Why do people love Google?
Google controls 70 per cent of the search market, in an era when our life revolves around the 'Search Box' and when successful internet executives, like the Stepford Princess Marissa Mayer, are considered facile thought leaders, propounding theories and dictums at will, like a new-age Thoreau. Did you read her latest gem where she says "
It is not what you know, it's what you can find out." Deep.
During the rise of the computers, Microsoft rose roughshod over everything else, swatting competitors like flies, bribing governments and big business bean-counters alike, always deflecting cries of monopolistic behavior by pointing fingers at the software thieves.
Now, Google deflects concerns of privacy by accusing users of "
what are you hiding that you are so afraid?"
Faced with a privacy nightmare in a cloud computing world, why then, do we love Google?
This
thread gives the answer, sort of speaking for the internet itself,
Yes, they are the new Microsoft. But one that doesn't charge you for their services. That's why we love them. And they're savvy.
Not only that, but it doesn't lock people in their proprietary office and protocols.
* Tired of Gmail? export it to imap
* Tired of Google Calendar? export it to ical
* Tired of Google Docs? export it to open office, ms office, html or even plain text
And,
People use google because they make great software and stay with them for the same reason. People stay with MS because they are locked in.
Labels: google, Microsoft
Finding the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the web 2.0 era
The PC Era is now finally over.The Bill and Steve Show that entertained us for over quarter of a century is over too. "
You and I have memories longer than the road ahead." Steve Jobs once said to Bill Gates. Bill has pushed himself out of Microsoft while
Steve is ill and can no longer look after his baby, Apple.
Where are the rivals of the web era? Or, to be more fashionable, the web 2.0 era?
- The Google guys seem to have no quarrel with the world, ostensibly sticking to their
'do no evil' marketing mantra.
- The web 2.0 pioneers, Joshua Schacter (Del.icio.us), Kevin Rose (Digg), Gabe Rivera (Techmeme), Caterina Fake (Flickr), Matt Mullenwag (Wordpress), Evan Williams (Blogger), are either too young or too mild in comparison.
The Bill Gates and Steve Jobs show also featured an all-star supporting cast of Scott McNealy (Sun), Michael Dell and Mark Andreessen of Netscape, not forgetting guest roles by John Sculley, Andrew Grove (Intel) and other PC-era heavyweights. Those were the days when technology had only started to invade our homes and our lifestyles.
In today's age of blogs, Youtube, Digg, Comments for Everythings and what not, it is a shame we don't have more of these: "You Copied Us!", "How many Windows users does it take to change a bulb?"
Then, you had nerds versus everyone else.
Now, everyone claims to be a Nerd.
Everyone claims to be an expert, famous, or both, among other things.
Everyone has a blog, Twitter account, Facebook/Myspace/Orkut Profile or a Digg account.
The Nerd has gone mainstream.
Among other web 2.0 players, there is Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) who reportedly 'stole' his way to social networking riches. Zuckerberg tries to copy Steve Jobs. He tried to copy Jobs' seminal 1984 Introduction during the introduction of Facebook's ad system, Beacon: "
Once in a lifetime...this is the future of advertising". As the cliche goes, rest is history.
There was a third big-time entertainer during that period, Larry Ellison.
This decade, all we got was Mark Cuban and he is nowhere as newsworthy as Ellison, despite scoring a double whammy -
a blog and a team.Any random sampling of quotes from the Bill Gates and Steve Gates tells you that Bill Gates played Kevin Smith's Silent Bob (or, muttering Bob) to Steve Jobs' opinionated Jay. Both of them are Geniuses, only one of them burns brighter than the other.
Some of my favorite quotes from Bill Gates and Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs quotes"He'd be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once or gone off to an ashram when he was younger." - Steve Jobs on Bill Gates
What a computer is to me is the most remarkable tool that we have ever come up with. It’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.Being the richest man in the cemetery doesn't matter to me ... Going to bed at night saying we've done something wonderful... that's what matters to me.They are shamelessly copying us. - (On Vista)
Unfortunately, people are not rebelling against Microsoft. They don’t know any better. (1994)
When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something. (2005)
Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary. (2005)
The art of those commercials is not to be mean, but it is actually for the guys to like each other.- Jobs On the "P.C. and Mac" commercials, at the All Things Digital Conference 5, where he shared the stage with Bill Gates, 2007
Bill Gates QuotesMicrosoft has had clear competitors in the past. It’s a good thing we have museums to document that. (2001)
Spam will be a thing of the past in two years' time. (2004)
Microsoft looks at new ideas, they don't evaluate whether the idea will move the industry forward, they ask, 'how will it help us sell more copies of Windows?' (1998)
I wish I wasn't ... There's nothing good that comes out of that. You get more visibility as a result of it.- On Being Rich, in The Guardian, 2006
The Best quote on GatesBill Gates is a very rich man today ... and do you want to know why? The answer is one word: versions.- Dave Barry
Labels: apple, bill gates, Microsoft, steve jobs
Do we need yet another Operating System?
