Google vs. Microsoft

The bigger question is, "What is Google going to do with they launch their new version of XP (even before they get to Longhorn), that has SEARCH built into the OS?"

People (including myself) talk about Google and Yahoo all of the time and forget that Microsoft can take them both out. When you have 50 billion in CASH you can do virtually anything you want. They even invest heavily in their competitors like SUN, Apple, and several companies whose purpose is to destroy Linux. Right now it is Google that is set in the middle of their crosshairs. They are gunning for them and Google WILL lose.

But you gotta love the mindset of Bill Gates. Instead of getting into the whole battle of the Search Engines, Microsoft is going to bypass the whole thing. You will use their search without the use of any browser. Built right into the OS and Microsoft products (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.) you will be able to search for anything.

Plus "Uncle Bill" has been buying up the rights to content for over a decade. He has been using hundreds of little corporations to accumulate information. There are some things that you will ONLY be able to find on MSN. He owns countless rare works of art that he has locked away and has done high quality scans of. There are thousands of volumes of encyclopedias he owns the rights to. He has been accumulating literary masterpieces and internet publishing rights to millions of books, manuals, journals, research reports, etc.

There is no question that he knows where this is going. Search is in its infancy stage and as big as people THINK that Google is, they are still a site that is solely dependent on the relevancy, accuracy, structure, and format of OTHER PEOPLE'S information.

Bill knows that the Internet is growing SO fast that soon it will be impossible to find anything of relevance using traditional indexing. Even now there are often countless pages of information you need to sift through to find what you are looking for. And THAT is from the biggest search engines; the "industry leaders".

Will MSN have everything? No, but they don't want to. Bill's philosophy is basically: If you want to find information on Norwegian Yaks, go to Google. If you are looking for anything else of relevance come to us.

I don't even like Microsoft very much, but I have to respect his vision and endless determination to dominate every industry he enters.

Believe me, this whole Google vs. Yahoo thing will be nothing but a side show compared to what Microsoft is going to do. Not an IPO, a "Gmail" system, or a product search will be able to save Google. And certainly not their Toolbar.

That is just the sad reality of it. Larry and Brin got greedy. They think they are invincible when they should have cashed out a year ago.

 

It has everything to do with the toolbar. Google's Toolbar uses the browser to search. It is going to be worthless once Microsoft bypasses the browser altogether.

But you are right, it is a broader topic that should have its own thread. Sorry.

 

Well I can't argue with the Master of the Universe.

You clearly have the upper hand.

 

Shawn, you have a rare find of a member in SEOGuru, this guy is a major asset to Digital Point. Now I do not know him from Adam, but by reading this mans posts we are all in the company of a visionary in this industry.

I hope you hang around a long time SEOguru.

Have a great day and keep on posting.

Shawn, I think what he means by the toolbar is: Google software programs will not keep Microsoft who can with the flick of a few switches in the OS hurt Google greatly.

If they build in antispyware programs in to the future OS that will enable folks to delete any program that transmits information to third parties that will kill a lot of programs.

Microsoft must market into this desire for privacy online or they will fail also since the spyware software companies will develop programs that will enable users to delete most programs that invade privacy.

So unless Google finds a way to engage users without datamining, they will have a hard time down the road. If transmission of page views is outlawed down the road where does that leave Google?

The EU has very strict privacy laws and the US will have to follow soon.

 

you're too fast at moderating, Shawn. I was about to answer to the old one when I noticed the seperate thread

Microsoft (msn) definately has the biggest cash cow of all: Windows. They already made lots of stuff obsolete... other browsers, email clients, file managers, video/audio players, software firewalls, online messengers, remote access solutions. There is still a market for any of these programs but the margin is slim, if there are commercial competitors at all! There's still room for ZoneAlarm, PCAnywhere, Eudora, Opera and so on... but besides that, it's Microsoft dominating.

