MSN Planning to Take on Google? 677
asyn42 writes "CNet is reporting what should be no surprise, Microsoft appears to be readying itself to take on Google for a position as the top search engine. The long range impact on the relationship between MSN and Yahoo/Inktomi is likely at risk."
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Google is my god (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, right after Google releases their code.
Re:Google is my god (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google is my god (Score:3, Funny)
Basically, moderators follow the same "fact checking" standards as the editors do, which is of course none at all. As I personally have had all my mods meta
Re:Mod Points - You may already be a winner!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google is my god (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google is my god (Score:5, Funny)
you must use netscape
In related news... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
Coincidence? I think not...
The MS "PageRank" technology in action... (Score:3, Funny)
"Browser" returns the following link:
Internet Explorer [microsoft.com] Website.
Search:: [mozilla ]
"Mozilla" returns the following link:
Internet Explorer [microsoft.com] Website.
Search:: [OpenOffice.Org ]
"OpenOffice.org" returns the following link:
Microsoft Office [microsoft.com] Website.
Search:: [quicktime]
"quicktime" returns the following link:
Microsoft Windows [microsoft.com] Website.
Search:: [Apple computer]
"Apple computer" returns the following link:
Microsoft Windows [microsoft.com] Website.
Etc. You get the idea...
W
Why MSN will fail: (Score:5, Insightful)
"linux" search on MSN [msn.com]; top site goes to Amazon, next two go to Microsoft.
"linux" search on Google [google.com]; no microsoft links on the front page.
Bottomline: MSFT is not a credible source of information. I don't think that I'm the only one that thinks so.
Re:Why MSN will fail: (Score:5, Interesting)
3. Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP
Learn about the Microsoft alternatives and how to move to them from open source products.
www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/migration
If that's not biased, I don't know what is...
Re:Why MSN will fail: (Score:5, Funny)
Now, of course, if they hadn't been hosting it on IIS/ASP.NET...
Re:In related news... (Score:4, Funny)
tsk tsk tsk... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:tsk tsk tsk... (Score:4, Interesting)
Why bother suing those microsoftsucks.org sites when they simply (mysteriously) don't show up on search engines?
Re:tsk tsk tsk... (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft has clearly lost the Internet battle.
Microsoft's goal was to create a network in which they control all the protocols, all the formats and everybody has to pay a fee to put a site online.
But now we have a network with TCP/IP (Unix), http (neutral), html (neutral) where everybody can put up websites.
The whole browser-battle was just damage-control by Microsoft.
And in the next 5 years, with millions of online-capable PS3, millions of online-capable cellphones, millions of new Linux desktops (It's happening slowly, but it happens, just look at Munich and how 5 other cities around it also are looking into switching to Linux just a month after Munich's decision) and millions of Firebird or Opera users on Windows, IE's domination days are counted.
Sure, they will probably hold the majority of browsers for quite a while, but if only 30% are non-IE, it's a too large chunk to ignore and IE domination is over.
No worries (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No worries (Score:5, Funny)
... for the humor-impared - it's a joke.
... for everyone else - it's not a joke!
Re:No worries (Score:4, Interesting)
No, it's funny because it points out that most Linux-zealot's attitudes about Windows are still stuck in the pre-Windows 2000 days when Microsoft made shit-poor OSes. They don't anymore. The longer it take you to notice this, the dumber you look.
Re:No worries (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows has it's selling points, Linux has it's selling points, here's where I draw the lines:
Server: Linux is fantastic as a server OS, it beats any MS server OS 100% of the time. This due to the customizability of the kernel, hardware specific optimizations, and the fact the it runs headless.
Home Use Desktop: Microsoft OSes are fantastic as home desktop OSes, they beat Linux in 95% of home use situations. The only exceptions in favor of Linux is non-game, surf and email purposes and people who code as a hobby.
Corporate Desktop: Linux wins due to security and the homogeneous software environment in corporations. This is not a 100% of the time thing but perhaps in the 75% range due specifically to legacy software availability.