I am still using Win XP SP 2 and I have no issues or desires to upgrade to
Microsoft new Windows 7.
Vista was a
failure.
Some guys recently
installed Google's Operating System for mobiles, Android on Asus EEE PC.
Among older tech companies, only Apple manages to excite its users with its products with its cult-like influence but I think we will reach a saturation point for coolness soon.
After all, even Johnny Depp and his cultivated coolness could not save the third (some say the second too) installment of the "Pirates of the Carribean).
How will Apple look without Steve Jobs?
Tech mags and papers will cover the introduction of Windows 7 because they got to fill the space and make some ad money.
Tech users will download the new O.S. for boasting rights and adding ammo to the water cooler/twitter talk,
" did you download? Yes, my download speed was..."Meanwhile, the normal P.C. user is happy with what he has. For your normal web usage, you do not need a new operating system.
Didn't I hear someone say the other day that the days of Desktop O.S. is over?
The web is the new Operating System.
If someone needs a new operating system, it is the old technology companies.
Labels: Microsoft, Vista
Is Google going Microsoft’s way?
Through two almost successive product announcements, Google has started to convince me that it may be going Microsoft’s way. Microsoft used its dominance in the Desktop OS and Office business to clone existing successful programs with great success in the 90s, destroying many startups in the process.
Google is doing the same things but I suspect Google’s ability to defeat the incumbents with two upcoming services.
First, Google announces a Wikipedia-type system called
“Knol” where people can write encyclopedia type pieces and share ad revenues with Google, benefiting from Google’s easy indexing promise.
About.com, ehow.com, wikihow.com, squidoo.com, hubpages, mahalo.com, howstuffworks.com…these are some of the heavy weights that Google aims to defeat just because it enjoys 70% dominance in the search business.
Earlier Google launched base.google.com to challenge Craigslist, pages.google.com to challenge easy web page creators. What happened to all these?
Then there is the trust thing. Will Google go Yahoo’s way and show links from only its properties as top results. That is easiest way to lose credibility in the market.
Coming on to the second announcement of Google introducing a
redesigned version of the long dead Google Answers, where it will most probably show results from Google search. If this is the case, the new service can be as vague as some Yahoo Answers replies can be. At least the original Google answers had people who gave detailed, researched replies for a fee.
Suggestion for Google: Combine the above two services and create an army of 10000 people (when it died, Google Answers only had 800 people answering questions) who are willing to search on demand and try to create a better service than existing human-powered search services, including chacha.com.Labels: google, knol, Microsoft, search, web 2.0, web strategy, wiki
What Google CAN buy
Google share prices crossed the $600 a-share mark yesterday, which takes its market capitalization to about &188 billion, give or take a few hundred millions.
How long will this price growth sustain? We don’t know.
Can Google share prices reach the predicted $2000? We don’t know.
Can Google find more means of making money and not get stuck with a one-trick pony assessment?
And does it matter that Google is a one-trick pony?
Looking at reports of ad-supported mobiles coming soon to a wider user base, we can’t say for sure there is any harm in betting on advertising.
There have been a huge one-trick pony called Microsoft in the the PC/Windows/Office world before.
Om Malik has listed some
companies whose combined market capitalization is less if not equal to Google’s market capitalization:
The New York Times Co. (NYT) ($2.86 billion),
Reuters (RTRSY) ($16.5 billion),
CBS (CBS) ($23 billion),
Viacom (VIA) ($28 billion),
News Corp. (NWS.A), ($71.5 billion) and
Yahoo (YHOO) ($35 billion)
And,
Enough change left over for buying Facebook.
Of course, these are fanciful specimen of speculation, much like what Bill Gates’ money would buy. To buy anything that costs over $10 billion, Google might have to dilute its shares, which might evenbring the value down.