It all comes down to the question: Where is the money?
It is in simple searches for the average lazy guy, as SEOGuru pointed out already. Microsoft wont stop people from using google to look for "Norwegian Yaks", pageranks and backlinks as long as they can have the easy-to-sell queries.

 

Thank you anthonycea; however, there are MANY intelligent people here.

I am not a code junkie. I have met countless people over the years that can take a bunch of data and run analysis to find trends or little gems of information that we may not have realized. That is not my forte.

What I do well is take all of those little things and combine them into strategies to make money. I've become increasingly efficient at it.

Again, thank you for the compliments but they are unwarranted. I've been here a short time and there are several other people that deserve such praises over me. Shawn is a great moderator; better than I have seen elsewhere. Our comments were meant in fun.

 

I'll believe it when I see it.

despite what everyone says, I don't think msn can ever "netscape" google. if it was that easy for them to do, they'd be doing by now.

MSN's search engine, as it stands now, is a joke. until I start to see innovative changes and new ideas from them that actually have a big impact, I wouldn't worry too much about google's future.

 

Well said mxlabs. You hit the nail on the head. There are many arguments that can be made for where the money is.

Being that MSN's content will be largely controlled, they will be able to filter out irrelevant information and certainly filter out adult content. Would people be willing to pay for that service? I don't know. Microsoft probably thinks they will.

Here is a thought. Would you put it past Microsoft to invest 30-40 million just in FREE lessons of how to search the Internet, starting from 1st grade on up? Of course, they are all using the Microsoft OS and not using a browser. I would not be surprised if they had a long term strategy to get whole generations using search through their operating system.

 

It is already being done. MSN has invested tens of millions into search technology. They have already announced their own bot and ranking algorithm that is supposed to put Google to shame. Granted, it isn't up and running yet and I'm not claiming that Google will disappear overnight. If there is one thing that Microsoft has, its patience.

They aren't worried about Google gaining any more market share. The fact is that by losing Yahoo, Google has lost more than half of its market share and AOL is already working on moving off of Google as well. It wont be long before all Google has is Google.

Remember, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't happening.

 

Yeah, Shawns alright, I have had my moments with him, if he lets me speak he will let anyone have their say so, that is why Digital Point Forums will be one of the best Webmaster forums in a very crowded market of forums.

What will separate the men from the boys in the forum business will be editorial integrity verses censored content.

If a forum is nothing more than an extension of a major corporations PR department then no one will want to go to church there, why, to hold up on a pedestal their favorite sponsor?

Look, Microsoft has a forum now, if these independant forums are nothing more than PR tools for certain companies the members will find out fast and find new forums that are not bias.

OK, that is why Shawn could have something here, I am sure that many will be knocking on his door soon to try to influence him in one direction or another, but that is his business on how he runs his forum.

Some forums are pro Google since the forum owners make money teaching PAGE RANK secrets, so you can not insult the master there. You will be banned the same day.

Maybe Shawn and I will never like each other, but a little friction makes for a better forum.

 

You make some good points Shawn. To Microsoft it is: Where is the money. But ultimately the question is: Is the money in relevancy? And as you pointed out: What is relevant?

I can see both sides of the argument. Some feel that big companies can pay their way to the top of the listings (which you can do now with sponsored links). This eliminates the possibility for smaller companies that may have valuable content to be noticed or "reap the rewards".

However, others would say that the paid listings ARE more relevant. It certainly eliminates spam sites and one could argue that if you were looking for, let's say, "Lingerie". Would you rather have Victoria Secret, Fredericks, La Perla, and Lovefifi on top (all world leaders), or have some small hole-in-the-wall company working out of their garage? Or worse yet, some adult site with "pics" of women in lingerie?

I guess it really depends on what you are looking for.

I think before anyone can win the war, searches need to become more qualified.

Ahhh, but there is the advanced search, right? Who uses it? Why not build a form of advanced search into the actual search?

You type in "Lingerie". The first thing that comes up is:

(please select one of the following)
Are you looking for:

• Places to buy LINGERIE?