So what's my stance? Linux is great, Windows is great, but at different things. If you want a highly configurable OS that you can tweak and tune to extract all your hardware has to offer, use Linux and don't expect it to be easy. If you want to play Splinter Cell and don't know the difference between a sea shell and a c shell, then don't even look at Linux 'cause you ARE going to get stumped.
The other big problem is one of perception. The vast majority of Windows users (not all) are under the impression that they are technically savy because they know where to click their mouses. Throw them into a DOS shell and they choke. Put them in from of a Linux console and you're likely to hear "What is this???". Conversely, the vast majority of Linux users (not all) are quite techically savy and as such they tend to be elitist (and some are just jerks). This makes for an oil-and-water mix that will ALWAYS exist.
To close back on the post, Windows OSes don't necessarily suck, but low skill Windows-only admins (90%+), give the software the appearance of sucking. It's all in the know-how, and moving a mouse around some neon colored buttons ain't know-how. I also think the majority of Windows-zealots (and there are a buncha them) are specifically from this clueless group of folks.
Re:No worries (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, I think they can easily replicate that.
Google isn't even doing advanced clustering, it is just fancy load balancing on top of a ton of small cheap servers. You could easily do the same thing with a bunch of Windows 2000, or Windows 2003 .Net servers.
The one thing Google DOES get from running Linux is big cost savings. For Microsoft, that's a non-issue though since it's their own software.
Good Luck! (Score:5, Interesting)
That being said, if anyone can compete, it's Microsoft. They have deep pockets, but they don't always win (see UltimateTV, e.g.).
Re:Good Luck! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good Luck! (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean things will stay the same.
We bitched about IE being a core part of the OS, now we get to bitch that MSN is. Antitrust lawsuits, here we come again!
Have you looked at the search options in IE? (Score:4, Interesting)
Google Toolbar. (Score:5, Informative)
Found it (Score:5, Informative)
The registry key that has this (on 2k) is: \HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Search . There are 2 keys here - Customize Search & Search Assistant. Both of them point to http://ie.search.msn.com/...
Now, I can't find the address you're supposed to change the references "to" (as in, at google), but that's where to change it "from".
Re:Found it (Score:5, Informative)
REGEDIT4
l orer\Main]
l orer\SearchURL]
p lorer\Search]
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\InternetExp
"Use Search Asst"="no"
"Search Page"="http://www.google.com"
"Search Bar"="http://www.google.com/ie"
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\InternetExp
""="http://www.google.com/keyword/%s"
"provider"="gogl"
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\InternetEx
"SearchAssistant"="http://www.google.com/ie"
Re:Good Luck! (Score:4, Insightful)
--Pat
Re:Good Luck! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Good Luck! (more MSN searching history) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Good Luck! (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm afraid that the fact that Google is associated with searching at the moment is not a very strong reason for it to remain. I remember when I would talk to people about the World Wide Web and they would say something like, "oh, you mean Netscape? I've got that on my computer!"
I hate to say it but microsoft are in an extremely strong position to crush Google. Just come up with something that is nearly as good and then integrate it completely into Internet Explorer and the OS. It will be another example of them leveraging their monopoly power, but since they've found they can get away with it, what's to stop them?
Here is what will stop them... (Score:4, Insightful)
Here is what will stop them - Google can and does keep up with the times, updating their engine. Even if MS had the competing technology today, they would have to get it integrated into the OS/Browser. It won't happen with the OS, people don't upgrade that often, and it takes MS a long time to come out with a new version. IE may be a better candidate, but everyone doesn't upgrade their browser very often. (mass majority)
How they would be able to compete is to change what is already integrated, like if they updated MSN. (which is probably what they are doing). So further integration into the OS won't help them, it will become outdated very quickly.
And if they try to take on Google in the centrally located search engine, they can't do it. MS cannot innovate as fast as Google, period.