Labels: google, Microsoft
Outgoing PC Magazine Editor gives thumbs down to Vista
Isn’t it odd that the journalists and politicians speak the truth or whatever is bogging them down, only after they are done with their jobs? Outgoing PC Magazine Editor-in-Chief Jim Louderback, has this to say about Vista in his
last editorial:
"I've been a big proponent of the new OS over the past few months, even going so far as loading it onto most of my computers and spending hours tweaking and optimizing it. So why, nine months after launch, am I so frustrated? The litany of what doesn't work and what still frustrates me stretches on endlessly. The upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled! If Microsoft can't get Vista working, I might just do the unthinkable: I might move to Linux."
Mr. Louderback was unhappy with Vista’s Driver handling, shared drive that system can’t find, the redesigned Network Settings, and how hard it is for the system to connect to wireless connections after waking from sleep.
Seamless experience, which was the promise given by Vista, or was it?
Labels: Microsoft, Vista
Chronicles of technology: 10 greatest legal battles
The Guardian lists out
10 greatest legal battles in technology and they are:
1. The Statute of Anne (gave writers a short term copyright ownership over their own works)
2. Bell v Western Union (the telephone patent dispute)
3. Marconi and the invention of radio (who invented the radio?)
4. Apple v Franklin (copying code)
5. The Betamax case (the impact of VCRs)
6. The Godfrey libel (libelous postings online)
7. The US v Microsoft (anti-trust, monopoly)
8. Dmitry Skylarov (DRM, internet laws and national boundaries)
9. MGM v Grokster (filesharing fallout)
10. Apple v Apple (Apple Computer vs Beatles’ Apple Corps – over logo)
The writer left out the “
Apple vs. Microsoft” case, (Windows being a copy of Apple), which would have Apple score a hat-trick of legal blockbusters.
We are still waiting to know
whether Facebook was a ripoff.
Labels: apple, controversey, law, legal, Microsoft
BBC and Microsoft: Best buddies in town
To watch BBC's video programming online, you need to install iPlayer which needs Microsoft Windows installed on your computer. As
Defective by Design says, it is like dictating
'you must own a Sony TV set to watch BBC TV'.
There's more: you must also accept Microsoft-inspired Digital Rights Management (DRM) that the iPlayer imposes upon you.
I never knew watching news video online would require so much hassle. BBC's online media initiatives were supposed to be harbingers of things to come, setting up BBC as an innovation leader.
The BBC runs more than 500 excellent news sites. However, in this case, DefectivebyDesign argues that BBC's
'Microsoft-friendly' approach stems from the simple fact that
important persons within the BBCorganization and the British Government are pretty close to Microsoft. The BBC's Director of New Media and Technology was openly sharing platform with Microsoft and touting DRM. Moreover, the man who is in charge of BBC Future Media & Technology, Eric Huggers earlier held a variety of senior posts at Microsoft.
It is no coincidence that Bill Gates has an honorary knighthood. Just the other day, I watched a detailed Bill Gates interview on BBC's tech program "Click Online", where the billionaire talked eloquent about bringing computing to the poor - he did not mention $ 3 Windows, plans to finish the OLPC, among other things. Which was fine but I was surprised that the interviewer did not ask any hard question, reducing the program to a good PR exercise for Microsoft.
DefectivebyDesign is running a campaign to pressure BBC to stop using the current 'pro-Microsoft' iPlayer. You can sign up
here.The BBC has considerable global reach. We should hope that it remains as objective in its tools selection as it is with its news.
Platform Agnostism is the way to go.
Labels: BBC, Microsoft, news business, news channels, OLPC, online rights
Can advertising alone bring success to Google's competition?
Following in the wake of Ask.com's aggressive marketing campaigns, it is now Microsoft's turn to promote its Live search service. On its recently launched Lice Search Club site (club.live.com), Microsoft gets users to
play games and solve puzzles, awarding them points which they can later exchange for assorted goodies.
It sure sounds like a Pepsi campaign. The clincher here is this: while you solve word puzzles, Microsoft 'pushes' live search results related to the word, without you ever even asking for it. There is a hint a button which shows up further search results.
Can 'Push Search ' and Puzzles make die hard Live Search users out of us?Producing search results for predefined/preset words are one thing, showing results based on context of the content of a document, that too, on-the-fly is another.
Even Google couldn't do
detailed semantic search.
Besides,
Search is about Intention, Relavancy and Discovery.
I am not sure Push Search is fit or ready for this.
On a happier note for Microsoft, since it pushes automatic search results as users play games and puzzles on club.live.com, Hitwise reports that Microsoft’s share of US searches shot up from 8.46% to 9.85%.
Compared to Google's strengths and reach, this is chump change.
Google did not need advertising to promote its search engine.
