Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Can Microsoft Beat Google?

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the they-beat-netscape-apple-and-ibm dept.

Microsoft 603

An anonymous reader writes "With all the hype surrounding the recent release of MSN Search, are the search engine wars heating up? There's an interesting article that states, "As the veteran Microsoft enters the already flooded search engine industry, and Google still being fresh and refreshing to most people, it begs the question: can the old supplant the new?""

cancel ×

603 comments

first friday february fourth post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571835)

first friday february fourth post

begs the question (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571845)

why don't you look up what "begs the question" means, then resubmit this story.

Well (-1, Troll)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571846)

I hope someone beats google.

The power and information google has and will continue to imporve upon is scary.

Re:Well (3, Insightful)

JamesD_UK (721413) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571888)

The power and information google has and will continue to imporve upon is scary.

Surely whoever beats Google is likely to have more power and information (or gain it later) than Google themselves? That would really solve your problem.

Re:Well (0, Troll)

Washizu (220337) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571926)

"The power and information google has and will continue to imporve upon is scary."

Did you mean: improve

Re:Well (2, Funny)

rrhal (88665) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571927)

Well to beat google M$ would have to leverage its monopoly on the desk top to gain a competitive advantage. They wouldn't do that; that's illegal.

Google is the next Alta Vista.

Re:Well (0, Flamebait)

Directrix1 (157787) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571951)

Are you missing <sarcasm> tags in there? I hope Microsoft gets the shit kicked out of em. Microsoft owns the world because of the populace's complacency with mediocrity and monopoly. And I for one love to see any instance of Microsoft losing in the business world. Not as satisfying as Bill taking a pie to the face though.

Re:Well (1)

ganesh129 (611228) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571993)

agreed....microsofts seems to have the need to stick their nose into everything great. new technology comes out that a business is making alot of money on, and M$ instantly feels the need to go after them. i hope they lose a ton of money on this.

Re:Well (1)

pegasustonans (589396) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571977)

The power and information google has and will continue to imporve [sic] upon is scary.

I hope you're being intentionally ironic here.

Of course (3, Insightful)

blakestah (91866) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571848)

It will be just like how Microsoft beat AOL at the ISP game.

And just like Microsoft beat Sony in the game box market.

Re:Of course (3, Insightful)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571901)

How has Microsoft beat Sony?

Microsoft has only released one console. Sony has released the original PSX, the PS2, the PSone and soon the PSP.

Therefore I would say Microsoft released one console that did fairy well, but you have to wait until you see the XBox 2 and other developments before you judge success. The fact that Nintendo are weakened shows that success is determined by longevity not the success of any one given product.

Re:Of course (1)

farnz (625056) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571960)

Microsoft has beat Sony the same way it's beat AOL; bear in mind that if MSN had "won", AOL would be a minor player on the Internet.

Re:Of course (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572062)

>Therefore I would say Microsoft released one console that did fairy well

Are you moron? Halo 2 did well, Xbox didn't.

Re:Of course (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571955)

Never underestimate the power of monopoly... and willingness of the current massively corrupt U.S. government to overlook it. Microsoft controls your computer (for most people)... Microsoft is quite capable of saying where you can and cannot go.

Most people access google only by using Microsoft software. Most of google's traffic and hence advertising money if funneled through Microsoft software. Google is vulnerable to its very core.

Re:Of course (0)

l4m3z0r (799504) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572015)

And just like Microsoft beat Sony in the game box market.

I'd hardly say they beat sony in the game box market. Sure the xBox had a good showing. I'd be more likely to say that the MS tossed nintendo out(coming into a near equal but not quite as good footing as sony). MS has a long way to go before they put Sony down for the count, hell even nintendo is here to stay for a while. Nintendo is the apple of consoles.

Re:Of course (0, Offtopic)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572056)

Sarcasm.

Re:Of course (1)

pegasustonans (589396) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572037)

And just like Microsoft beat Sony in the game box market.

This is news to me.

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572042)

>And just like Microsoft beat Sony in the game box market.

LOL. With the massive $5billion loss by Xbox, how can MS beat Sony?

Re:Of course (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572052)

Does no one here understand irony?

Re:Of course (-1, Offtopic)

dioscaido (541037) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572053)

Am I the only one that things blakestah was being sarcastic?

