[teszeract]

THE WAR
This one is going to be doozy. It will probably go on for years to come and shape our computing future. There's no doubt that there will be a victor, but who? The Contender or the Mighty? I'm talking Google vs MS. With battlelines already being drawn, scouting taking place and strategies being mooted, the conflict is still in the cold war phase, but it's about to get very very serious. However, it's not obvious that the consumer can just stand back and watch expecting to be the real winner whatever the outcome ... they might even be part of the casualties.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology...opstories_html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09...enter_rebuild/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09...rosoft_google/
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...atementPR.mspx

[rickey939]

Google will be victorious by a TKO in the 7th Round.

[CharlesS]

God, I hope Google doesn't end up getting Netscaped.

[historylme]

Money is on the Google boy, they got heart and sold.

[JoshuaZ]

Yeah, go google. Then again, replacing one evil lord for another might not be the best idea.

[moonmonkey]

Google will turn out to be as bad as Microsoft is they win.

They know more about us than our own mothers.

[Cubeoid]

Google will **** Microsoft.

[Salty]

Go Google! So long as they make it Mac compatible. If they don't, then... uhh... go Pages!

[Wiskedjak]

Google will win this war. But, they will be as bad, if not worse, than M$. And, they'll prove to be much more difficult competition for Apple than M$, especially if they run Mac compatible (I already prefer Picasa over iPhoto)

[teszeract]

I don't think that Mac compatibility is going to be an issue for the future. Esp. with Apple migrating to Intel and reducing porting hurdles. Also Goog is placing some bets with Java (hint: you've already got it). But the sentiment in this thread is correct - that absolute power will corrupt absolutely. In a while, the "do no evil" founders will find themselves bowing before the pressure of boards, stakeholders, investors to make more moolah.

[teszeract]

OT: hey, did that network that gained sentience in the Terminator have a name?

[rjenkinson]

skynet?

-r.

[Wiskedjak]

Google Master Plan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/21470089/

[teszeract]

Thanks, rjenkinson.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Google will win this war. But, they will be as bad, if not worse, than M$. And, they'll prove to be much more difficult competition for Apple than M$, especially if they run Mac compatible (I already prefer Picasa over iPhoto)

Google will never be as bad as MS as long as they keep producing the quality software they're producing now. Look at all their stuff - it's clean, simple, and easy to use. Not bloated or convoluted at all. Google is doing well because they produce quality software. Sure, that causes competition for Apple, but competition is good. It will keep Apple on their toes.

And anyway, if Google starts getting bloated and ugly like a lot of Microsoft software is these days, well, your argument about them being much stiffer competition kind of goes away.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

People don't hate google like they hate Microsoft.

They aren't all that mac friendly but they are better than MS.

[dampeoples]

Did they make Picasa for the mac yet?

[Salty]

Originally Posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO

People don't hate google like they hate Microsoft.

They aren't all that mac friendly but they are better than MS.

That's partly because the world can only have so much hate before it bursts into flames... MS pushes the limits themselves

[brokenjago]

As far as I know, the only Macintosh compatible software Google has ever released is the gMail notifier for Mac OS X.

[SirCastor]

Google strikes me as a company that's trying to do things to make life easier and cooler. Like Apple. they're trying to make computing work for people. Microsoft doesn't do that. Microsoft tries to make money. That's [em]all[/em] they do.

Don't get me wrong, Apple and Google are trying to make money too. But MS just doesn't care. MS is a lot like the RIAA I just realized.

[kcmac]

I'll never understand the Picasa love thing. I use it at work on my PC only because Windows is lame in this regard. Would never want Picasa on my Mac.

[Sebastien]

Originally Posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO

People don't hate google like they hate Microsoft.

Don't worry, that'll come.

Remember, people hated IBM more than they did MS at first.

[insha]

Originally Posted by kcmac

I'll never understand the Picasa love thing. I use it at work on my PC only because Windows is lame in this regard. Would never want Picasa on my Mac.

