Page 1 of 1

The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Thu May 05, 2005 8:40 pm
by HvyMtlClickWitch
GATES VS. GOOGLE
Search and Destroy
Bill Gates is on a mission to build a Google killer. What got him so riled? The darling of search is moving into software—and that's Microsoft's turf.

By Fred Vogelstein

Microsoft was already months into a massive project aimed at taking down Google when the truth began to dawn on Bill Gates. It was December 2003. He was poking around on the Google company website and came across a help-wanted page with descriptions of all the open jobs at Google. Why, he wondered, were the qualifications for so many of them identical to Microsoft job specs? Google was a web search business, yet here on the screen were postings for engineers with backgrounds that had nothing to do with search and everything to do with Microsoft's core business—people trained in things like operating-system design, compiler optimization, and distributed-systems architecture. Gates wondered whether Microsoft might be facing much more than a war in search. An e-mail he sent to a handful of execs that day said, in effect, "We have to watch these guys. It looks like they are building something to compete with us."

He sure got that right. Today Google isn't just a hugely successful search engine; it has morphed into a software company and is emerging as a major threat to Microsoft's dominance. You can use Google software with any Internet browser to search the web and your desktop for just about anything; send and store up to two gigabytes of e-mail via Gmail (Hotmail, Microsoft's rival free e-mail service, offers 250 megabytes, a fraction of that); manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there; and, through Google's Blogger, create, post online, and print formatted documents—all without applications from Microsoft.

While Google was launching those products—all of them free—Microsoft has been trying in vain to catch up in search. It has spent about $150 million on its search project, code-named Underdog. But Google and lately Yahoo keep leaping ahead with innovations like local-area search complete with maps and satellite photos, ways to search inside a video file, and search designed for cellphones.

Simply put, Google has become a new kind of foe, and that's what has Gates so riled. It has combined software innovation with a brand-new Internet business model—and it wounds Gates' pride that he didn't get there first. Since Google doesn't sell its search products (it makes its money from the ads that accompany its search results), Microsoft can't muscle it out of the marketplace the way it did rivals like Netscape. But what really bothers Gates is that Google is gaining the ability to attack the very core of Microsoft's franchise—control over what users do first when they turn on their computers.

Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page and CEO Eric Schmidt all say that any talk about supplanting Microsoft is ludicrous. But the idea that Google will one day marginalize Microsoft's operating system and bypass Windows applications is already starting to become reality. The most paranoid people at Microsoft even think "Google Office" is inevitable. Google is taking over operating system features too, like desktop search. There are fewer uses for the start button in Windows now that Google's desktop search can locate any program, document, photo, music file, or e-mail on a computer.

All of which helps explain why inside Microsoft, the battle with Google has become far more than a fight over search: It's a certifiable grudge match for king of the hill in high tech. "Google is interesting not just because of web search, but because they're going to try to take that and use it to get into other parts of software," says Gates as he leans forward in his chair, his body coiled as if he could spring to his feet at any second. "If all there was was search, you really shouldn't care so much about it. It's because they are a software company," he says. "In that sense," he adds later, "they are more like us than anyone else we have ever competed with."

Though CEO Steve Ballmer has been boss for five years, Gates, who is chairman and chief software architect, is leading the charge against Google. Forced to watch Google's stock soar the way Microsoft's used to, and Brin and Page enjoy their roles as tech's new rock stars, Gates brings to the fight a ferocity that nobody has seen since the Netscape war a decade ago. Their popularity gets under his skin. "There's companies that are just so cool that you just can't even deal with it," he says sarcastically, suggesting that Google is nothing more than the latest fad, adding, "At least they know to wear black."

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technolo ... -1,00.html

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Fri May 06, 2005 9:35 pm
by Equinox
Hopefully, Microsoft's fall is at sight.

I'm happy with what Google is doing, Gmail will be great, I just hope that they don't become greedy because of $.

I am going out of Microsoft this year, I'm going into Mac, I can't stand this OS no more.

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Fri May 06, 2005 11:35 pm
by Neorave
"Monopoly is just a game, senator, I'm trying to control the fucking world!!!" - Robin Williams mocking Bill Gates

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 10:24 pm
by fifthtea_sausage
Hopefully, Microsoft's fall is at sight
I can't see why an American would actually want its own company/major part of its economy to 'fall'.

I mean, its a company which makes software which millions of people buy.
Surely if its that bad people would not buy it!
I mean they make great products - this is proven by how many people buy them.

I don't see why everyone hates MS.