• The history of LINGERIE?

• Manufacturers of LINGERIE?

• Adult content relating to LINGERIE?

This solves many things:
1) The searcher is more likely to get more relevant results based on what they are looking for.
2) The advertiser who is paying for ad space or sponsored links is more likely to get qualified traffic (which will in turn increase ROI and drive up the cost per click for the search engine)
3) The results are more "family friendly". Heck, let the adult sites fight it out in the adult section of the keyword.

This is just a thought, but I think that this issue will need to be addressed before any winner can be determined.

 

I do agree that google holds the upper hand over google, especially over those who are not as computer savvy. I also agree that Google is going to run into trouble when MS releases their search... BUT we will see how accurate it is on the first try- if they mess up early- people may stray away from its use later.

 

Jason, Google has the upper hand on Google? Don't you think you better edit that?

Keep on keeping on, my prediction, Google will merge with a service provider like AOL or maybe Barry Diller will buy them.

How about this one, IBM or INTEL aquire Google, talk about SEARCHWAR3

Now Intel's COO is on the Google board of directors, you all know that IBM is a data mining king, think and grow richer, I hope.

 

Though I believe that historical profiling is a good concept in theory, I don't believe it can work for search or virtually any other industry. I'll explain why.

Large companies invested millions of dollars in this technology over the last couple of years. They looked at buying histories, clicking tendencies, searching preferences, etc. to present information that is "customized" for that viewer. Ultimately what they found was that sales and customer confidence dropped. Most of these companies have gone back to their old ways.

The reason why is because of the nature of the Internet and the inability to perform true profiling. The underlying concept is that if I visit a site and search for "Cars", the next time I go to the site and search for "Bras" they may show me "Car Bras" because they know I'm interested in cars. Or if I visit a certain site when searching for a certain keyword, that site may come up first if I search for that keyword again or another keyword within that theme.

There are a few problems here.

1. Who is on the computer?
   The assumption is made that every person uses the same computer, and each computer is only used by a single person. What if I'm not on my own computer? I'm at a friend's house, an Internet Cafe, a library, at work, or I have a computer who is shared by my family? Unless there is a login for each user, it is impossible to tell if the same person is searching as before. All they really know is the IP address or that my browser has a cookie installed. Some companies that did profiled marketing customized menus, colors, and featured products based on historical searching and it made many customers frustrated because it may not have been THEIR profile.
   
2. How do YOU know what I want?
   Even if I DID login and they knew who I was, how would they know what I want? If I go to Amazon and buy a cookbook as a gift for my mom, that does not mean that the next time I come back I want to see cook books or kitchen appliances. Even if I DID buy a Plasma Screen TV for myself, do I really need to see ANOTHER plasma screen TV after I just purchased one? I came to the website for a reason and a company can not predict what that reason is for. Ultimately, they can not forecast "intent".
   
3. You don't know where I want to go.
   If I visit one site, I probably would visit that site again right? NO. I do searches all of the time and usually have to go through more sites that I DON'T want than sites that are of value to me. They do not know how I "feel" about a website I have just visited. If I am looking for sites I like, then I will likely make a list. Ummm, that is what the FAVORITES tab is for. I certainly don't need someone else's help to tell me what site I am looking for. In fact I would be a little upset if I am looking for a site that I know is suppose to be there and it isn't.

The nature of customer profiling, though a great idea, is impossible online because the reason why you are visiting a site can change every time you visit.

That is why my proposal would work. You allow the customer or user to make the choice at the point of action. You don't have to worry about what they wanted before, all that matters is what they want NOW.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

 

SEO GURU and Shawn, why do you think Microsoft wants us all to use PASSPORT?

Profile, Profile, Profile, now they are doing away with LOG ONS and PASSWORDS with new programs they are developing.

So your personal ID (666) will be the virtual chip in your brain, your online identity, no log in, no passwords, no cookies will be needed with the new systems of computer user ID.

Bless you my smart friends (brothers?)