Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft's Anti-Google Video Campaign

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the if-you-don't-have-anything-nice-to-say dept.

Advertising 304

eldavojohn writes "As the presidential race heats up, the smear ads on TV are also increasing. But Microsoft isn't going to site idly by and let the politicians engage in all that song and dance — and Microsoft really does employ both song and dance. Their Youtube channel appears to be slowly transforming from trade show videos and launches into a marketing attack or propaganda campaign that only targets Google (both videos I've watched seemed to have nothing positive about Microsoft in them). Under a month ago, they launched a spoof called GMail man, a creepy guy that flips through all your GMail and serves up super personal ads that are wrong (although they never say if Hotmail engages in targeted marketing). And a few days ago Googlighting shows up to spread fear and uncertainty about Google Docs. Most amusing to this viewer was that I found no such trace of 'Googlighting' on Bing's video service."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Youtube (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131543)

Who owns youtube?

Re:Youtube (4, Interesting)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131599)

That's what I always liked about Google, so far: they are pretty fair regarding search results and other contents in general.

Re:Youtube (5, Insightful)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131717)

Content is content. Google doesn't care what it is as long as you consume it (and of course they track you and advertise at you).

Ever seen the Simpsons talk about Fox? Same deal.

Re:Youtube (2, Insightful)

Tharsman (1364603) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132083)

They have no choice. The minute they start controlling the content they lose the "web host" IP protection status.

Re:Youtube (3, Insightful)

Anthony Mouse (1927662) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132277)

Where do people come up with this nonsense? They can control the content all the like. But if they do it in a way that is detrimental to their users, people will switch to something else. That is what keeps them from censoring Microsoft and anyone else critical of them, not whatever "'web host' IP protection status" is supposed to mean.

Of course, that doesn't mean Microsoft isn't running a FUD campaign against them. (It seems that they are.)

Re:Youtube (4, Informative)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132377)

Umm, microsoft still filters results about things involving google and microsoft so that they are favorable to microsoft. This has nothing to do with "IP protection status", and considering that such a phrase doesn't exist, please don't make such a claim.

DMCA protection has nothing to do with choosing to filter content in any way.

Re:Youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132497)

DMCA safe harbour means that you are not liable for copyright infringement by third parties, unless you have knowledge of it. It does not mean that you have to host competitors attack ads.

Re:Youtube (4, Interesting)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132085)

Hosting videos ads that attack you is such over-the-top fairness that it's remarkable. I hope Google makes more off the ads than Microsoft paid to produce them.

Re:Youtube (0)

scoot80 (1017822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132291)

Its not fairness, its $$$. They don't care as long as they keep shoving ads down your throat.

Re:Youtube (4, Informative)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132359)

Last I checked seeing the ads is the tradeoff for receiving the amusing content - a deal I entered of my own free will. Nobody clicked it for me, and the ads never came near my throat. This is how the Internet works. If you don't like ad supported content you should probably sell your computer, tv and radio - and cancel your mail delivery too.

Re:Youtube (2)

metalmonkey (1083851) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132221)

The other day I found a message from google in my gmail spam box. However it was the notice that privacy policy was changing for my apps domain, I put this down to fair algorithm rather than intent since the privacy change was otherwise pretty well advertised. I guess I could have gone the other way depending on my temperament at the time.

Stay Classy Microsoft (4, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131567)

Don't ever change.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (5, Insightful)

Squiddie (1942230) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131631)

They're kind of right on this one. I wouldn't trust google docs to run a business. I mean, I might venture to do libreoffice, or other free software, not only because it is a better software model, but it's good for the company, but MS is right in this case. Not so sure about the gmail thing, though I don't appreciate being scanned, which is why I don't use it.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (3, Insightful)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131807)

They're right like Karl Marx was right. Marx wrote about the problems with capitalist systems, and he was absolutely right on many of his points. Then he came up with his own system which was a complete disaster and even worse (much worse) than the system he wanted to replace. This is just like MS: they might have some valid points about Google, but anything they offer up as an alternative is going to be even worse.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (2)

Squiddie (1942230) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132009)

That's true. The MS alternatives suck, but let's not be blind to the problems that google has. Plus we already have good alternatives. It's called FOSS.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (4, Interesting)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132091)

True, unlike with political systems, we actually have a great alternative in Free software. No one's come up with a better system that capitalist republics yet, and the alternatives are all horrible: Marxism, feudalism, etc.