Labels: google, Microsoft, search
Chronicles of Microsoft the evil: Part…
When was the last time you heard a story that put Microsoft in a good light? Can’t remember? Rejoice. You are not alone. Here’s the latest gem:
Ars Technica reports that Microsoft has filed a patent application for
‘for an "advertising framework" that uses "context data" from your hard drive to show you advertisements and "apportion and credit advertising revenue" to ad suppliers in real time’Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? The desktop version of Google’s context-ad system is what it is.
Basically, some cynical Microsoft dude, tired of being called ‘second-hand, late-on-the-scene’ version of Google, thought up this Orwellian scene where the customer who pays for an OS, is made to endure ads based on contents on his/her hard drive.
But hang on, maybe Micrsoft plans to use this ‘not new’ (patent office take note) ad system in its probable versions of free OS which it might launch in near future to take on the rise of cloud software, including Google’s online office offerings.
Or, maybe, Microsoft is going for
'noblehood' this time and plans to use this new patent to go after adware producers for patent infringement.
I am looking forward to more Orwellian Fantasies centered on Microsoft’s new ad system.
For your consideration: –
‘this post was written on MS Word and was sponsored by Disney (Chronicles of Narnia) and the net access was sponsored by Nescafe’.
Labels: controversey, Microsoft, privacy issues
Microsoft’s new low cost PCs for India are expensive than existing models
Microsoft has announced that it will sell $513 PCs (Rs. 21000 each) in India, which will be built on AMD hardware and will come pre-loaded software for students.
Thing is, students in India already have access to PCs for under Rs 15000 ($350) which they can configure with a wider range of freely available software.
If Microsoft is really serious about helping students in poor nations, they ought to use some of Bill Gates’ charity money and use that to give out free PCs and software.
This way Microsoft also ensures Bill’s money stays in the company.
This also says much about the blanket PR coverage that such news items are given by traditional newspapers and news sites, most of whom do not even bother to go to the local tech marketplaces to research the stories.
An example is
here.
Related Stories on MediaVideaHow Microsoft and Intel are trying to muzzle OLPCHow Microsoft is trying to buy poor people’s loyalty for $3How low cost mobile sub notebooks can bring affordable computing to the poorLabels: low cost computing, Microsoft, OLPC
255 ways Microsoft is confused today
Microsoft’s allegations that the open source movement has infringed upon no less than 255 patents, as reported in
Fortune, can unsettle the most die hard among open source supporters.
Microsoft says that the Linux kernel violates 42 Microsoft patents, followed by Linux GUIs which violate 65 patents, Open Office suite violates 45 patents, E-mail programs violate 5, the remaining 68 violations being done by other popular FOSS programs, for a grand total of 255 violations.
Sob...poor company
Sure it reads like a list of U.N. resolution violations by the
‘Axis of Good’.
However, dear FOSS supporters, there is actually nothing to worry about.
Weak legal standing
1. Let’s start with Patents. Open source supporters say that software essentially being a mathematical algorithm, cannot be patented.
2. In April this year, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously opined that
far too many patents have been issued in the last 20 years or so.
The Patent office is okaying patents like evacuation coupons.
3. The Free Open Source Software movement has big patrons in form of the
Open Invention Network, formed in 2005 by 6 major companies including IBM, Sony, Philips, Novell, and Red Hat to acquire a wide set of patents that companies like Microsoft might said were copied from them.
So if Microsoft ever sues a Linux distributor for patent infringement, the OIN might countersue Microsoft in retaliation, claiming that Windows infringes upon their patent.
This opens up a scary world of
suing and countersuing until one day the courts rule that patent system is harmful to one and all, dead.
4. Whom will you sue?There are far too many open source developers, hackers, distributors to pin point.
Hell, if it comes to that, even you and I can hack Linux, creating yet other new versions.
It is like, how many remixes can you make?
In this scenario, can Microsoft be like RIAA and start suing everyone?
What a fall for a once mighty corporation.
5. The Novell Deal and Microsoft's hypocricyThe sloth giant is caught confused in its own dead weight.
Microsoft knows it cannot be aggressive about suing big companies using Open source software, some of whom are big buyers of Microsoft as well.
Then to matters worse for itself, in 2006, Micrsoft made a deal with a prominent Linux distributor, Novell, under which both agreed not to sue each other’s customers for patent infringements (see above), Novell would give Microsoft royalty and Microsoft would distribute Linux coupons from Novell that enabled customers to trade in for Novell Linux subscriptions.