That being said, Google won't last forever. I remember several other "kings" of the search engine - Yahoo, AltaVisa, NorthernLight, etc etc. Google has held on for a long time though, because they innovate. I think the only was MS could beat them would be to buy them. That is their MO anyway.
Re:Here is what will stop them... (Score:4, Insightful)
What "integration" are you talking about? Do you mean that text input field that Google hasn't changed since it first appeared on the web? That's the only user interface that has to be integrated into OS. Period. Everything else can be done on MSN's network.
MS cannot innovate as fast as Google, period.
They don't have to. MS has always survived by the following motto: "Make it good enough, undercut prices, beat competitors to the market or try to make it a default choice." Guess what, it worked.
Re:Good Luck! (Score:3, Insightful)
Certainly helps, but there have been other "ubiquitous" brands that have significantly lost marketshare if not gone under. Frisbee doesn't make all the world's flying disks. People use Curad, too, instead of Band-Aid. People use Puffs probably more than Kleenex. Pepsi has marketshare, despite Coke being generic for "soft-drink" in some areas. I don't know what Xerox's marketshare is, but the
Re:You haven't been reading enough about XBox 2 th (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You haven't been reading enough about XBox 2 th (Score:3, Funny)
Clippy: You seem to be getting your ass fragged. What would you like to do?
How about.. (Score:5, Funny)
Called MSNBot, the software scours Web sites and collects hyperlinks and documents. The software is part of MSN's effort to challenge Google by revitalizing MSN Search with its own algorithmic search technology.
You'll never beat the mind-share that Google has. No-one is gonna use MSNbot as a verb, like "I just googled for planetside tips" or create sites like googlism [googlism.com]. Msnbotism? Hah!
Re:How about.. (Score:5, Funny)
You're talking with a friend about some obscure topic, and to find out the answer, your friend says, "I'll google it." He fires up IE and heads to the MSNbot web page, at which point you say, "Dude, I thought you said you were going to google it."
Your friend thinks for a second, goes up to the address bar, and fixes the problem.
Re:How about.. (Score:5, Insightful)
This should be modded as insightful, not funny.
I am quite terrified, cause I am sure this will happen at some point.
Re:How about.. (Score:3, Funny)
Haha! (Score:4, Insightful)
You can't make Windows somehow incompatible with Google to force Windows users to use Microsoft's search engine. Google will find a way around it.
Re:Haha! (Score:3, Funny)
How easy would that be to include in their next IE security patch? =P
Wonderful (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft vs. Google (Score:5, Insightful)
What does Microsoft think it has going to counter that sort of incredible power?
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Copy it. Integrate it into IE and the OS. Case closed.
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:3, Insightful)
One thing I suppose they could do is add some kind of totally open API for searches - google has a SOAP API but you're restricted on the number of searches you can do per day. Suppose MS offer the same thing, but with no restrictions, they could undercut google and attract web developers. Kind of like what they did to netscape by making IE available to all users for free.
At the end of th
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny how things change.
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:5, Funny)
Pretty Pictures.
Just make a huge paperclip run and get you your search result, and bam. Instant hit.
Windows? Internet Explorer? Office? (Score:5, Interesting)
Just playing devil's advocate (you did ask) but presuming they can get search accuracy within spitting distance of Google, their big advantage is Windows and Internet Explorer. (Yes I know, illegal bundling, monopoly, yadda, yadda... Who here thinks MS won't tie something into Windows if they can?) They could tie all sorts of interesting search functions into Windows and Office. Why fire up the web browser if you can search without it?
I agree that it's unlikely MS will supplant Google but never underestimate a monopoly with $40+billion in the bank. Most people get to Google through Microsoft software. That's a perfect opportunity for MS to put itself in the middle. Not easy but definitely possible.