In fact, MS criticizing Google is a lot like Feudalists criticizing the Communists.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (5, Interesting)

swillden (191260) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132473)

That's true. The MS alternatives suck, but let's not be blind to the problems that google has. Plus we already have good alternatives. It's called FOSS.

I'm a fan of F/LOSS, but there really isn't a F/LOSS alternative to Docs. What I mean is that while LibreOffice, for example, does a bunch of things that Docs doesn't do, Docs also does some really compelling things that LibreOffice et al don't do. Specifically, Docs is a really powerful collaboration tool. I work for Google, so I've obviously been forced to use Docs extensively, for all of my design docs, presentations, etc. I briefly found Docs' limitations annoying, but the first time I sent a design doc out for review and saw the power of the collaboration model, I knew I'd never go back.

Unless you've tried it, it's hard to understand just how powerful it is to be able to have multiple people all working on a document in real time. Even if you don't need real-time collaboration, it's much better to have everyone commenting on and tweaking the same copy of the document, rather than sending copies around and then having someone try to pull all of the disparate changes together. And when that can happen in real-time, and you have either text chat or even full multi-party video conferencing (Google Hangouts) integrated into the collaborative document system... it's an amazingly effective way to get multiple detailed opinions and quickly arrive at consensus decisions, even when people are scattered around the world.

My kids' school uses Google Apps, including Docs (no, I had nothing to do with that decision; they made it before I joined Google and before I moved here) and I love it for that as well. My kids share their papers with me and I fix minor errors (and later go over the changes with them -- the markup on the revision view makes that easy), or add comments about more significant things I think they can improve, then later I see what they changed. My wife does the same. Sometimes all this happens more or less in real-time, while we're talking about it. Other times, due to schedule mismatches, the automatically-generated e-mails about comments and responses drive the process. It works well either way, though I prefer the interaction.

Of course, when the assignment is complete, turning it in is as simple as sharing the doc with the teacher, and the teacher's comments and corrections show up in the same way, via the same process. It's very powerful.

My wife often writes letters to various entities, and while she has good ideas she doesn't always structure them well, and her grammar, punctuation and spelling sometimes leave something to be desired. So, she writes her letters and shares them with me, and I fix them up. Sometimes I also significantly change the content. Usually she agrees, but not always, and she can always see exactly what I did and easily revert what she doesn't like. Often, we do these steps in parallel, with her still writing the end of the letter while I'm fixing up the beginning. Sometimes I'm even working right behind her, fixing up just a few words behind her.

Perhaps it's just my life, but about the only "documents" I write which aren't collaborative in at least some degree are slashdot posts and the like, so I find that I'd nearly always rather use Docs than anything else. Even if the feature set is rather anemic compared to a "real" office suite (though getting less so all the time).

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (2, Insightful)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132053)

Anything that Microsoft offers is going to be vastly superior.... in at least one sense as it relates to Google Docs.

Office 365 is a paid only service where the users would be the customers and not the product. That's MS current alternative to Google Docs, and really, they had it up before Google Docs. At least, AFAIK, they did internally. I am not really sure when they officially starting offering it as SaaS.

Google Docs, the free version, is not something I would ever use for business for one second. You have no reason to trust Google, and really, you can't take on that kind of liability with most businesses that deal with anything close to sensitive information about customers. Not possible unless you are really stupid, have no lawyers to tell you are stupid, or just reckless.

There *is* a paid version of Google Docs. You can disable advertisements in gmail in the paid version. However, I still don't feel good about Google having access to all that information. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

With both SaaS platforms you have APIs and can integrate other processes. I'm sure they are pretty similar in the vast majority of features and capabilities.

In the end, I would not want to use either one of them. If I can roll my own and host my own servers I would do that. I am not faced with that particular problem. Most of the stuff I deal with already has robust platforms for that particular industry that allow for a lot of collaboration already.

What MS is really butthurt about when it comes to Google Docs is that they are not offering the free product. MS is not the only one butthurt about it either. The number of businesses that can't make it because they can't compete against Google's free is quite large.

I don't have any particular answers to that. I just know Google causes a lot of problems for business simply because they leverage their advertising revenue to drive products from a paid model down to a free model.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (2)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132245)

The number of businesses that can't make it because they can't compete against Google's free is quite large.
I don't have any particular answers to that. I just know Google causes a lot of problems for business simply because they leverage their advertising revenue to drive products from a paid model down to a free model.

