job, then there is no real incentive to upgrade. This is a big problem for Microsoft - after all, how many companies still use Office '97 rather than paying for the new Microsoft Office suite?
Microsoft's search play may well have been a Hail Mary shot rather than a carefully planned operation. (Look at the utterly amateurish way that the MSNbot hammered websites driving up hosting bills for webmasters.) Naturally there will be comparisons between Microsoft's search offering and the case of IE1.0 and IE2.0. Will MSFT's second search offering be better - probably. Will it be enough to beat Google and Yahoo? No. The web is Google's territory - for now.
Regards...jmcc
Ballmer said: "The hottest company right now -- the one nobody thinks can do any wrong -- may just be a one-hit wonder."
The sun must be baking Balmers shiny little head.
Calling them a "one hit wonder" is grossly over simplification
Inktomi was a one-hit wonder and got swallowed up by Yahoo.
I don't see that happening here.
They're a 2-hit wonder: Search and AdWords/AdSense
The only question that would be interesting is HOW MUCH of the AdWords revenue is generated just by Google direct searches and Google direct referrals to the AdSense content network sites opposed to search referrals from Yahoo, MSN and the others. My gut tells me that even if Google as a search engine took a hit tomorrow by the next best thing that Google the advertising company would continue on strongly as they undoubtedly have the strongest advertising network on the planet at this time.
The real problem in my mind becomes if Yahoo (YPN) or MSN manage to unseat Google's leadership position in the advertising arena, not search.
Google's 100% reliance on the web could well be their downfall
Just like Oracle's 100% reliance on Oracle database could be their downfall but it hasn't happened yet :)
The web is where it's at, lot's of traditional desktop/network applications migrated to the web, lot's of new business to farm here.
I'm not worried about reliance on the web at all.
Given Microsoft's history of crushing their competition...
Ignore them at your own peril. Having a superior product means nothing. Just ask Netscape, OS2, Apple and the list goes on.
yahoo: 30%
hotmail: 22%
aol: 18.5%
gmail: 9%
let's see how these guys are doing if we look at the most recent 250k signups (last 4 months or so):
yahoo: 30%
hotmail: 20.8
aol: 17.6%
gmail: 12%
==> gmail is slowly gaining marketshare from aol and hotmail while yahoo stays pretty much the same.
I would consider the users of this sample site very open in terms of adapting new technology, the % of firefox user agents is currently around 12.1%
Given Microsoft's history of crushing their competition...Yeah. But Google and Yahoo are more of a threat than an easily dominated one man operation.
Ignore them at your peril. Having a superior product means nothing. Just ask Netscape, OS2, Apple and the list goes on.Microsoft is a mature company that is trying to postpone its ultimate demise. The products of the companies you quoted as examples were, to a large extent, trying to get into Microsoft dominated markets. This time it is Microsoft that is trying to get into markets that are dominated by better and more efficient operations.
Regards...jmcc
I think you have to look at history, and how Microsoft has handled competition. They've simply destroyed it, many times with inferior products.
You mean, like when the MSN online service destroyed AOL? :-)
In other cases, the competition has destroyed itself. Remember how WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 were slow to embrace windows? Word for Windows and Excel left them in the dust, because native Windows word-processing and spreadsheet applications had compelling benefits for users.
As for the IE-over-Netscape example that people like to bring up, it's important to remember that IE was a free replacement for Netscape Navigator, which was a commercial knockoff of another free product (Mosaic). Navigator had no compelling advantages over IE (indeed, IE soon became the better browser), and Netscape's server products had no compelling advantages over other products that were in the marketplace. Unlike Google, Netscape was always more hype than substance, so its fadeout shouldn't have come as a suprise to anyone.
"Yeah. But Google and Yahoo are more of a threat than an easily dominated one man operation."
europeforvisitors,
AOL is not that well, is it? MSN didn't do it, but it didn't help AOL having Microsft pumping billions in MSN. The problems is that MSFT is great at copying and has no shame in doing it.
"one man operation" like Netscape, Apple, Borland, IBM, Lotus, Apple, Sun...I was thinking more of the company that Microsoft bought DOS off for about $50K. Though Apple really is kicking Microsoft with the iPod isn't it? IBM - well it still is a player in the key business market. Sun - it is still around isn't it?
Microsoft it adept at copying to such an extent that, I think, if someone had an original idea in Microsoft he'd die of embarrassment. :) Remember how those Microsoft marketing people presented their dodgy search engine as an "Algorithmic search engine". Microsoft is now in the marketing business rather than being a pure software company.
Regards...jmcc
Having a superior product means nothing. Just ask Netscape, OS2, Apple and the list goes on
Having the terms "superior product" and "apple" on the same line of text nearly sent soda hurling at my screen.
I've been using the "other" products besides Apple long before Windows was ever heard of, even had one of the 1st Macs when they started shipping. I'm here to tell you Microsoft didn't do anything to Apple except let them hang themselves on their own misguided judgement.
So far, except for the Web Accelerator fiasco, I haven't seen Google make the kinds of mistakes Apple made.
Like Amazon.com? Ebay? Yahoo? Let's turn this around, MS's reliance on the sick profits they are making from their near monopoly consumer os and office divisions, currently running at about 2 billion profit on 2.7 billion for both windows and the office divisions last quarter, give or take is what is funding the rest of the company.
MS's reliance on these two cash cows could well be their downfall too, this kind of profit level cannot be maintained without a lot of help from a pliant government.
