Are you dumb? Why would people hate MS.... If they hate MS why use thier OS? We probably wouldent be chating on this forum if it wasnt for MS....
I think the search engine aspect of their domination is the most important and the one most likely to affect people.
nowadays people bash on microsoft often, thats what hes talking about. And sometimes its justified, like when i got pissed at them a couple months ago. I was trying to save a csv file in excel with chinese characters. damn thing wouldnt work cuz microsoft wont allow you to save in more then one encoding format. I downloaded open office for free, and that worked just fine. The bash is that with its billions of dollars it doesnt include some of the functions that a free open source program does. Of course microsoft has done some great things, and thats why its worth what it is. Its going to have to keep doing these things to stay on top of the game though! Google isnt a monopoly with competitors like yahoo and microsoft who are investing millions in R&D. Google can be overcome.. what if microsoft bought yahoo, and bought matt cutts and his team...?
I don't want to sound like an ass or anything, but it's painful reading an entire discussion when a lot of the terms are not even being used correctly... A monopoly doesn't give any allowance for other competitors. Mono means one, there can ONLY be one. When Ask, Yahoo, MSN and every other search engine dies and Google is the sole search engine on the net, then it'll be a Monopoly. Until then it's closer to being part of an Oligopoly. Google doesn't have a monopoly - and it never will as along as any other competitors exist. Due to the nature of the Internet (where the cost of entering for most industries is so low) there'll be very few, if any, circumstances of a monopoly in any Internet related industry. Now that you know the definitions, reread the thread and see how silly some of the arguments are. As someone else mentioned, if any combination of Google, Yahoo and MSN banded together they'd be operating under a cartel. Cartels are notoriously unstable and even then there'll be competition. There never will be a state of monopoly on search as long as people want an alternative. Monopolys are a rare occurance, damnit. *end rant*
Maybe it's just me..but I always felt that just offering a better product that ends up putting others out of business (without price cutting or any of that other nonsense) is perfectly legal in the US. It's not their fault they offer the only decent product out there. It's all about business practices, not size or money.
I think there are some jealous people here. If you owed google or ms wouldn't you be expanding? or would you just start giving away all the software?
Lets face it, the last thing we want is for Google to be a Monopoly. With no competition, they can walk all over us, God forbid they start price skimming...
Yes Google Isn't a Monopoly - A Monopoly would be defined as being in a Industry were Entry is extremely difficult almost impossible. People in the Search Engine Marketing Business are entering every day. Their Product isn't unique, their search is very similar to Yahoo Search, MSN Search and Just about 1,000 other search engines today.
My Schpeel on google There is so much that can be said about google. Some bad, some good, like almost everyone else. I feel that since they cashed in on ads, they've been spinning all over the place. To me, they're losing focus. It seems they are trying to monopolize too many markets, and and not focusing on their bread and butter. It looks like monopoly, but really, it's not possible. To sum up my opinion, I am losing much respect for google. The funny thing is... I, like you, will continue to use google for it's reach. They really should, however, keep an out out for the thousands of little guys trying to start something... like video sites. I mean google video, google news, google real estate, google auto, google albums, google books, etc.etc.++... yes that's a little much. Not more than .00001% is orginal by google. All everyone elses content. But it sure is branded. And who's got more content than everyone else's content? It's nice that a search engine would create unbeatable competition for anything else other than search results. My timeline of google: - They're just a search engine. - People like that. - People talk about it. - People use it. - People become attached. - Google ads are born. - Cash begins to rain. - Webmasters get involved. - Webmasters build ad sites. - Google ads continue to grow. - Cash now hails. - The web is now congested with ad only gibberish sites and repeat content. - Google blindly jumps into anything and everything google products. - People are still attached, whether they like it or not. The rest... TBD Yahoo Bit I am personally happy to see Yahoo with their new Micheal Jordan Sneakers on. They have totally flipped for the good. Their new and old (turned improved) markets are going to skyrocket, and I got my surfboard ready for this wave. Go Yahoo! I also happen to think Yahoo's results are a little better at times. MSN Bit MSN...? Where the heck are you? That's what I think. They have more power than they know. If MSN got their ducks in a row, and thought outside the box, they would accidently step on google while on their way to the top. Of course, got to improve the results. Maybe it's in the works... but then... would that be monopoly? No. Ok... I feel like I've just written an article... want to buy it? haha JK.
Haha, now watch when nobody's going to take any heed and continue arguing whether it's a monopoly or not. It's not. It won't be, it'll never be. I'm not saying this in broad generalisations, it's the truth - unless MSN and Yahoo roll over AND every single small search engine out there dies, Google will never be a monopoly. There can ONLY be one entity in a monopoly. Not one big one and a few others, ONE. ONLY ONE. The only circumstances in which a monopoly occurs is when entry is so difficult (or impossible) for other bodies that only one entity dominates. This can occur in certain scenarios: - A government designates one single energy provider - A government designates only one telco provider... Starting to see a trend? Often a governing body can decide to monopolise a single segment or industry or dictate laws making it difficult (or impossible) to enter. The Internet doesn't have a governing body, and I'm willing to bet if the world made every other SE illegal except for Google, there'd still be competition. Now the point of environmental context comes into play - an energy provider may be a monopoly in their country's market, but there're energy providers all over the world - is this provider a monopoly? Yes, but only in the context of their country. The nature of a search engine is international, there never will be a search engine monopolising the industry. Even if one body were to dominate the entire world and outlaw all SE's but one, would they be able to enforce it?