And (4, Funny)

Safety Cap (253500) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572093)

Like how Microsoft beat the hell out of Apple in the portable music player market.

WMP r00lz, AAC teh suck!

Marketing is the problem (5, Insightful)

chris09876 (643289) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571849)

I have a friend who works on the MSN Search team as an intern. He said their marketing budget is massive. The article says that MS invested hundreds of millions of dollars, but I'm guessing most of that is for marketing - NOT the research and development that is needed to come up with a truly innovative search technology. If MS wants to win, they should focus on having a quality product, and not worry so much about promoting it. If they really do make something better, people will use it.

Untrue. (5, Insightful)

cybersaga (451046) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571971)

If they really do make something better, people will use it.

Not true. Marketing is everything these days. Why is Britney Spears popular? Quality product? hehe...
Marketing will get them their users, but users that don't know any better. For the tech crowd, yes, Microsoft will have to come up with a better product, though I find that just as amusing as Britney Spears selling records.

Re:Untrue. (4, Insightful)

chris09876 (643289) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572060)

I think in something like search engines, the tech crowd dictates what people use. It's easy to switch your homepage. If there's a new better browser out there, tech people will use it, and inform their non-tech friends about it too. How much does google spend on marketing?? When's the last time you saw a google TV ad?

Re:Marketing is the problem (5, Insightful)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572011)

If MS wants to win, they should focus on having a quality product, and not worry so much about promoting it.

They didn't become the world's biggest software company by simply having the best quality product.

Re:Marketing is the problem (0, Offtopic)

0BoDy (739304) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572117)

In fact, he opposite is true of almost everything microsoft has done.

fp (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571853)

teeth

According to Googlefight ..... (3, Funny)

Alranor (472986) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571854)

google
(156 000 000 results)

versus

microsoft
(188 000 000 results)

The winner is: microsoft

Damn! I guess they can...

Re:According to Googlefight ..... (1)

cybersaga (451046) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572005)

The number of results means nothing. It's the relevance and order that matters.
What good are 188 000 000 results when you have to sift through 20 pages go get what you want?

Re:According to Googlefight ..... (1, Funny)

JeffWhitledge (675345) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572006)

google (156 000 000 results) versus microsoft (188 000 000 results) The winner is: microsoft.

I normally only use the first eighty million results on any given search, so really it's the quality of the hits that matter.

Too Late (5, Insightful)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571860)

It's too late. Google is already a verb.

People will never say, "don't ask me, Microsoft it."

Re:Too Late (3, Insightful)

Oscaro (153645) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571904)

Words come and go. A few years ago everybody would have said "don't ask me, check on Yahoo". Then it was "check on Altavista". Then "google for it". Do someone really think this will last forever?

Re:Too Late (1)

arch17c7 (708577) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571920)

Yes, people do already say "Microsoft it", but the synonym used in place of MS is a four-letter word that's not acceptable in polite company. Oh, f--- it, you knew this anyway.

Re:Too Late (1)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571936)

Canon copier I see here says you are wrong.

Re:Too Late (3, Funny)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571988)

People will never say, "don't ask me, Microsoft it."

You may be right. Since most geeks are guys, they'll never use the terms "micro" and "soft" and "it" in the same sentence. Too much ego.

Re:Too Late (5, Funny)

Antonymous Flower (848759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571994)

Microsoft v. - to acquire with monopolistic intent SYNONYM: assimilate

Re:Too Late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572009)

People will never say, "don't ask me, Microsoft it."

Yeah, an equivalent phrase already exists in, "Don't ask me, go fuck yourself."

Re:Too Late (1, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572082)

Yes, well -- "begs the question" has an established meaning but Taco and the AC submitter don't seem to have a problem redefining it.

Re:Too Late (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572098)

what, micro shit?

Second Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571863)

Woo Hoo!!!

M$ Sux!

All the hype? (1, Interesting)

missing000 (602285) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571866)

Am I missing something?

Also, MS has been in the search engine biz for years. Updating an interface hardly makes it buzzworthy.

Re:All the hype? (1)

jxyama (821091) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571968)

MS had been using Yahoo engine for searching until recently, i believe. the new MSN search uses MS developed search engine/algorithm.

Re:All the hype? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572014)

See? ... there's nothing new there, but all /.ers and bloggers talking aboot it. Seems their 100m$+ marketing campaign has already made quite an impact.