Right, but how many companies is Google really driving out of business? There aren't exactly a lot of competitors in the office suite space any more, and I certainly wouldn't be sad seeing MS driven out of business by losing their MS Office cash cow, plus we always have Libre/OpenOffice which works fine and runs locally. What else does Google do? Well they've dominated the search engine space for over a decade now, so no one's been driven out of business there in a while. And then there's Google Maps, but again there wasn't that much competition before they came along anyway, and Yahoo and Bing still have their maps products (in fact, Bing maps frequently do better than Google IME).

Offhand, I can't really think of any other markets where Google has driven anyone out of business or caused problems. I can think of a ton of projects they've started up and then thrown the towel in on (frequently the first I had heard of them was when they announced they were giving up).

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (4, Insightful)

Grumbleduke (789126) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132425)

And then there's Google Maps, but again there wasn't that much competition before they came along anyway, and Yahoo and Bing still have their maps products (in fact, Bing maps frequently do better than Google IME).

Some map companies, such as Streetmap or Multimap, would counter that point, arguing loudly that Google unfairly drove them out of business (or to a significantly lower level of business) by promoting Google Maps over their services via search, in breach of EU competition law.

At least, they did, a couple of weeks ago, at a meeting about "search neutrality" (Google* the term if you're interested...) in the UK Parliament last week (I happened to be there - it's not quite as insane as it sounds). That said, recent anecdotal experiments I performed indicated that in most ways Google does actually provide a better service (although I do like some things Bing maps does).

Google has caused quite a lot of problems for small businesses trying to "compete" with Google, particularly when Google has a "rival" service and promotes that via their search. That said, it remains to be seen whether or not Google has crossed the line into unjustifiable anti-competitive behaviour over this sort of thing (and the EC/CJEU, and US FTC etc. will likely be ruling on that soon). Not that MS is a strange to anti-competition lawsuits, iirc it's Windows Media Player-related one in the EU is still ongoing, with MS trying to get out of its >€1bn fine...

*See what I did there?

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (2)

Tharsman (1364603) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132115)

Not entirely true. This is just email we talking about, and any paid email service that has no ads is a viable alternative, not a disaster (unless you consider paying a small fee a month to be a disaster.)

But the Gmail Man video is right in many aspects, specially the Gmail Man's own arguments, like "who care" or "it's business" and "I'm just skimming for keywords." It IS a funny video, and I have a Gmail account that I keep active until the day I find a decent and viable replacement for Reader... until then, may as well use GMail too if they are anyways scanning my news reading preferences.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131817)

You do know what Office 365 is, right?

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (3, Insightful)

danomac (1032160) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131857)

Microsoft is just very upset that they didn't think of it first.

Just like most of their other projects, except Google won't sell to them.

Re:Stay Classy Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132323)

If I am not mistaken, hotmail was out well before gmail.

Really? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131581)

This is the best you can do at marketing MS? For fucks sake, this must be the most unfunny, pointless, stupid ad I've ever seen.

Re:Really? (4, Insightful)

Z34107 (925136) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131787)

Eh, maybe some people out there haven't heard of "targeted advertising." After telling YouTube to e-mail me in Japanese, just for kicks, I started getting some hilarious [dropbox.com] and kind of creepy [dropbox.com] ads [dropbox.com] sent my way. Prior, I saw mostly men's products and electronics.

G-mail isn't the only context [dropbox.com] they use for ad placement, though. Either way, Google gives me free stuff, and makes my web surfing a bit more surreal. I consider it a fair trade.

Microsoft's video is rather crass, but maybe it'll be educational for someone who wouldn't take the Faustian bargain were they fully informed. It's kind of refreshing seeing advertising based on the relative merits of the respective products rather than "Bud Light Summons Women," but on the other hand... Office 365.

Re:Really? (1)

bbecker23 (1917560) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131855)

Always a pleasure to find another Cracked.com reader.

Carry on.

Re:Really? (1)

Z34107 (925136) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131871)

Cracked's ads always seem more surreal than most. I wonder if their adsense goes to 11.

Re:Really? (1)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131913)

Japanese Lolita fashion has nothing to do with the book. Although it is very fricking bizarre stuff.

Bing... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131583)

... has a video service?

Seriously though, it isn't good for one service to weild as much power as youtube over which videos will be promoted to fame and which are left lingering in obscurity.

Re:Bing... (2)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131761)

... has a video service? Seriously though, it isn't good for one service to weild as much power as youtube over which videos will be promoted to fame and which are left lingering in obscurity.

