Comments on: Google's Brin fears the Microhoo borg

Speaking at an event for the Google Lunar X Prize, Google co-founder Sergey Brin reiterates his company's position on a Microsoft-Yahoo union.

[AppleSuxLeo]

Aww Sergi is afraid of a little competition

Google/Double-click isn`t a monopoly ??? Who are you kidding , Sergi ? Bend over and kiss MicroHoo`s ass. Cometition is the way of the world. The writing is on the wall...GOOG has dropped from $750 to $500 in a short while , and will continue to drop , as it is WAY overvalued. Remember Qualcomm in 2000 ? I do.

[cxgcxg]

Worse than unnerving

If people could really see the stifling effect that Microsoft has had
on the computer industry, they would insist that Microsoft not buy
Yahoo.

Microsoft does not have the corporate culture to create the great
innovation that we all deserve as the next generation computing
experience. Why people tolerate being continually fleeced by this
company in exchange for mediocre products is a mystery to me.

[theantibush]

beauty

People just cant see the beauty in five pages of compiler settings and build instructions just to upgrade a network card driver, so they go MS.

scumbags...all of 'em

[MadLyb]

Pot.Kettle(Black)

Like Google is much better in terms of the Internet. I actually think it is good thing if Google 'feels' nervous. That is a sign that you feel pressure and the need to compete.

Perhaps, we will actually get something innovative from Google other than more lame, half-baked applications that are nothing more than vehicles for delivering additional ads.

As to Microsoft/Yahoo...well, Yahoo has lost it's direction and MS never had one, so I think we will just have a bigger company that stumbles along, hopefully creating some pressure on Google in the process.

[AppleSuxLeo]

Competition benefits the consumer...

Windows Live services are great such as Sky Drive and their new mail is much faster and has much more functionality built-in than Gmail. I stopped using Gmail due to the slow load times
(esp. contacts)and the fact that it is nothing but a spam generating device. Yahoo Mail and Windows Live Mail are much better. Yahoo has more page views than Google does...mostly because they have the number one Messenger and chat used throughout the world and more people use their news sites and Flickr and such. No , MSFT is smart to buy Yahoo ;)Page views = advert dollars.

[SneakyWho_am_i]

half-baked google applications

Have you never wondered why google applications are half-baked?

Surely it's because developers at google have to make pages that work in
- all modern browsers
AND
- internet explorer

If we didn't have to worry about Internet Explorer, web applications such as google's would easily surpass the power and usability of desktop applications.

- Internet Explorer doesn't support basic standards as of IE7
- basic standards support is required to rapidly deploy lightweight and powerful applications

I do disagree though on the idea that Microsoft always lacked direction. Microsoft has great direction, and that direction is the desktop market.

Microsoft Windows, have you ever heard of that?
Microsoft ties all their applications into their operating system now, if you havent' noticed, so that Internet Explorer can't be uninstalled, neither probably can Media Player, and they all beg you to install Office and the likes.

Purchasing Yahoo is just another means to that end because it gives them more power to market Internet Explorer - which as I said before hurts the development of web applications.
In turn, this means that we need desktop applications - which normally only run on Windows.

Stop thinking in terms of Google, start questioning why Microsoft would want Yahoo in the first place. Their offer is FAR above the current market value of yahoo's steadily dropping share prices - it's not rocket science.

[twolf2919]

One big difference between MSFT and GOOG

Various posters suggest that GOOG is a pot calling the MSFT kettle black - i.e. because Google is a monopoly in advertising, it should not criticize the MSFT (a monopoly in the O/S space, a monopoly in the Office application space, a monopoly in the browser space) attempt to purchase Yahoo and, thus, try to compete with Google - and hopefully get yet another monopoly.

I think that doing so is misguided.

I am not necessarily against the MSFT/YHOO deal, but one has to consider MSFTs history in leveraging its existing monopolies to create new ones: using its DOS/Windows monopoly, it destroyed the Office product competition; it financed IE entirely from OS/Office profits and gave it away to destroy the competition (Netscape). By bundling countless other utilities, it drove tool providers out of business (e.g. DoubleStack).