I'll second that.

I only use it on my sister's laptop, for the same reason you pointed. If it ever happens that Google desides to release it on the Mac, it's safe to say that iPhoto has nothing to worry about.


Edit: And yes, Google will be just as bad as M$.

[tavilach]

Originally Posted by brokenjago

As far as I know, the only Macintosh compatible software Google has ever released is the gMail notifier for Mac OS X.

Most Google software is via the web browser. Google. Google Maps. GMail.

[SomeToast]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Google Master Plan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/21470089/

...presented on a Yahoo property.

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by tavilach

Most Google software is via the web browser. Google. Google Maps. GMail.

That's kind of the genius of it, isn't it? Isn't that exactly what Microsoft wanted to do with .Net? They wanted your applications to reside somewhere else and you would load them up from the network and use them. The only thing that doesn't fit into this puzzle is Google isn't charging money again and again and again. Are thy charging money at all?

[Tesseract]

Originally Posted by SirCastor

That's kind of the genius of it, isn't it? Isn't that exactly what Microsoft wanted to do with .Net? They wanted your applications to reside somewhere else and you would load them up from the network and use them. The only thing that doesn't fit into this puzzle is Google isn't charging money again and again and again. Are thy charging money at all?

They are selling ads, mostly.
They also sell search appliances and "Google minis".

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by teszeract

THE WAR

Originally Posted by Tesseract

They are selling ads, mostly.
They also sell search appliances and "Google minis".

Tesseract, teszeract... I'm confused. One person, two persons?

And after Googling [apropos] to find out what a tesseract is, I'm even more confused.

[Tesseract]

Two persons.
I was first.

[Kerrigan]

It always takes Microsoft a few years to catch on to new technologies, but when they do they always shut out the competition. Let's have a quick run through the graveyard of Microsoft competitors:

IBM - completely lost its software distribution channels to MS
Apple
Netscape
Real
Palm OS
Nintendo

And how many companies have challenged MS and won? None. When Microsoft begins to seriously compete with Google, Google will bite the dust. I'm only pointing out the obvious.

[tavilach]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

It always takes Microsoft a few years to catch on to new technologies, but when they do they always shut out the competition. Let's have a quick run through the graveyard of Microsoft competitors:

IBM - completely lost its software distribution channels to MS
Apple
Netscape
Real
Palm OS
Nintendo

And how many companies have challenged MS and won? None. When Microsoft begins to seriously compete with Google, Google will bite the dust. I'm only pointing out the obvious.

Let's look at that list. In my opinion, Google has far more resources than IBM ever had. The same goes for Netscape. Also remember that Netscape was so easy to shut out because they charged. As for Real, I say again that Google has a hell of a lot more resources. In the case of Palm OS, well: PDA's, not just an particular OS, have died. People use phones, and Palm has simply not made software for phones. And there's Nintendo: Microsoft would never have been able to touch Nintendo in their prime time, but as gaming consoles gave way to computers in my situations, in they went, and seized the more computer-like gaming console market from Nintendo's dying arms.

Don't underestimate Google: Microsoft is not invincible. Then again, I'm not rooting for Google. Monopolies suck.

Disclaimer: Don't flame me if my analysis was putrid. I'm not supported by a single fact.

[insha]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

It always takes Microsoft a few years to catch on to new technologies, but when they do they always shut out the competition. Let's have a quick run through the graveyard of Microsoft competitors:

IBM - completely lost its software distribution channels to MS
Apple
Netscape
Real
Palm OS
Nintendo

And how many companies have challenged MS and won? None. When Microsoft begins to seriously compete with Google, Google will bite the dust. I'm only pointing out the obvious.

That is true, but what has happened now is that M$ has gotten too big (I mean just look at monkey boy, he's gotten huge) for it's own good.