Better Google than Microsoft. We have seen what Microsoft does when they wield that much power in other areas. One shudders to think what it would be like if youtube was run by Microsoft and Bing was our only choice of a search engine.

Re:Bing... (2, Interesting)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131827)

According to a YouTube video I stumbled upon earlier today, if you buy a Verizon Android phone, Bing will be your only choice of a search engine on that device thanks to a half-billion dollar deal MS made with Verizon.

I guess I won't be getting my next phone with Verizon...

Re:Bing... (2)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131967)

I just bought a Droid 4... Google search provider.

Re:Bing... (0)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132153)

Microsoft and Verizon aren't getting along well lately. Verizon got burned on KIN.

Re:Bing... (4, Insightful)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132111)

According to a YouTube video I stumbled upon earlier today, if you buy a Verizon Android phone, Bing will be your only choice of a search engine on that device thanks to a half-billion dollar deal MS made with Verizon.

I guess I won't be getting my next phone with Verizon...

According to the phone in my pocket, Google is the only choice of a search engine on that device thanks to a fundamental conflict of interest between the Android part of Google and the search part of Google.

What's your point?

Re:Bing... (0)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132261)

Well I don't have a Verizon phone so I can't comment on the veracity of the YT video I saw (maybe it was with just one model, maybe they changed their policy and switched back to Google after the video was made, I don't know), my point was in response to the OP who said "One shudders to think what it would be like if ... Bing was our only choice of a search engine".

And Windows in the only choice of an OS to run MS Office on, thanks to a "fundamental conflict of interest" between the Office part of MS and the OS part of MS; what's your point?

Re:Bing... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132341)

And Windows in the only choice of an OS to run MS Office on, thanks to a "fundamental conflict of interest" between the Office part of MS and the OS part of MS

Office has been available for Apple computers for quite awhile.

Thanks for the entertainment (4, Funny)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131585)

Sincere thanks to Microsoft of entertaining me. Ranks right up there with Bill's infamous butt wiggle [skamarakas.com] .

FUD (4, Interesting)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131597)

The points the Googlighting video try to make is that Google has an unknown track record with office applications, their products lack features compared to the competition, and they have a track record of starting projects and abandoning them without much warning, especially cloud applications. So when Microsoft asks, "is this a product you want to bet your business on?" while it may be FUD, it's a pertinent question.

Re:FUD (5, Insightful)

semi-extrinsic (1997002) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131731)

I agree with your sentiment, Google do change/abandon projects quite often. But Microsoft suggesting that with their software, you could never "come into the office one day and the software looks completely different" is quite frankly hilarious to anyone who had to suffer the upgrade from MS Office 2003 to 2007 or 2010.

Re:FUD (4, Insightful)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131799)

What they're saying is your company chooses when the ugprades are done and can give employees a heads up. Not to mention how they publish betas, have a published roadmap, developer conferences, etc. etc. The other argument is that you only have to pay for Office once not on a month-to-month basis. Not to knock GoogleApps, but who's to say they don't raise the price next week?

Re:FUD (4, Informative)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131851)

What they're saying is your company chooses when the ugprades are done and can give employees a heads up.

And all that's off the table with Office 365 - upgrades happen when Microsoft wants them to.

Re:FUD (2)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131943)

Well, I'm not directly involved but our company manages Office 365 and Google Apps for other companies (we're an outsourced IT company). Microsoft has been very, very proactive on the ugprades sides. Even letting customers push their upgrades (moving from BPOS to O365) by six months or more. However, it remains to be seen how they'll do with O365. Also, O365 is server components only (SharePoint, Exchange, etc.). The client-side software you use with it Outlook, Word, Excel, etc. doesn't necessarily have to be upgraded at the same time or at all. for example you can use Office 2007 if you really want to.

Re:FUD (3, Informative)

semi-extrinsic (1997002) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131959)

Fair points. But we should really compare apples and apples here. MS's own Office 365 (which this is an advert for, I think) also auto-updates on a 90 day schedule according to this [wikipedia.org] .

What I think is MS's problem with Office 365, however, is that it falls between two chairs. It is not as powerful as real Office, for businesses wanting the power of, say, Excel and Access. It is also not free, so more casual users (say, a barista who owns his own coffee shop) would rather have Google Docs for free. Or, again, she would buy a copy of Office Home&Business.

Seems to me that the "Medium/Large business that solely wants to do Office in the cloud", which is what this is designed for, is pretty much a mythical creature.