Re:All the hype? (1)

stubear (130454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572045)

Microsoft did FAR [winsupersite.com] more than just update the interface for their search engine. The entire search engine was rebuilt from the ground up and added some rather interesting, albeit relatively unknown, capabilities and it's only going to get better from here.

no? (0, Troll)

PacketScan (797299) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571868)

I think ms will steal everything they can from google. are googles days numbered?

It might if you keep advertizing it ever y day (4, Insightful)

Arcturax (454188) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571871)

Seriously, I think 90% of the hype has been here on /.

As for overtaking, I don't think it will. They just aren't adding enough new value to make it worth breaking a 5 year long habit of typing google.com

Drawing Parallels (5, Insightful)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571879)

Before we get too much into the IE vs. Netscape comparisons here, I want to point out one of the major differences between the Browser War and whatever Search Engine War may or may not be brewing:

IE didn't win the browser war as much as Netscape lost the browser war.

Simply put, Netscape sat on their laurels and watched as Microsoft yanked the rug out from under them. Yes, there was underhandedness involved, but at root, Netscape shoulders most of the blame for having lost the browser war.

Thus far, I don't see any indication that Google is going to repeat Netscape's mistakes. Google continues to run a service that is fast, reliable, and modern. They're aggressively broadening their service base, they've attained the pinnacle of name recognition, and they're not showing any signs of letting up.

Whatever comes, this will not be a simple rehash of Netscape vs. IE.

Re:Drawing Parallels (2, Interesting)

will_die (586523) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571997)

The better comparision would be DEC's Altavista fight againt Google.
People forget that back in the mid to late 90s that Altavista was the google of the time.
If ms can do something in the search arena then google people will drift over.

Re:Drawing Parallels (1)

SenFo (761716) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572113)

The better comparision would be DEC's Altavista fight againt Google. People forget that back in the mid to late 90s that Altavista was the google of the time. If ms can do something in the search arena then google people will drift over.

Microsoft rarely invents anything innovative. They copy. Google, on the other hand, has proven to be quite innovated. Is it no surprise that Microsoft has practically the exact same interface as Google?

But where oh where is that input box amongst all those ads? Oh, there it is. But oh...Rice says that "Attack on Iran 'simply not on the agenda'"? Oops, there goes the attention again.

Alternative viewpoint. (4, Insightful)

Faust7 (314817) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572059)

Google continues to run a service that is fast, reliable, and modern. They're aggressively broadening their service base, they've attained the pinnacle of name recognition, and they're not showing any signs of letting up.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it would be that Google is trying to do too much, too fast. What in the world does trying to be a domain registrar have to do with increasing their search capabilities? Plus, Google's research into search AI is not at the level of Microsoft's. (Never, ever underestimate the power of Microsoft Research.) There are some indications that Google may indeed "sit on their laurels" and let Microsoft pass them by.

You have to realize that Microsoft is a very big, very powerful company with an enormous R&D department and a gigantic marketing machine. Google has won both market share and mind share, but both can be taken. Microsoft is in a position to do it. One underestimates at one's own risk.

Microsoft's big problem (5, Interesting)

deanj (519759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571882)

Microsoft's in an interesting position. They can't really take advantage of their OS they way they did to wipe out Netscape.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a web search added to the regular Windows search. Yes, I know they have a beta of desktop search too. I just don't think they'll be able to effectively pull it off.

They already are using it... (4, Insightful)

PornMaster (749461) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571986)

Seriously, why do you think it's worth it for Microsoft to bother getting into search? It's not because billg's interested in the technology, it's because they have millions of eyeballs anyway because MSN is set as the default homepage in millions of browsers.

They are using their own search with their own advertising system to monetize that advantage. They don't have to be better than Google for that to work, just not completely suck donkeys.

I'll probably still use google. (3, Insightful)

kevinx (790831) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571884)

I like google because I don't like to be bombarded with crap until after I push the search button.

Sure they can (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571887)

Why not? How would being Microsoft hinder you from doing better?

Evolution... (2, Insightful)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571890)

Evolution calls for competing protagonists to adapt, to evolve, to change their characteristics to suit either the changing environment or their competition.

Google has a head-start, and are presently unencumbered by the bonehead marketers that have ensured that Microsoft produces such sloppy software.