Right now it is true that GOOG has a near monopoly on the search space. But there are still plenty of alternative choices out there. So GOOG's dominance is not limiting consumer choices. If MSFT gets the upper-hand in the search arena, it has a record of making its products interdependent (e.g. IE "ActiveX" extensions that only work in Windows), thus limiting customer choices.

Something to think about.

[vhaakmat]

Huh?

Microsoft WAS a monopoly in the desktop arena. That is so yesterday's news. Apple has had huge successes since its move to the Intel architecture, as well as Mozilla's Firefox web browser. The choice is in your face everytime you download a "free" tool, you're being asked if you want to make google your default search engine, or firefox your default browser. I never get any such questions with MS tools. Google does not want to call itself a monopoly, even though they are one. Because they haven't been sued yet, it is not formally estalished that they are one. So GOOGLE.. give me a break!!!. I stopped using their search engine months ago, because they are not that much better anymore, and frankly, getting too big in my opinion. Googple pays developers a great some of money to create open source tools, for free. the software is free to be used by the public, but developers are paid to create them. If MS does the same, people start crying foul. The last time I looked, Google was almost as big as MS, rakes huge amounts of money through ads (spam). MS rakes huge amounts of money through software. It is the same thing, just different business model. Google's search engine has become almost like spam, but no, that's OK because it is Google. Give me a break!!!
I rather spend my money on a company that gives billions to charity instead of buying expensive toys. Just giving my opinion.

[theantibush]

bah...humbug

You forgot to mention that there are tools and office choices in the realm of the MS 'monopoly'.

But I suppose only under the google 'monopoly' do customers have choices.

[t8]

This is true

Anyone who thinks that Microsoft is OK, doesn't know their history. They have killed innovation and kept prices high once they gained a monopoly position and ultimately it is the consumer who pays.

Thankfully we have an open Internet platform that anyone can sell their wares without being put out of business by a company called "Internet". It only takes a dominant Microsoft to kill that openness, but I do not think that Microsoft will ever get that position thankfully.

[goodpasture]

whatever...

If you think you have choices with Google. If you've done SEO or SEM for a day, you've heard of Google and it's really all that matters. Now wait till Google decides to make a change and slices your sliver of existence right off the map and today you have no income. My My My ... Google is such good people ... ba humbug as you say! Frankly that scares the hell out of me so I pray MS Yahoo plows their way right beside Google 50/50 so we will finally have a choice. Yea there will still be plenty of others out there like there is now but that is just something you do on a Sunday after Church when you have nothing else better to do. And if you don't want to mess wiht those, Getting listed in Google and MS Yahoo both will get you listed in all those others automatically EVENTUALLY. Don't tell me we have a choice anymore in Google.

[SneakyWho_am_i]

Yes!

If Microsoft got a better foothold in the Search Engine market, meh, who cares?
It has nothing to do with search engines.
It's about pushing internet explorer and Windows.

The people who accuse GOOG of being a pot and calling MSFT a black kettle merely show their ignorance.

Internet Explorer (just barely the most popular browser) is the least popular browser among webmasters - the people who make the internet. Because it's RUBBISH!!!!!
I hate Internet Explorer passionately. I write code according to the language and every browser except IE respects it. If I try to fix/break it for IE, I end up with five times as much code - it's disgusting. IE7 is worse because it "supports" more standards, but that support is more buggy and useless than the last version of IE6.

It's not that I hate Microsoft. Sure, I love Windows. I love Office. Office really impresses me, Their formats are amazing, and I really love COM - I think it's a huge amount of great fun.

So Microsoft is cool...

But I hate Internet Explorer - no, actually, I just hate having to write code for it.
Interesting that the world's most popular browser, from the world's most powerful vendor, is the world's worst? Not at all.
IE is locked into Windows and is invariably how Windows users taste the internet for the first time. You never realise it's broken 'til you've tried something better.

Internet Explorer's market share is slipping - which is making it easier to develop powerful web applications - the appeal of this draws application developers AND USERS away from the desktop application market.

What's the big difference? If we can run our whole office suite through our web browser, and it doesn't have to be Internet Explorer, then we can do it on any computer, anywhere. Even at the house of some crazy computer nerd using Linux.
Yes, even on a Mac.

Microsoft is naturally working against this. Windows is a great product and worth defending - this is their way to defend it. Keep all the popular applications tied to the desktop so they only work on Windows.