Re:FUD (1)

unencode200x (914144) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132045)

Could not agree more, in the current state of tech. full-blown cloud is not quite there yet. We have some hybrids where companies are running everything out of the data center with 99 percent of employees using thin clients to Remote Desktop Servers, mobile devices (tables, phones, etc.), or laptops + SSL VPN + offline files (or SharePoint) and it gets pretty close. Most of the employees can work from anywhere, anytime (if allowed) are are quite happy. We have various projects working on making working from anywhere more productive.

Re:FUD (4, Funny)

pseudofrog (570061) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132293)

...is that it falls between two chairs

I wonder if anyone at Microsoft is capable of moving these chairs?

Re:FUD (0)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131833)

Wait, wait, they actually say or even just imply that? They force this ugly ribbon infested piece of crap that they call Office 2010 on me (at least when i'm at the office and don't have a choice about it) and then try to scare me by saying Google Docs _might_ look different at some point in the future?

Re:FUD (1)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131899)

Office 2010 is in no way a forced upgrade (sucks if your work requires you to use a certain version but that's not really relevant). The UI changes are documented well in advance with betas, blogs, conferences, etc. Google likes to change their UI without any significant notice and kill off entire products at a whim. That's the difference they are trying to point out.

Re:FUD (4, Funny)

Tanktalus (794810) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131849)

But Microsoft suggesting that with their software, you could never "come into the office one day and the software looks completely different" is quite frankly hilarious to anyone who had to suffer the upgrade from MS Office 2003 to 2007 or 2010.

What are you talking about? Microsoft is completely in the right on this one. That type of rollout would take weeks at least. More if you have a second employee!

Re:FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131947)

I have a copy of MS Office 2003 that I still use and it works just like when I first installed it, do you think you can say the same thing any Google web project? Upgrading MS Office is a choice but not google docs.

Re:FUD (4, Interesting)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131735)

I gave a very similar argument to a CEO at a company I was consulting on in the construction of a small datacenter. He wanted all Apple servers because he was sold on the ecosystem. After explaining to him that they also have a track record of abandoning their corporate customers, I was given the okay to deploy an almost completely Linux rack (they have one Exchange server). Like everything else it's a matter of the right tool for the job. I'm not sure if I'd ever trust Google Docs for a business, but in fairness Microsoft is pushing just as hard with their Office Online apps. I will say that Google Docs was quite useful in my last year as an undergrad and in grad school as a colaboration platform.

Re:FUD (3, Insightful)

bgarcia (33222) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131811)

they have a track record of starting projects and abandoning them without much warning

Sure, Google will sometimes abandon projects that they offer for free to users. But Google Apps for Business [google.com] is a product that they sell. They won't be abandoning a revenue stream like that any time soon.

Re:FUD (2)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132033)

Sure, that's the counter claim. But when you remember Google makes 96% of their revenue (and probably close to 99% of their net income) from advertising, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that Google could pack up their Google Apps for Business division (or any other division really) at the drop of a hat, and not really feel the blow. On the other hand, Microsoft's Business Division earned them 52% of their net income last year. You can bet your ass they're not going anywhere.

Re:FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132193)

Sure, Google will sometimes abandon projects that they offer for free to users. But Google Apps for Business [google.com] is a product that they sell. They won't be abandoning a revenue stream like that any time soon.

That's your conjecture, and not any guarantee from Google. Given Google's track record of poorly managing projects and then eliminating them, it's going to take a lot more than bgarcia's faith for people to use Google's business products.

Re:FUD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131821)

Not only is a pertinent question, it raises awareness that so many of Google's products are half-assed. Google is a marketing company offering mediocre products whose only redeeming quality is being free. But even among the free alternatives, Google's offering ranks poorly.

As far as I'm concerned, Google has 3 quality products: search, gmail and Youtube (which they bought). The first two are privacy nightmares. Everything else is half-assed and/or poorly designed (Android being a prime example).

Re:FUD (2)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131937)

Google Labs has a track record of starting projects and then abandoning them without much warning, especially cloud applications. Google Labs is the group that puts out all the "beta" stuff. They often release projects to the public to test if there will be wide acceptance. If the test projects aren't accepted they get killed off. Other projects are widely used, like gmail and Google Docs, and they lose their beta tags and don't seem to get killed off. The problem with cloud services is that there is never a guarantee the cloud provider will be there tomorrow. This is just as much an issue for MS's cloud services as it is for Google's. MS also has a local office suite. There's also Libre Office to consider.