Re:Windows? Internet Explorer? Office? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Microsoft vs. Google (Score:5, Funny)
Obligitory Simpson's quote:
Bill Gates: Your Internet ad was brought to my attention, but I can't figure out what, if anything, Compuglobalhypermeganet does, so rather than risk competing with you, I've decided simply to buy you out.
Homer: I reluctantly accept your proposal!
Bill Gates: Well everyone always does. Buy 'em out, boys!
[Gates' lackeys trash the room.]
Homer: Hey, what the hell's going on!
Bill Gates: Oh, I didn't get rich by writing a lot of checks! [insane laughter]
What did you expect? (Score:5, Funny)
too much money (Score:3, Interesting)
Google is good and popular technology, very unlikely they can improve on it, yet they will throw millions at it just *because* it's a 'monopoly'. Very much like the XBox being the dead-end answer to the PS2.
Interesting (Score:3, Funny)
not a chance, unless... (Score:5, Insightful)
(a) are as fast as google (yea, right)
(b) are as clean as google -- no graphic ads, only small text ads (again, yea right)
(c) Take the same strong anti-censorship stands that Google has taken (big yea right here)
Accurate results (Score:4, Informative)
In Other News... (Score:3, Funny)
âoeI think we are ready for this,â said Bill Gates, who plans on renaming himself âoeThe Gatesâ. âoeGod has had his time running the universe, now itâ(TM)s my, err, our turn.â
Microsoft would not comment on future plans if they do indeed beat God out as ruler of the heavens, but did say they plan on charging a license fee for living.
God was unavailable for comment, but was heard laughing very loudly.
Film at eleven.
So, I'm thinking . . . (Score:4, Funny)
Disallow:
Don't visit msnbot.com, however (Score:5, Interesting)
Apparently msnbot.com has been owned by Go Daddy Software since April of 2002, according to the WHOIS entry [internic.net]. Maybe they knew something we didn't?
I'm sure when MS sues Go Daddy Software over this, it will show up here on /.
Re:Don't visit msnbot.com, however (Score:3, Insightful)
so you often need to whois the registras servers to get the real owners details.
so thesedays to identify the owner you need to use netsol first then query the server that that returns (in this case whois.godaddy.com)
$ whois msnbot.com -h whois.godaddy.com
and that returns..........
Registrant:
None
400 N University Ave.
Apt. 505
Little Rock, Arkan
Re:Don't visit msnbot.com, however (Score:5, Funny)
After switching to Mozilla, the only pop-ups I get when visiting a porn site are in my pants.
http://www.mozilla.org -> Download version1.4b -> Install -> Edit -> Preferences -> Privacy and Security -> Poppup Windows -> Block Unrequested Popup Windows
no big surprise (Score:4, Insightful)
This quote from the article raised a few red flags in my mind though:
Seriously, does anyone else see future security holes in this? Because I sure as hell do. Think of a misconfigured Longhorn box, open to the net, letting ANYONE browse through their entire computer. Think those Quicken docs are safe? How about your stored emails? Not that you can't already find this stuff on KaZaa et. al, but I see a more widespread problem here.
I once had a friend.... (Score:5, Interesting)
So my friend said "All right - let's have a test. I'm going to have Google look for this search string that deals with Microsoft technical information - and I'll have the Microsoft technical page do the same thing. And we'll see who has the most accurate and fastest results."
"But - but that's not a fair contest!" the Microsoft rep told him.
"No," my friend said, "It's not, because Google just returned the results for its entire current storage of the Internet, and the Micorosft Technet search engine is...still looking."
Should Google be worried? Naturally - always be paranoid about competition. The best thing it can do is keep going to businesses and say "What do you need to look up?" and figure out how to make their system work for them. "You want to search emails super fast? You have tons of documents you need to search through?"
To be honest, Microsoft has not succeeded very well outside the operating systems - look at handhelds, cable access - MSNBC is doing all right, but I attribute that to the NBC rather than the MS part of it.