In order to out-take Google, Microsoft would have to adopt it's strictly logical, scientific modus operandi.

No.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571891)

Microsoft is a marketing company before a technology company. Google is the opposite. People will continue to use the best search engine, and MSN is not it.

uh .. (3, Insightful)

savuporo (658486) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571895)

Google frontpage: ~4KB HTML
MSN frontpage: umbteen kilobytes of clutter, flash, and totally irrelevant BS.

guess which one im gonna pull up for a simple web search.

Re:uh .. (0, Troll)

shird (566377) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572036)

Uhm... are you using msn.com or search.msn.com?

Google and search.msn are pretty much the same size. But you make a good point, most people are as stupid as you, and will go to msn.com instead of the proper page.

A lot of people forget (3, Interesting)

adzoox (615327) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571898)

Microsoft dominating Apple in the operating system market wasn't really a David and Goliath Battle.

Apple was essentially the Google of the early 80's to late 80's.

Google overcame many GREAT & Powerful names - the main being Yahoo and Lycos to come out on top.

Apple overcame Compaq/HP/IBM (for a while) and was at the 50% of all computers sold for a certain period of time and far greater % in education.

Microsoft has the muscle now and has always had the brute force or dominating power to overcome anyone they set their minds on.

That said, I think Google has the name - MSN Search just doesn't roll off the tongue.

MSN Search topic has been regurgitated (1)

t-maxx cowboy (449313) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571902)

MSN Search topic has been regurgitated to the point of making me sick. Move on, give up on the issue. Do we really need 1-3 daily front page posts on MSN Search???? Lets restrict this to once a week, maybe.

it begs the question (4, Funny)

Threni (635302) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571906)

No, it raises the question.

Who Will Win. (2)

jetkust (596906) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571908)

There is a lot of room for improvement in today's search engines. Whoever helps people find the stuff they are looking for best, people will use them. That is how google won in the first place. I'm thinking the next step will be more along the lines of artificial intelligence moreso than pure number crunching.

Re:Who Will Win. (1)

kloidster (817307) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572095)

It's Google's to lose, that's for sure. MS has the money to catalyze that loss. According to some of the things I am hearing coming out of Google, they are not even interested in the search market; they are interested in going after Microsoft's market-share in the OS world.

Google is now a verb meaning "to search" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571915)

search.msn.com is not a verb.
Put that in your pipe and Swiff(tm) it.

Let me think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571918)

Errmmm... No. Then again, I live in Mountain View so I'm biased.

Hardly (5, Interesting)

M3rk1n_Muffl3y (833866) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571922)

Google is attracting the talent M$ can only dream of. Somehow I doubt that they will manage to find any hardcore search geeks to develop new search apps for them. As far as search goes M$ are n00bs not the veterans and they won't be catching up. Their so called "new" search produces less relavant results than Yahoo and on top of that they are very vulnerable to manupulation by SEOs.

nice try, but no cigar.

Re:Hardly (2, Interesting)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572081)

Microsoft has always managed to get the highly talented people that they want. 20 years ago when I was fresh out of college I worked at a company in the Boston area that had a highly talented engineer working for them. Microsoft decided they wanted this guy. He turned down all sorts of offers for huge amounts of money, mainly because he & his wife were both from the New England area, they had young kids, and the kids grandparents were all in the New England area.

Microsoft wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. They kept offering him more and more money. When they realized why he kept saying no then they sweetened the offer with a number of first class airplane tickets EACH YEAR for a number of years so that his entire family could come back to Boston to visit family multiple times each year. They also tossed in a pretty nice sailboat as a signing bonus since he was also an avid sailor. He finally broke down & said yes. From what I understand he was one of the key architects for Excel and/or some of the other Office products.

Why I dislike MSN search already... (5, Interesting)

jmcmunn (307798) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571924)


Because they feel the need to crawl web pages roughly 5 times as much as Google does. I swear their spider has nothing better to do with it's like than to visit my web page for some reason. I only have a few pages, and I get better than 50 hits a day just from the MS spider. Google seems to only hit each page once a day at most. I could see how that could get out of hand if you had a large site, with tons of pages.

Don't get me wrong, I am not worried about bandwidth because of the spider or anything, I just think they could tone down a little. Obviously if I were worried I could do something about it (maybe, depending on how nice it is).