You (2)

M0j0_j0j0 (1250800) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131601)

Have to love the american way of advertising!! The Gmail man was kinda funny though. They would had a better effect with, " So Mr. Anderson you've been searching for Hemorroids!!!"

Re:You (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131639)

They would had a better effect with, " So Mr. Anderson you've been searching for Hemorroids!!!"

Nope. Bing give you adds based on your searches too.

C'mon slashdotters.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131609)

An opportunity like this doesn't come often these days. Cue the M$ bashing!!! :D

Re:C'mon slashdotters.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131681)

There's no point. It's already been said. Just replay last year's comments. Microsoft hasn't changed a damned bit and is still slinging around FUD. Not news, it's the norm. Nothing to see here.

A beautiful hypocrisy! (4, Insightful)

j33px0r (722130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131633)

Ok, Microsoft has done countless "evils" in the past and still does, but with that being said, they do a wonderful job of pointing out the privacy issues of Gmail and the risks of implementing Google Apps. Googlighting was an excellent and humorous video as well.

Maybe if Google and MS duke it out enough, all of their little wrong-doings will get pointed out, fixed, and society may actually advance! Or perhaps we will just sit around and watch some mudslinging while our privacy is further reduced. I'm feeling pessimistic at the moment and leaning towards the latter.

Re:A beautiful hypocrisy! (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131809)

>Maybe if Google and MS duke it out enough, all of their little wrong-doings will get pointed out, fixed, and society may actually advance!

Interesting point and probably true to some extent, but I can't help but think of R and D of american politics. They'll bash each other over certain things, but many things they do agree on silently (like having a 2-party system, probably, for example) and those things will not improve.

They may be different in many ways and one may be better or worse than the other, but in many ways they both suck profoundly, from certain perspectives.

Re:A beautiful hypocrisy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132143)

Maybe if Google and MS duke it out enough, all of their little wrong-doings will get pointed out, fixed, and society may actually advance! Or perhaps we will just sit around and watch some mudslinging while our privacy is further reduced. I'm feeling pessimistic at the moment and leaning towards the latter.

I think about what's happened in the patent wars, and all the duke'ing, and the lack of societal advancement, and I agree with you on that last sentence.

Not Surprising (4, Interesting)

wbr1 (2538558) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131651)

While I am not a fan of google's practices of late, how often has Microsoft not been a FUD spewer?
It is ingrained in their culture.

History may not repeat itself... (1)

mrflash818 (226638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131655)

...but it sure does rhyme -- Mark Twain

In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but... (5, Interesting)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131669)

you wouldn't know it.

Apple is no longer the company that MS had to prop up (with a cash investment and an MS Office port) for the pretence of competition - they are now the biggest company in the world.

But MS seems OK with that - they still act like Google is their real competitor. Is it because Google is competing in the online space and Apple isn't? Or is because Apple has enormous margins and MS sees this as a positive development in the industry - whereas Google tends to offer things for free and push MS towards lower margins?

I have no idea, but one of these days MS should get over their Google fixation and start thinking about competing with Apple too.

And BTW, Kudos to Google. One of the reasons I'm a fan of theirs is that they seem to compete fiercely with everyone!

Re:In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131753)

MS, and Apple, have a common enemy. So, for now, MS is all buddy-buddy with Apple.

Anybody familiar with MS knows that MS will turn on Apple in half a second; if MS thinks that's whats in MS's best interest.

Right now, the first priority is to stomp Google.

Re:In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but (5, Insightful)

Mountaineer1024 (1024367) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131779)

Microsoft don't need to compete with Apple.
Microsoft are primarily interested in the corporate market - business and government.
Everything else just flows on with that due to the need to be compatible.

Apple has spoken recently of their inroads into business as a "collateral win", an unintended bonus.
They are putting zero effort into replicating or replacing the core feature set that any large business relies on (exchange, active directory, etc).

The reason that Microsoft is scared of Google is that they are actively attempting to make the underlying system immaterial as the Google services become the compatibility glue.
Who cares if the underlying system is running Windows, OSX, Linux or something else when the end user gets exactly the same experience?

That's what Microsoft is scared of, not a high end device manufacturer that interoperates with them.

Re:In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132319)

Microsoft don't need to compete with Apple.
Microsoft are primarily interested in the corporate market - business and government.

Have you seen all the screenshots and videos of Windows 8?