M$ did not duke it out with the companies you list at the same time, those were one-on-one bouts (to a certain extent). This time around M$ is facing competition from every direction at the same time. As for M$ competing, the closest they came to competing is when the M$ was developing IE to compete against Netscape. That is the only time that I truly think they were competing (or something close to it, since they had a huge advantage, Windows). All the other times they used underhanded ways to further their dominance.

Now Windows is not such a crucial factor (or advantage) for M$ (as far as Google is concerned). Google does not need Windows to survive, and I think this is a very huge advantage in favor of Google.

I think M$ is really competing with Google, as they haven't been this distressed by a company in the Internet realm since Netscape. So I'm not sure why you think M$ is not taking Google seriously? And I seriously doubt that Google will "bite the dust", even if M$ "begins to seriously compete with Google".

And no I'm not a Google's fan boy -- I think they will be just as bad, if not worse, that M$.

[JackNN]

I love how Google is using Microsoft's own tactics against it, i.e. giving stuff away to compete. I'm not sure there'll be a clear victor - Microsoft has deep pockets but I think its influence will wane. I'd just like to see its market share reduced so it's forced to compete on quality.

Actually I'd like to see a duopoly where Google owns the information and Apple the entertainment. Both have innovation in their DNA and I doubt they would let a dominant position stop them innovating.

[Salty]

I'd just like to see a few different companies shaking things up. And if it comes to the point where you just have two formats that work well with both programs then the consumer benefits.

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by Salty

I'd just like to see a few different companies shaking things up. And if it comes to the point where you just have two formats that work well with both programs then the consumer benefits.

No No No. This is Microsoft, nothing is ever about the consumer.

[edgr]

Originally Posted by JackNN

Actually I'd like to see a duopoly where Google owns the information

Google already does own the information. Google knows when you eat, when you sleep and who you sleep with, what brand of car you drive and what political party you support. Google knows everything.

Pretty soon you'll see little googlebots buzzing around the streets: "GoogleBot: indexing your life."

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by edgr

Google already does own the information. Google knows when you eat, when you sleep and who you sleep with, what brand of car you drive and what political party you support. Google knows everything.

I don't even know when I eat and sleep, before I'm actually doing it. As for the last three, I guess Google knows nothing then.

[moonmonkey]

Originally Posted by edgr

Pretty soon you'll see little googlebots buzzing around the streets: "GoogleBot: indexing your life."

Do you have any proof of this?

[amsalpemkcus]

IMHO. The only way M$ is going to compete well against Google is by splitting up. The size of M$ is its own biggest problem.

[rfrost]

M$ is trying very hard to become the next General Motors, a company living on past glories staffed by brain-dead execs whose only concern is quarterly financials and obscene executive salaries. Like GM, M$ pursues innovation only when it anticipates it being a high-margin venture, and most of those "innovations" turn out to be mere tweaks (except, of course, when they buy out another company that has actually innovated). By that token, XP is M$'s Escalade: bloated, overpriced, incremental, and dimwitted, but most of all, banking on the ignorance of consumers. M$ typically stays well behind the innovation curve, preferring to let others take risks, and if they succeed, buying them. By contrast, Google always tries to push the envelope, and it's smart enough that its successes far outnumber its failures. Having had students who've worked for both M$ and Google, it's clear to me that it's Hell at M$ (bureaucratic, stifling, etc), Heaven at Google (enabled employees, exciting, risk-taking, etc).

M$ is the epitome of what I think of as a corporate life-cycle: innovative on the front end, increasingly conservative as it matures, then encrusted and incapable of changing either itself or its products. Remember that of all the mammoth companies of the 20th century, only IBM genuinely managed to reinvent itself with an entirely new business model. For the sake of residents of the State of Washington, I sure hope M$'s growing senility doesn't ravage the state's economy the way GM's has Michigan's.

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by amsalpemkcus

IMHO. The only way M$ is going to compete well against Google is by splitting up. The size of M$ is its own biggest problem.

That's also it's biggest strength. MS couldn't have held the crushing grip on competitors if MSN, Windows dev, and Application dev had all been separate.