Google has a lot of brand name, it has proven, cheap, realiable technology that is getting better. As long as they keep that edge, keep pushing the envelope, keep talking to businesses/consumers and find out what they want and deliver on it, MS will be left with YAMSP (Yet Another Money Sucking Project).
Of course, I could be wrong. But based on my Safari and Mozilla browser searching Google and my non-Geek wife actually using the words "I'll just Google that later", I'm not too worried.
Re:I once had a friend.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft Technet is not a revenue generator. Google is a revenue generator.
MSN search is/will be a revenue generator. Therefore they will actually spend money and effort on it.
Google API (Score:5, Informative)
I bet that MS would not offer that, or maybe a
Google is more than just a search engine.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:MSN bots have been gathering data... (Score:4, Interesting)
On my server, I had this experimental php script that just prints new lines in a loop forever.
Well, a brilliant bot from MS address space (it didn't identyfy itself as anything else than IE) didn't read the robots.txt (which denies everything) and found its way to the script. When I later started wondering what was jamming my ADSL, I realized that the bot had hammered the script a bit over hundred times, each time timing out after downloading about ten megs...
Mindless MS Bashing (Score:5, Funny)
MS Coder: Boss, we've got a problem.
MS Boss: What is it?
MS Coder: It turns out you can't trust the "keywords" meta-tag.
MS Boss: What?!?
MS Coder: Seriously. Some unscrupulous people abuse it.
MS Boss: Crap. Now what?
MS Coder: Well, it seems we're going to have to come up with a smarter algorithm than "index by keyword metatag".
MS Boss: But Google didn't have to write any fancy software.
MS Coder: Actually, we're now operating on the theory that Google does in fact have some fairly advanced software.
MS Boss: Advanced?!? You mean like technically advanced?
MS Coder: Yeah, it looks that way.
MS Boss: But we don't write our own technically advanced software - we wrap mediocre implementations of Unix technology in Macintosh user friendliness.
MS Coder: I know - it's a bit of a problem.
MS Boss: Pity we can't "partner" with them.
MS Coder: Yeah, like Stac, Java, and that smartphone company.
Google will only die if... (Score:4, Interesting)
That's the only reason that I use it. If MS can create a better search engine then Google, that finds better pages with less thinking (less words and tweaking of searches).
The only problem I have with a search engine is when I go to it and have to try like 10 searches to get what I want, when I can goto Google and get it in 2.
However, they had better start from scratch because all their previous search engines are really bad. The MSDN one being the worst. Maybe there is a way to have it return better results, but I haven't found it. I want it to be easier to narrow down my choices for APIs. I mean why is a MSCE API ranked higher then a Win32 api call on their results pages? Are there really more users of the WinCE api?
The only time I seem to use MSN search... (Score:3, Insightful)
Then it invariably brings up an MSN search page with, surprise!, my url right at the top. Hell, using that method they could become the leaders in much the same way that the MSN homepage is one of the most visited one on the internet (because so many users don't bother to change the default one loaded every time you open a new browser window).
Turn it off... (Score:5, Informative)
or change the default [pcmag.com] to something other than Microsuck.
[sarcasm]
It's actually quite simple: [/sarcasm]
Microsoft's proposed take-over plan... (Score:5, Funny)
2. Park large EMP device outside of Google headquarters.
3. Detonate large EMP device.
4. Profit!
or something along those lines...I can't think of any other way they'll get ahead of google...
(also notice, that the usual missing step 3 is included in this exercise for your viewing pleasure)
My god (Score:5, Interesting)
Now they're trying to integrate their search engine into the OS? Well if they do MSN's search service will eventually rise to #1 regardless of how poor the quality of it is (It's working for IE). Because most people will just use Windows' search function, and a smaller portion will be aware of that as
A quick google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A quick google (Score:4, Funny)
It also would've shown that you can make a pretty decently-sized sandwich in the time it takes to generate results.
MSN v. Google (Score:4, Interesting)
The other thing to note is that MSN does not have an "I'm Feeling Lucky" button, but it does have an annoyingly fugly butterfly. I think the last two items will be the determining factor in the Search Wars.