It's because Apple is a phone company (1, Interesting)

billlava (1270394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131853)

Sure, Mac has been making strides, and I have a friend who swears by 'Pages' and 'Keynote,' but it's the iPhone, iPod, and iPad that have made Apple the behemoth it is today. Microsoft would love to make money in these markets as well, but they already ARE raking in tons of cash from MS office, and Exchange servers and other software for businesses. That is where Google (and not Apple) can really hurt them, and with the shift toward cloud services, MS is right to fear Google, and they have some decent points to be made about consistency and long-term reliability that you can reasonably expect from Microsoft.

Re:In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131861)

The reason is simple. Microsoft used to be a role model for geeks for a few years and has been displaced by Google. Now all geeks hate Microsoft and love Google which represents a complete about turn for Microsoft. So this Google fixation is a simple case of butt hurt and Microsoft should get over it if they know what's good for them.

Re:In theory Apple is MS's biggest competitor, but (2, Insightful)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131933)

It is because MS is still fixated on stifling open source software from the market place. They see Google as a HUGE threat because they see Google as having let the open source horse out of the barn and now you have companies such as Samsung, Motorola, Amazon, Barnes and Noble among others that are deploying this on devices all over the place. They don't see Apple as a threat that way. Microsoft has always wanted to see their OS on everything ....everything. The widespread use of open source in the marketplace is Microsoft's biggest nightmare.

LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131705)

Most amusing to this viewer was that I found no such trace of 'Googlighting' on Bing's video service."

Then you didn't look very hard. [bing.com]

They are like politicians ... (4, Insightful)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131725)

who slag off the opposition. What I really want to hear is why they are better, not rude reasons why the opposition is bad. This sort of thing is a complete turn off -- no matter who does it. Mud sticks to the hands of those who throw it.

battles among emperors (1)

k6mfw (1182893) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131733)

When I see articles like this, I cannot stop thinking it seems familiar of way back when kings and emperors from different countries get in a tizzy which leads to economic, political shifts and/or wars that impacts commoners (that never had a say on the whole matter anyway).

Re:battles among emperors (3, Insightful)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131805)

More like guild rivalry.

Not in the MMROPG sense, where guilds are glamorized, but rather, in the medical sense, where you had to be a member of a guild to practice your trade or you lost not only the fruits of your labors but body parts as well, and which feuded with each other over their domains.

These days, we call them mega-corporations, and instead of guild charters, we've got copyright and patent laws, but the model of how the field does things would be recognizable by a stone mason from the sixteenth century.

Online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131739)

Woah, you need to be online to use Google Docs (ignoring offline mode)?

So Microsoft's Office 365 magically works without an internet connection?

But it's not a *person* looking at your mail (3, Insightful)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131773)

If you are upset about the idea of a computer reading your mail, then how can you justify using email at all?

Does the MS-Word spelling checker "read" your Word documents?

Re:But it's not a *person* looking at your mail (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132107)

So you'd be fine if I scanned all your personal documents and stored on them on my computer. I promise I won't let any humans read the original scans. I'll just take out the pieces I think someone might want and sell them separately.

Last I checked the spell checker didn't send the data off to Microsoft when it checked my spelling. If it ever did they would lose all their corporate customers because the use of it would violate privacy laws in many countries.

Honestly those were funny (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131785)

Say what you will about google or MS... but the ads themselves were hilarious.

Re:Honestly those were funny (1)

Mandrel (765308) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132151)

I found the videos mildly humorous.

I look forward to the South Park boys taking on Google, as they did for Apple [wikipedia.org] .

YouTube (4, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131797)

I love it that Microsoft uses YouTube (owned by Google) for this. The use of negative ads is tasteless. Then again, it's an election year so it's fashionable.

Just watching the videos... (2)

Higgins_Boson (2569429) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131825)

Just watching the videos and reading comments on them. Wow... this SERIOUSLY looks like it is backfiring for Microsloth.

The GMail Man video is at least 6 months old (1)

SonofSmog (1961084) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131907)

The GMail Man video is at least 6 months old. Where have you been?

Re:The GMail Man video is at least 6 months old (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132171)

Yup. And it wasn't even created as an attack ad, it was created as a joke for an internal Microsoft conference last summer. I guess someone at MS thought it was funny enough that they posted it on YouTube...

The Giant Cheese and the holes ... (2)

JCPM (2577407) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131923)

The Giant Cheese is partitionated to many companies as Google, IBM, Red Hat, Oracle, Microsoft and Apple.