The arguments for leaving Windows are numerous and relate back to attack surface, security, stability, ease of automation, etc etc.
There's no need to go into all this, but the point is that the main reason anybody uses it (ignoring having to learn that sometimes a stsrt button might not have a "windows" icon on it) is jsut that your applicatins (until the event of gmail) only run on Windows.

[tundraboy]

Openness of Web Standards is No Small Beans

Yeah, competition is good but what kind. Do you really want Microsoft imposing their own proprietary web standards on the internet? Do you really want Microsoft to have the power to decide what can and cannot get on the internet? Do you really want Microsoft which already is the overwhelmingly dominant firm in operating systems and office suites to take over the internet as well? Is that anything like competition to you.

And this is not anti-MS just because they're MS. I certainly don't want Google to acquire dominance in the OS and office suite fields. They're already the overlords on search and web ads.

Yes we want competition but not the type that ends up in a super-monopolist taking control of all aspects of desktop, server and network computing.

[tundraboy]

Above is a reply to folks who think MS means 'more competition'

.

[alegr]

Be afraid

Stay away from those bad websites employing such Microsoft's proprietary thing which is now known as AJAX. Oops, that's the whole Web 2.0.

[SneakyWho_am_i]

Absolutely

I don't even think that Microsoft CAN (or would put in the necessary time and money to) take over the search market....
...
But increasing their presence in such a market allows them to push Internet Explorer much harder, which reduces our ability to develop (much more portable) web applications.

To write code for Internet Explorer is like jabbing yourself in the eye, it is the one browser that totally ignores what the language (be it http, css, html, javascript) tells it to do and does something else entirely.

This makes it hard to develop web applications - which is what Microsoft wants of course, so that everyone still makes and uses desktop applications - which only work on Microsoft's flagship product, Windows.

[winstein]

Default Search settings and shopping choices

Currently Google is the default search on Dell and Gateway computers. Yahoo is the default search on HP. If Yahoo is part of Microsoft, it will no longer have to pay HP to be included on the desktop. Microsoft will just use its OS as the leverage to force Dell and Gateway to default to Microsoft/Yahoo. If this happens, It is the browser war all over again, but this time, it will be about online shopping experience and advertising. All online retailers will have to pay Microsoft to be included in the search results.

[alegr]

Default search

Why Dell and Gateway are not forced yet to use MSN search as default, if we follow your logic?

[kinowerken]

More Whining from Google

Googleborg IS the new Microsoft. Tell me, Sergei, how are you
using and crossing indexing information from search, advertising,
mail, Earth, etc. For a company that has put itself in the position
on seeing all this traffic, something Microsoft, at its worse was
never able to do, when do you come clean on what you're doing
with all this personal information? They are nervous in the same
way Microsoft was nervous about Netscape. And besides, as
another poster said, competition is good, right?

[SneakyWho_am_i]

Competition is good.

You're right, competition is good. That's why Microsoft increasing its existing presence in the search engine market would be a very bad thing.

It's a way to regain lost market share for Internet Explorer.

It's also a way to crush the web applications industry in favour of desktop applications and ultimately Windows.

As any webmaster knows, making web applications is a joke as long as you have to put up with Internet Explorer.

Competition is good.

[theantibush]

Pissin in his pants

I love it when capitalists talk of morals and values. Thats when you know they fear for their lives.

[xlhzum]

Microsoft Shill

C-net is such a Microsoft Shill.

I don't suppose honest, non biased reporting is popular any more ?

[Seaspray0]

Then prove it

In what way? Tell us specifically what is biased in this article. What un-truths are there? What is not honest about it? BACK IT UP! Otherwise you're remark is about as believable is "the moon is made of cheese."

[goodpasture]

I Love You Google....