If MSDN's search is any indication... (Score:4, Informative)
Half the time, I get JScript 'Out of Memory' errors or NO results from my searches...
Long live Google!
Controlling information is step #1 (Score:5, Interesting)
There is competition, right now, but that is no guarantee of competition in the future.
In other markets and industries, people have clearly stated they don't want one company controlling their whole life. Why is it so damn difficult to do the same thing with computers and software???
Not Such a Bad Thing (Score:5, Interesting)
In any case, if my sister is an example of the standard non-geek masses, getting people to switch from using MSN to Google is difficult at best. If MSN can become more handy and more useful than it currently is, where's the harm in that? It might give Google some competition, which is always good, and increase the productivity of searching the Internet for "the unwashed masses."
Re:Not Such a Bad Thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Install it and watch her make the switch in a few days.
bottom line (Score:5, Interesting)
MS will never be able to compete with this. I would be very surprised if their main page will weigh in under 75Kb. It will be 90% fluff. And there will be ads all over it!
Google wins.
.
never (Score:3, Insightful)
Therefore, Microsoft's corporate ethic will ALWAYS prevent a Microsoft Search Engine from producing reliable (ie. uncommercially biased) results.
Google's refusal to bias it's rankings based on ad revenue is it's strenght, and the very reason it become so popular, it decimated all competition. No matter how good your technology may be - if you poison your results with commercial bias, there will be roughly ZERO demand for that search service. Even if Microsoft leverages their monopoly to try to cram it down people's throats, it will still fail. Nobody wants another spam factory disguised as a search engine.
my sources say (Score:5, Interesting)
Then there's the Google motto of "don't be evil" to contend with. Part of Google's success, I believe, is due to not being evil, and more than that, to being good. That covers things like clearly marking ads, keeping their home page simple (I wouldn't use it as my browser home page if it wasn't) and not accepting payments for rank improvement.
There are a lot of very smart people at Google and my sources say the management is very shrewd and realistic. I'll bet they weather this storm. The drubbing of Netscape was, I think, an easier thing to do. Google already gives away their service for free, and they've got immense mindshare. Netscape had good name recognition at the time, but back then there was a flood of new users that didn't know anything about the net. That was also at a time when there wasn't so much anti-Microsoft sentiment out there (yes, even the general public has had a taste of it due to the court cases).
Wow, I just about convinced myself to submit my resume!
Doesn't matter if Google is better (Score:4, Interesting)
It doesn't matter. The vast majority of people use defaults no matter what, a good portion of the rest will think "Hmm well MS is a super huge company so I'm sure what ever they make will be really good quality and be so much better than the competition". Don't count on them pick up on the search time as they'll probably attribute any difference to the internet being slow. Also sure as heck don't expect them to really notice the differing quality of search results, for one it's a completely subjective category and another you they likely won't even pay close enough attention to notice the difference. It's simple enough, integrate it into the OS, (something similar to Sherlock? been a while since I've used it), and make it the default anything on the windows box, home page too, really the average new user has no desire to change any kind of settings with their computer for the simple reason they don't really understand them. A search engine is obviously a good choice for a home page, make it your search engine and they're likely in your palm forever. Given the resources MS has and the actions they've been willing to take in the past combined with the courts unwillingness to stop them they would be fools if they didn't become #1.
The Obvious (Score:4, Insightful)
As usual, this won't be a question of who as the superior technology or performance. It will be a question of which of the two (MS or Google) can force themselves upon the user first.
Obviously MS can, since it controls the computer. Most users are not technically saavy enough to choose a search engine. Most don't even understand they can type into the address bar.
When they go "onto the internet", they see MSN. MSN is the internet to them, the same way AOL has been the internet to a lot of unfortunate people over the last many years.
Of course, working against MS are the various spyware packages that help the user find things (via popups) that might not have appeared on MSN's search... chuckle.