Re:Why I dislike MSN search already... (1)

cpghost (719344) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572030)

Because they feel the need to crawl web pages roughly 5 times as much as Google does.

Perhaps the OS their spiders are running on bluescreens every now and then, so they need to rescan freqently between reboots?

Begs the question (4, Informative)

Catskul (323619) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571925)

No damn it. It doesnt beg the question. Begging the question is a logical falacy.

Re:Begs the question (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572039)

But language is to the better part defined by usage, so that's a common meaning for that phrase now. Just like some words have to disparate meanings depending on context that develop through language usage.

But for the record:

begging the question [google.com.au]

Re:Begs the question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572112)

So are you redefining 'to' to mean 'two'? Sorry, I didn't get the memo yet.

Re:Begs the question (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572086)

No damn it. Fallacy is spelled with two 'l's.

This has been asked before. (1)

keiferb (267153) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571928)

Really, every popular search engine to date has had it's high points and its low points.

Something will beat our currently beloved Google eventually. Whether or not it's a good thing remains to be seen.

I missed the hype (1)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571932)

When it comes to search engines there are only two options to people: Google and everything else. The only people that will be using this are MSN users that get directed/re-directed to it by Microsoft.

Google only stands one chance (2, Insightful)

codepunk (167897) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571934)

Google only stands one chance or their lifespan is
limited to a year or two at best. They have to get
as much stuff on the desktop as they can because MS will integrate their search into the OS. They have got to push firefox now, they need to find a way to own a spot on everbodies desktop and right now firefox is the way to do that.

The old does not have to supplant the new (4, Insightful)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571950)

Just provide a viable alternative to google as hopefully others such as Yahoo will also do. It's really not in our interests for Google to monopolize searching.

Has anyone seen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571953)

the new MSN Search commercial?

It's kind of pathetic, I feel like they're begging you to use their search engine and then at the end, the Microsoft logo pops up, giving you that good old "We OWN YOU" feeling.

They should be more truthful (0)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572004)

Microsoft should be more truthful about it in their commercials. The end should have the Microsoft logo with the caption: "Because you'll eventually be forced to use it"

Microsoft's lack of business ethics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11571974)

We the open source community have to stop Microsoft from obliterating yet another innovative website with their bottomless bank account and relentless aggression. Please sign this petition [petitiononline.com] which will be sent to the appropriate parties. Hopefully we can make a difference and preserve the spirit of the open software movement in today's cut throat search engine market.

Re:Microsoft's lack of business ethics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572035)

You, sir, are a hero of the Internet. Godspeed to you and your noble petition.

Mr. Softee can't get it up... (2, Insightful)

William_Lee (834197) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571976)

I personally think it is unlikely that M$ will ever dominate Google no matter how much money they throw at it for a number of reasons.

#1) Google has been branded into people's consciousness as THE way to search the net. While the landscape of search engines is littered with now fallen former champs ala altavista, Google has a ton of momentum behind it as a brand.

As long as they continue to innovate and return the most relevant results, it is very unlikely MSN search will achieve much penetration of this market. Why would people switch otherwise?

#2) M$ has rarely been an innovator in ANYTHING. In the world of search engines, being one step behind just isn't going to cut it. Google has consistently shown themselves to have a bold, creative overall vision. M$ has always lacked one and still does.

#3) Google is now flush with cash after a very successful IPO. Earnings are going gangbusters and look like they will do so for the forseeable future. They are going to be in a financial position to execute on their game plan. M$ may also have a cash hoarde, but Google's stock price and cash give them the tools necessary to challenge M$ on their own turf if so desired.

Momentum is a powerful force, look at Ebay's domination of the auction market. As long as Google continues to lead, and M$ flails along behind, Mr. Softee will remain flaccid in the search engine market.

Can Microsoft Beat Google? (1)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571996)

No.

Because Google is really, really good. Netscape lost because it sucked more than IE for a time. Google is better.

That said, I see this being used by people who's lives revolve around MSN instant messenger, to find flash games and ecards (which it will probably be good for). In other words, the people who use the old MSN search already.

Differences (1, Interesting)

shird (566377) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571998)

I personnaly have found msn search to have a few more results which google couldnt find for some specific searches. So for that particular search, msn was better, as it found all the stuff google did and more. Those are the facts and can't be denied.