Personally, i like the 3 first former, and i hate the 3 last latter.

And now, i'll do holes to the Giant Cheese secretively as if i'm a spy-rat.

JCPM: BWHAHAHAHA

Classic Microsoft (1)

steveha (103154) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131925)

I've seen this sort of video before from Microsoft. This is classic, not really anything new.

These sound more interesting than they really are. Both of those videos are like Saturday Night Live sketches that have thirty seconds of humor padded out to two-and-a-half minutes.

steveha

Yeah, That's Because (5, Interesting)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 2 years ago | (#39131927)

Moble's the next market and Android's already beating Microsoft there. Not to mention that if Google decided to bring Android to a PC environment it would start up immediately with easy access to all the apps in the Anrdroid Marketplace. No other MS competitor has ever brought that many potential ready-to-run applications with their environment. Google could trounce Microsoft across all the markets they service, if Google were so inclined. That idea is bound to be making some sphincters clench in Redmond.

Re:Yeah, That's Because (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39131991)

Not to mention that if Google decided to bring Android to a PC environment it would start up immediately with easy access to all the apps in the Anrdroid Marketplace.

Yeah, which would be a tiny fraction of the current Windows apps?

No other MS competitor has ever brought that many potential ready-to-run applications with their environment.

Sure if you ignore Apple.

Google could trounce Microsoft across all the markets they service, if Google were so inclined.

So that's why Google's ChromeOS has now taken over Microsoft's desktop market share? Oh right, it was a total fail.

Re:Yeah, That's Because (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132275)

It's not just that Android has 400,000 apps. It's that they're all instantly available through the market - unlike what you have to go through to find, select and install a Windows app. And they're backed up in the market too. And there are 250 million people who have acquired 10 billion apps. Ifyou had an Android PC you would just log in and Google would offer to install all of the apps you ever bought.

Now compare that to setting up a new PC. Gah. Can you imagine trying to get Norton and Quicken going on your new W8 PC with all your other apps? Do you even remember where you put the install discs and license keys? The horror!

Re:Yeah, That's Because (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132063)

Isn't Android already available for PC? Isn't it also supported by Intel?

News to me (1, Funny)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132037)

Bing has a video service?

Mutually Assured Incompatibilitier (1)

JCPM (2577407) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132093)

What's the matter if YouTube is not compatible for IE-explorer of PC or Mobile device of Windows? Google wins.

What's the matter if YouTube is not compatible for Safari of Apple G5 or iPhone/iPad? Google wins twice.

What's the matter if YouTube is compatible for ChromeOS of PC/linux or Android? Google wins three times.

What's the matter if YouTube is compatible for Firefox of PC/linux but not of PC/windows? Google wins four times.

If M$ did decide which platform will be working its M$ Office and which not, then Google can do the same with its Youtube.

Identical for owned Apple's StuffIt, iTunes, iPod, QuickTime, etc.

JCPM: Google, didn't you learn it before? Mutually Assured Incompatibilitier.

Sueing (2)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132141)

Since all these major corps are so happy to sue each other for every stupid thing (including patents), isn't this sue-worthy? I don't live in USA, so I can't be sure in detail, but in Argentina, google/gmail would pretty much be able to prove that MS is degrading their image, and making them loose potential money. Isn't this so in USA as well? I'm pretty sure it probably is.
An, since some of the thing implied are actually non-true, there's a major point there.

Besides, since when do companies need a REAL motive to sue each other.

Classy, Microsoft. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132217)

The actual but unintentional message of this video is that Microsoft is tragically unhip. Like comb-over unhip.

http://www.un-productivity.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132415)

http://www.un-productivity.com

Google's Anti-Microsoft Office Campaign. (1)

JCPM (2577407) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132467)

"Google's YouTuboffice doesn't work on windows" vs "M$Offitube doesn't work on linux".

JCPM: Google, didn't you learn it before? Mutually Assured Incompatibilitier.

Bing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39132491)

http://www.bing.com/search?q=googlighting&qs=n&form=QBLH&pq=googlighting&sc=8-9&sp=-1&sk=

Microsoft is dead to me (0)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#39132509)

After learning that Microsoft is one of 19 members of the far-right wing Heartland Institute, that is creating curricula for elementary and high schools that teach the "controversy" of global warming, I will not pay for another Microsoft product. They will get none of my money. If I had an XBox, I would mod it or hack it or whatever it is that you do to them that Microsoft doesn't like.

And I'll never use Bing.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?