Why is it that MS is given such treatment re web related things when they have such a dismal record when it comes to any web related projects? You know the ones, they are mostly cancelled now, and msn isp limps along. MSN search is pathetic, the only people I see who like it are the ones who's sites are doing well in it, I've never seen msn search referals lower.
IBM used to be in MS's position, nobody thought ibm could fail, then along came progress and IBM didn't [progress, that is], almost went out of business, they learned, and are now pushing Linux heavily.
It's the proprietary consumer software / os model whose days are numbered, that's what MS is worrying about.
That recruiting speech is necessary because MS is no longer attracting the best and brightest, although some will do it only for the money. This is what's been behind their latest posturings, their half baked 'opening' of some of their source code, they know open source is attracting the best programmers out there, and open source doesn't need to offer lots of options and high salaries to attract those programmers.
MS doesn't like the web, they don't understand the web, so anything they have to say about the web, including Gate's famous comment that the internet would never take off is pretty much worthless.
Google on the other hand does understand the web, they even like it, unlike MS, so if I'm going to look for a company to do well with the web I won't be looking at MS, I'll be looking at google. Will they create a defacto thin client portal type app? Maybe, maybe not, my guess it will be built piece by piece, and maybe it will even run on IE 7 if MS ever gets around to creating an updated browser that can support those types of features, which is against their best interest to do.
I'm surprised that nobody here has mentioned Google's long-standing Search Appliances [google.com]. The same link will give you some info about their Desktop Search for Enterprise, all of which have been around for a couple of years and are great products. (Look for an MS "search x-box" ... coming in 2025!)
Frankly, the lack of public awareness of these products can be traced to G's ham-handed publicity department and a PC media industry dominated and saturated by MS ad dollars (are you reading this, Ziff-Davis?) When MS feeds and clothes your children with their ad dollars, your unlikely to give a fair shake or even a few lines of copy to their top competitor(s). The next time you read a glowing review of MS products, check to see how many ads they are running in that magazine ... or website.
Like Amazon.com? Ebay? Yahoo?
Absolutely, yes. Good examples.
Which of those companies are currently diversifying their income streams?
Where do you see the "web" in 5 years time, in terms of how people use the internet, and how that use is changing?
Let's turn this around, MS's reliance on the sick profits
That's a whole different story, but MS is making "sick profits" based on diversity, not the web.
TJ
They're selling "WinXP Lite" (Starter Edition) in Maylasia and other pacific rim countries loaded with "OfficeXP Lite" for ... US$38. In the US, the only versions of these programs we could buy will cost us in the neighborhood of US$600.
If this was any other industry, MS would be charged with "dumping" (selling their product at way below actual cost of development or giving it away in order to gain market share).
That's what has happened/is happening with IE/Netscape WMP/Real and other MS "inventions" ... they bundle the apps into the OS, call them features and jack up the OS price in some markets, while the real inventors/innovators are stuck without a bundle and without the revenue from the other markets to subsidize the product.
And don't even get me started about why 3rd-party apps like WordPerfect aren't making much headway integrating with the MS OS while Office and such are flourishing. Just look at how much litigation it's taking to get the phone/cable companies to open up their lines for 3rd-party providers. Do you think MS will open up their architecture to the competition any time soon? Phaugh. It's a bloody miracle any 3rd-party apps are able to float on top of that poisoned pond at all.
That's what has happened/is happening with IE/Netscape WMP/Real and other MS "inventions" ... they bundle the apps into the OS, call them features and jack up the OS price in some markets
Actually, Windows is a bargain compared to the old days of DOS plus add-ins such as memory managers, file managers, text editors, and comm programs. And Windows XP is a bargain compared to the old days of Windows 3.x plus add-ins. (I remember paying $25 or $30 just for Trumpet WinSock so I could access the Web.)
People can complain all they want about the dominance of Microsoft Windows, but having all the essentials bundled in has been a boon for users--and without that bundling, computers and the Internet wouldn't be as ubiquitous as they are today.
they will create their own thin client chip and everything needed to start producing new type of PCs. they will have agreements with one of the chipmakers, somehow i smell AMD. they will licence open office which will run on their servers, browser (they already hired programmers) and their IM (they already have that in Picasa or somewhere). Now they just add user friendly client to Gmail + link to backup drive to Gmail and WOW - we have it all, don't you agree?
i know Billy is smart and they want to smash them but it is too quiet and Google guys are preparing something that will be bigger than we can imagine.
if i am wrong and they will do less, they will die...
and i right?
they will create their own thin client chip
I have to point out, that having a Search Engine is like creating a "Large" system, whereas an OS is a "Complex" system. A BIG difference.
Is there even a remote proof that Google$ has a capacity to jump such a distance? Did they even attempt to build something? Yeah, sure, they run a bunch of distributed boxes. Big deal. Yeah, sure, they use a high-school level math to calculate a bunch of parameters for each web page, and do it pretty efficiently. So WHAT? How many ends do they need to meet to come up with an OS? and then version 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 untill it is stable in anyway?....
I am frankly tired of this "Google-OS" talk, untill I see something remotely working and in beta, I won't believe a single word.
I will eventuallly seek other sources of revenue unless things change. Fair is fair!
Google couldn't afford that.
I will eventuallly seek other sources of revenue
Exactly! Today, I am making so little money from Google$ traffic I won't be able to live on it in a 3rd world country (unlike 3 months ago). If Microsoft$ comes up with an AdSense alternative tomorrow - I am there, not a single Google ad on my sites.
I certainly hope Balmer has something in his pocket besides MS marketing machine, because this Google$ thingy date is up, and it aint paying up.