To summarize, and no offense to non-saavy users (who won't read this anyway), but the sheep will be shepherded right thru MSN as usual.
Microsoft Should Stick to OS's (Score:5, Insightful)
Like this week's PC World magazine (I'm pretty sure it was PC World) says, when your name becomes a verb, something has gone very right. Google [google.com] has had things going very right for a long time, and they're not trying to take over the entire world, which gives them cool points to boot!
But seriously, as a result of this, all of their products are incredibly useful and tolerable. You won't find much anti-Google sentiment out there because the services they offer are simply useful:
And, of course, the default Google search is customizable in particular ways. A search for link:slashdot.org [google.com] tells me that nearly 31,000 web sites link to Slashdot. A search for site:microsoft.com netscape [google.com] tells me that "netscape" is mentioned on at least 7,800 pages at Microsoft.com.
Sorry, but I don't think Microsoft can catch up to that. And even if Microsoft could, how would such a successful web venture as Google be hurt by it? If nothing else, a little competition might *slightly* reduce Google's load, allowing for even greater expansion of services...
I wrote far too much, but I'm in class, so I had a good excuse.
We need competition among search engines (Score:4, Interesting)
People use many types of access from various ISPS to login, using computers from a wide variety of manufacturers. Most of them use Microsoft operating systems which is a danger to the whole computing world. Microsofts software is increasingly unstable, bloated and generally low-quality. Their monopoly allows them to be lax with testing and quality control.
The same principle applies to search engines. Almost everyone uses google or yahoo to seach for anything. These two sites have become the very interface to the Internet. This also allows them to alter information (place pro-republican sites above pro-democracy for 'election' search), snoop (with the FBI they might already be doing this), and in the long run suffering the same quality control fate as Microsoft. People build a view of the world around them by exploring and communicating with the other people. The Internet allows people to talk to other people far away and share political and moral opinions which on a larger scale helps tolerance and peace itself. These are not small issues; how many politicians can anyone think of who do NOT get their information from the Internet?
More search engines will increase the diversity and break the stronghold of google. Google is a single point of failure for the Internet (the only other one is the DNS servers system) for most Internet users. Although I use it and love it, we are giving one company too much control, while knowing what the results of that are. I do doubt Microsoft can cut it as a competitor there since Ive never used MSN, and Ive seen their success with the XBox and other home-media entertainment ventures. Other skilled companies however can bring a fresh search interface to the online world.
Blue Search of Death??? (Score:4, Funny)
It will *NEVER* work (Score:4, Insightful)
GOOGLE.COM: 5KB HTML, 8KB Images.
MSN is too commercial. The search technology doesn't matter. The reason why Google is attractive is because it's:
1) Simple
2) Simple
3) Simple
4) Ad Free
5) Accurate
MSN (and Microsoft) has none of these. If they get #5, they are still down 4 in my book. They can't get 1-4 done, they've already buried themselves knee-deep in editorials, audio, video, and syndicated content.
Moving away from their current setup will alienate their coveted "AOL types", and improving search technology will do nothing to gain the attention of "Google types".
It's not about the results alone, it's the atmosphere and the confidence!
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Informative)
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Informative)
AltaVista
Google
Ask Jeeves
Fast
DirectHit
Excite
GoTo
NorthernLi
Yahoo
I, of course, have it perform the search on Google.
Re:All I can say is (Score:5, Funny)
you suck, you will never be uber.
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, IE6 is far superior to the majority of browsers out there - IE3,IE4,IE5 and IE5.5!
Re:All I can say is (Score:4, Interesting)
Remember Hotmail? A very popular web-mail service? Remember MS coming in and leaving things be for a few months, and then bombarding it with advertising?
Don't think MS won't take advantage of every bit of white space. Yes Google should take notice, but I couldn't picture them being incredibly concerned.
Re:true (Score:4, Informative)
And the default search engine in IE, anyone?