In plain terms, this means
Microsoft is a Linux distributor.6. Don’t mess with the GPL license Anyone who distributes free software covered by copyrights owned by the
Free Software Foundation (the norm since the Linux movement started in 1991) has to abide by the GNU General Public License (GPL), written by Free Software evangelist Richard Stallman. As of now, most important portions of the Linux OS come under GPL.
Like Microsoft Lawyers, lawyers for FSF strictly enforce the rules as strictly, if not more and have often forced open source developers to open their source code if they have used free software into proprietary products.
What will go against Microsoft in the Novell deal is that
GPL makes it illegal to do patent royalty deals with distributors of Linux, which is the core of the Microsoft deal with Novell (see above).
Final thoughtsIt is ironic that
a ‘virtual’ Linux distributor is planning to sue other distributors and users!It also doesn’t bode well for Microsoft infamous PR. Where are those dollars going?
It might also mean that the SCO lawsuits are not going anywhere.
Microsoft may have helped the Open Source Movement:If the issue comes out in the open, the tireless open source programmers would soon get their hands on all the alleged infringements and hack around them.
So, will Microsoft win against the ‘Axis of Good’?
I think not.
Labels: controversey, Microsoft, monopoly, open source, patents
Microsoft hopes to buy poor people’s loyalty for $ 3 a pop
Microsoft is reportedly going to offer
a lite version of Windows XP Starter Edition and Office Home and Office 2007 for only $3 to poor people in developing countries.
Governments in poor countries will reportedly foot the bill for the software and will bundle it on to machines that may cost around $300.
On the other hand, the One Laptop per Child will sell for
only $150 and runs on open source software. It is already being tested in Argentina and Nigeria among other nations.
Strangely, the Indian Government is non-committal to the $150 Laptop. Microsoft’s considerable lobbying and PR machinery is working hard to make sure that governments in the poor countries opt for its still expensive (compared to FREE) software.
Details about security features of the $3 bundle are still not clear. Since these will come preloaded on the PC, what options do the consumers have when they format the PC?
This wouldn’t add anything to Microsoft’s coffers but the company hopes to convert these poor people into buyers of more expensive software.
At best, it is a wet dream of a collective group of overpaid hacks selling shirnkwrap.
Labels: Microsoft
Downside of the A-list phenomenon: link baiting is easy
This weekend, it was Paul Graham’s turn to resort to linkbaiting.
He writes that
Microsoft is dead. Reasons: techies don’t use MS as much as before, Google is winning the online battle, and so on.
That is okay for Paul to write, as he writes for a particular type of audience – geeky, startup-oriented, who love to give the finger to the goliaths of the day.
Don Dodge quickly puts things in perspective when he asks, ‘Since when does growing $4 Billion a year = Dead?’.
Already many including those working with Microsoft understand Microsoft is
a middle-aged, gracefully plateauing company that was once king.
What goes around comes around.
Dave Winer puts it right when he says ‘
What's happening with MS is not death, but being pulled back to earth by gravity. It's the cycle of tech companies’
Microsoft will not be worried by Paul Graham’s article.
Microsoft is in all probability aiming for that fickle, ‘oh so cocky’ market’. It is after the low-bro market – the governments, the Fortune 500/1000/whatever organizations who still think the CIO is God and the harassed consumer who easily succumbs to the retailer’s pressure to go in for a fully loaded PC – easy money for the taking.
Therefore, here is a thought:
The downside of the A-list economy, perpetuated by the likes of Techmeme, Digg and others, is that people on the list have the liberty to make cute headlines without lifting the little finger.
As an A-list, you are allowed to be confrontational (Calacanis’ anti-SEO rant), pouting (Scoble’s choice not blog after the Kathy Sierra incident), falsely sentimental (Om Malik’s Web 2.0 innocence post)….at the other end is Time magazine which proclaim 2006 to be the year of YOU.
Labels: blogging, Microsoft
Microsoft vill Plateau, for a while and then…
Microsoft has already plateaued for quite a long time despite te billions from Windows and Office. I was thinking about a take on MVP and thus the German type ‘vill’.
Even the might
Scoble is angry with Microsoft’s present situation:
The words are empty. Microsoft’s internet execution sucks (on the whole). Its search sucks. Its advertising sucks. If that’s ‘in it to win’, then I don’t get it.
Vista has not been that big a success.
What of Microsoft is not able to mount a suitable challenge online until it is too late – Google and others have already started offering online versions of Office applications. Next up: a serious challenge to Office and server?
By that time Microsoft should have done what it had done well in the past – buy all that it can’t . Buy Yahoo?
If that doesn’t happen…
Labels: Microsoft