However, I have to say that google has a better URL to remember for people on a kiosk etc and need to just pull up a search engine.

Most people think of a web site as 'word' dot com. ie, to remmeber google all you need to remember is the word google.

But for msn search, you have two words, separated by dots, which could be in any order. In fact, the logical order of "msn" then "search" isn't correct. If I were search.com, Id put an entry for the msn sub domain and get some hits. Or sell it to Microsoft, cause most people are going to be typing 'msn.search.com' instead of search.msn.

That said, msnsearch.com does work, though searchmsn.com is registered by someone else.

Re:Differences (2, Interesting)

shird (566377) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572102)

Another point: Using the fisher-price colours and theme of Windows XP was a clever choice by MS.

A lot more people are going to trust and use the ms search because it looks like it is part of the OS and "official" in terms of looking like the OS portal to the rest of the Internet. Pretty wise move.

But again, the url is crap. You can "google" a search term. "just google it" etc. But you can't do the same with msn.search.

What if? (-1, Offtopic)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#11571999)

Let's wait until Microsoft enters the oil industry!! Bwahahahaha!!! : )

google vs. microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572002)

Google has to screw up pretty bad to get me to go try microsoft code. I really am trying to avoid that wherever possible, and I suspect most tech/geek types are doing the same.

The might win on inertia, but then Google's already in that mindspace for most people.

Microsoft Doesn't Understand (2, Interesting)

SenFo (761716) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572010)

Sure, hits are probably the most important aspect to a search engine; but, Microsoft just doesn't understand what makes Google what it is.

I use Google because it gives me accurate search results without all the added crap. I am emphatically uninterested in having an ad for the latest version of Office display when it's totally unrelated to my search material.

Unless Microsoft can think about something other than money for a change, it's not going to happen for them. You and I both know this will never happen.

duh (5, Interesting)

erikharrison (633719) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572018)

Supplanting Google isn't even hard, relatively speaking. Just be better - total cost of migrating from Google to another search engine approaches nill.

The question, of course, is can MS supplant Google? I doubt it. The reasons:

* Microsoft can't pull a MS Works or similar trick - namely they can't undersell on a poorer product until it hits market saturation

* They can't use proprietary API's or file formats for lock in

* They can't bundle it with their OS

* They can bundle it with their other web services, but when Google trashed Yahoo! many moons ago, it was made clear that superior search engine beats stack of web services.

* MS has no skill making a successful web service. Hotmail and MSNBC are strategic grabs of other services or content (anyone have a counterexample?).

* MS does not seem to have a corporate philosophy that would easily lend itself to Google type ads, which are the only search engine ads I have ever been lulled by. How will MS make a profit?

Of course one has to wonder why they entered the search engine market anyway. I suspect it is simply because it's cool, and much though you may loath them you've got to get MS that. They go where it's cool, even if it's not profitable all the time - they can afford it. Of course, once they are king of a market, they are ruthless about squeezing the rock for all it's water . . .

Can Microsoft Beat Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11572031)

Of course. They'll just integrate an easey accessable interface to MSN search in Longhorn, and no one will bother to open up google any more...

Concerntrate on what's next. (1)

Capt_Troy (60831) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572047)

I think Google's really hit the nail on the head here. Google works, it's gonna be tough for MS to overcome unless they just do it a lot better, and that's pretty doubtful. What they need to do is concerntrate their efforts on the next big thing, rather than trying to outdo Google at what it already does.

Precedents... (4, Insightful)

catdevnull (531283) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572061)

Let's take a look into the recent past:

How did MS's IE beat Netscape? By integrating IE it into Windows. Don't you think that the MS plans to make this search technology 'hard wired' into future (or even current) Windows releases to circumvent users's access or choice in using Google?

Netscape also had some serious quality control issues which was the final nail into its coffin. I suspect, however, that Google is in a much better position to compete than Netscape ever was. But, they're going to have a serious fight on their hands--it's not about quality, it's all about quantity to Microsoft. The more drones out there who start using MS's search engines because the next Windows iteration pushes Google aside will start to erode at Google's profitability and they will play a long hard war of attrition.