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 11:37 pm
by HvyMtlClickWitch
fifthtea_sausage wrote:I don't see why everyone hates MS.
I can't answer for everyone else, but A) Windows is a RAM-sucker, B) It seems to be doing things in the background when i haven't told it to do anything, which unnerves me, and 3) it takes up too much damn space on my hard drive that i could be using for metal.

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 12:16 am
by Twilightsymphony
fifthtea_sausage wrote: Surely if its that bad people would not buy it!
I mean they make great products - this is proven by how many people buy them.

I don't see why everyone hates MS.
Well not necessarily. Microsoft had quite a very good product placement in the past although there were always more innovative and also better products available... and the product politics of MS arent truly the greatest around.

And to say their products are great because many buy them.. well, i dunno.. there are also many people who buy pop music;)

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 2:45 am
by NeonVomit
Microsoft are awful. I hate windows, and unfortunately I don't know enough about computers to change, but my friend will install linux for me and I'll be a happy bunny after that.

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:03 am
by Equinox
fifthtea_sausage wrote:
Hopefully, Microsoft's fall is at sight
I can't see why an American would actually want its own company/major part of its economy to 'fall'.
Actually, I don't only want to see a major company, I wanna see the whole country fall, I just hope to be alive to see that, why? let's just say that I love history, if u know what I mean.

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 6:11 am
by fifthtea_sausage
I can't answer for everyone else, but A) Windows is a RAM-sucker, B) It seems to be doing things in the background when i haven't told it to do anything, which unnerves me, and 3) it takes up too much damn space on my hard drive that i could be using for metal.
Surely because the program is a 'ram sucker' is no reason to hate the company. I mean you can't hate a company just for making a product which doesn't suit you. And I don't see what you mean by all this stuff running in the background. Do control+alt+delete, go to processes, then go to some website/search info on them on google to figure out what they are for.
Microsoft are awful. I hate windows, and unfortunately I don't know enough about computers to change, but my friend will install linux for me and I'll be a happy bunny after that.
There are a lot of ways your computer might be malfunctioning to ruin your experience. It is just not fair to blame all your problems on Microsoft just because its the latest 'fad!'
Actually, I don't only want to see a major company, I wanna see the whole country fall, I just hope to be alive to see that, why? let's just say that I love history, if u know what I mean.
Shame on you :(

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 7:17 am
by Stealth
@fifthtea_sausage: You said "There are a lot of ways your computer might be malfunctioning to ruin your experience. It is just not fair to blame all your problems on Microsoft just because its the latest 'fad!'"

That's the whole point!!! If Windows were a good operating system, the computer SHOULDN'T malfunction at all!! And yes, you might say that in this case, HvyMtlClickWitch's computer is fucked up because she played an mp3 by Justin Timberlake, which corrupted her system's heavy-metallic structure, or whatever... BUT, honestly, how many people have problems with Windows?? HvyMtlClickWitch's case is not an isolated one... I'm sure 98% of people have trouble with it, including myself, not to mention the fact that Windows is a VERY expensive program. Once in a while, my computer crashes even when I'm not using it and I don't know why, and it drives me fucking crazy. And then they try to sell you programs in order to try to fix whatever problems you might have... Well, these programs cost around $70 and they don't solve any problems, so if you have a problem, you pay $70 for, let's say, Norton SystemWorks, and in the end your computer starts having more and more problems (this is why people shouldn't feel too guilty if they donwload Norton SystemWorks or similar programs; if you buy it, you are giving away money and you get no benefits).
So, there are objective reasons for not liking Microsoft and Gates. And since they have a monopoly, they control the market. For all I know, they might have 4 new operating systems waiting to be released, only they would release them gradually so that people would constantly have to upgrade to the latest one, and this would increase the company's profits.

To conclude, I'd like to quote an anonymous 18th century French philosopher, who once wisely said: "Fuck Microsoft".

Re: The Lesser Of Two Evils?

Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 11:23 am
by Jaakko
Ehhehe, I used to hate Windows until I built myself a hardware combination that works. Windows hasn't crashed since, only badly written programs like many games and device drivers can crash this fucker. There's no way you can build an OS that prevent all crashes, besides, some more things happening that you don't even know about in the electric network, voltage peaks and shortages which the hardware does its best to hide but sometimes a cause of crash might simply be outside of the computer. Ever wonder why office computers have their own power network, fuses and electric wirings instead of using the one connected to ovens, hairdryers, vacuum cleaners and washing machines?