Not just no.... (1)

koan (80826) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572077)

But hell no, M$ has shown an amazing lack of understanding in the past 15 years in security, customer needs and wants.
The name Google means "easy and fast" or "accurate" The name Microsoft means "insecure" and "ineffective".

One thing going for MSN (1)

ZakMcCracken (753422) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572078)

TV ads

Google being purely a "being in written" doesn't have an identity (yet?) that "speaks" to TV and radio audiences. I for one couldn't imagine what kind of TV ad would Google set up...

Googling (2)

fsck! (98098) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572080)

I prefer to be believe that Microsoft will put a bunch of money at into it, then throw a fit and give up. Their following will never grow much beyond the MSN customers that don't know any better.

If people are now treating google as a verb, bringing us tantalizingly close to a content-addressable web, how can Microsoft possibly usurp that kind of common recognition? Microsoft is already a verb, too; to do something expensively wrong (perhaps not in as common use as googling).

If all this 'fan-fare' isn't just Microsoft's own manufactured hype, which I believe it is, this will have a polarizing effect on the search industry. Expect AOL and Yahoo to publicly bring in (or restore) one search technology or the other, leaving people like Inktomi in the cold.

MS can win (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572084)

Google has the market right now. They have the brains, the experience, the technology, and enough funding. They do not have a monopoly on Desktop Operating Systems. Google will lose this fight.

Someone will inevitably point out MS's failure to dominate with the X-box, or in some other venture. Let me make this clear. If the U.S. Justice system remains bought (as they are now) MS can crush anyone in any market dependent upon the desktop. In order to get to Google 90% of all people use Windows. MS can just build the search functionality into Windows and, so long as it works well enough for the average person, they will not bother to use a different search engine. It does not have to be as good as Google. It can have 10 times the ads. It can rank everything according to who pays the best. It can fail to work in anything but IE. It can shamelessly promote MS with marketing crap. It does not matter. So long as it is "good enough" to actually work for most people and it is built in, it will win.

MS sometimes takes years to get a product "good enough" but they have the time and the money, and most importantly, the monopoly.

He who controls browser controls search (1)

t482 (193197) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572096)

All they have to do is integrate the search into IE and they will control the market.

For example they could have a feature that displays the msn search results every time you search any search engine such as google (in a side iframe).

Alternative they could have common search results precached on the browser level so it appears faster.

Even better, Microsoft could use its clout with the media (NBC), Libraries (where Gates donated lots of PCs), and Encarta to integrate their content.

Microsoft has to, gulp, innovate to win (5, Insightful)

saddino (183491) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572099)

1) The UI problem. As many have noticed, MSN Search is a near copy of Google's interface: even the "Settings" look identical. At best, making Google "switchers" comfortable will aid in driving traffic, but at worst it's an admission that "Google has done it right, and it can't be done better."
  • Innovation: Microsoft should research how to make the UI
  • better than Google. If it's possible, they should do it. It'll pay off even if people have to learn a new paradigm (ugh, hate that word).

2) The domain problem. For those few who do not have a Google bookmark (or have a built-in window a la Safari and Firefox), they can likely type "google.com" into their browser faster than...(they're already typing in their query). "search.msn.com" is just, for lack of a better word, ugly.

  • Innovation: Microsoft should buy a simple domain as a home for their search. Which brings us to...

3) The branding problem. For a company has huge and rich as Microsoft, they are strangely conservative about protecting the amazingly well-entrenched brand "Windows" (whether that's a valid trademark is an other issue). It's almost as if Microsoft has given up on branding and just "wings it" (Windows Movie Maker? Windows Media 9?). Face it, just adding "Windows" or "Microsoft" or "msn" (ooh, that rolls of the tongue) breaks all the rules of branding. Google is a verb because it is fanciful.
  • Innovation: Come up with a new name for your search technology, advertise the hell out of it (and per 2 above buy a single word domain for it) and then Google will be worried. If you build it, they will come.

er... (2, Funny)

keiferb (267153) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572103)

This is a trick question, right?

the way MS can beat google (2, Funny)

musikit (716987) | more than 9 years ago | (#11572121)

HANDLE ResolveAddress(LPSTR lpstrAddress)
{
if( strcmp(lpstrAddress,"www.google.com") == 0)
{
strcpy(lpstrAddress,"www.msn.com");
}
return ResolveToIPAddress(lpstrAddress);
}
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...