I truely do but if they are trying to argue Microsoft is Monopolistic and controlling, Sergey needs to look in the mirror. I am a struggling website developer trying to make it in the big world of internet marketing and everybody knows the only name to know is Google. I've learned a lot along the way but made a lot of mistakes as well which is the definition of learning. I've met much resistence from Google along the way and it's hurt quiet a bit. Two huge milestones were losing my adsense account which I think is because I was developing in the labs of my university at the time and I think bored freshmen were taking advantage of my left open pages, caches or just clicked my ads because they were there. I've appologized to Google even though I've never been really for sure what I did wrong. i've asked forgiveness 5 or more times hoping someday they will reinstate my account. They won't even acknoweledge I've emailed them anymore. I've heard of hundreds of others with the same story. Another time, I had a eBay affiliate store making pretty good money each day getting lots of hits and it was completely wiped from the Goog index overnight one night and dropped to worthless overnight. It was a cookie cutter script but I still was developing each page individualyl for some content, keywords, descriptions, etc... They don't have the technology to automatically pick the bad sites from the good ones and at most levels shouldn't be able to either. I'm just a speck on a flee's ass to Google but a powerful example at how dangerous Google really is. You think about that and wait until your on Google's radar for ruining your day some day. It's not if; It's when.

[partytildawn-20159620461052270]

EU Won't Approve Merger

EU regulators who have been interviewed by the press have all indicated that a merger between Yahoo and Google would NOT pass muster in Europe preventing the two companies from melding together.

[SneakyWho_am_i]

Internet explorer is insanely hard to code for

What a lot of you who aren't serious webmasters won't understand (and yes I understand that some Microsoft employees still write websites for IE) is that it is incredibly hard to write code for IE. If I decide to make my pages IE-friendly, they bloat to 500% of their original filesize, and yes, it takes 500% as long to code them.

So although I really love some Microsoft technology (COM is great fun, and Office is a powerhouse), I really hate Internet Explorer.
It's wasted so much of my time and money because it just doesn't do what you tell it, and yet because it comes preinstalled with Windows IE is the first browser anybody ever used when they went on the net for the first time - naturally the ONLY way such a poor browser could retain such a large market share after the advent of modern browsers (with their standards compliance, speed, security, stability...)

Controlling the Search market is controlling the Browser market. Acquiring Yahoo could conceivably increase Internet Explorer's market share by thirty percent in five or ten years, and that is very, very bad news for everyone on the internet.

Why would Microsoft care so much about dominating the browser market?
Well duh:
- a large web presence enables you to market you application (an Operating system, Windows) to a wider audience
- By crippling the internet and crushing its growth, you hurt the development of web applications

Web applications? Yes. Put it this way. Microsoft's killer app is Windows. Why do people use Windows? Security? Nope, Windows has the largest attack surface of any software known to man and as such vulnerabilities are discovered in it constantly, and most of them go unpublished. Also most viral attacks are written for Windows - on Linux we generally don't need antivirus software at all.
Stability? Stability is a valid argument for using Windows. Rapid deployment, too. In most cases, you just install it, turn it on, and install all your applications and everything just works. Linux is exactly the same IFF you haven't seen Windows first and picked up the skills for that - Windows has a lot of inertia. Most people are familiar with Windows and can therefore get results from it. Linux is technically more stable, for example, but for a Windows user, Windows is more stable.

But I mentioned installing apps, and that is the real reason anybody uses Windows, surely!!!
It's for WHAT YOU CAN RUN ON IT.
Many Windows applications have Linux equivalents, and many will just work on Linux regardless - but that's not always as good. It's certainly not appropriate in a Windows-based business computing environment. It can be a big shift. Open Source Office programs have excellent Office importers and exporters (not perfect I guess because they're so complex)..

So anyway Microsoft's mission with Windows dedicates a lot of time of course to making sure your programs will run. Even after an upgrade.

They also have to develop libraries ad Application Programming Interfaces for developers - which seem to change majorly with every major release (funny that)..

Anyway the end result is, partly due to the advances in Web Standards, web applications can be built now which are almost tolerable stand-ins for desktop applications. Many of them are free to use or even suitable for use in business computing GMAIL!!!

GMail has a lot of clear advantages over desktop clients. For one, it's very easy to install GMail. Just type it in and press enter. (Hey that sounds a bit like apt or yum)

So Google is promoting Firefox, which runs on all computer platforms (and is far superior to IE), and a lot of web applications, some of which are natural competitors for desktop applications (although I prefer desktop webmail clients, I'm too lazy to set one up!!!)

Web applications are increasing in quality, constantly. They are becoming more and more suitable rivals for desktop applications. What you have to consider is that GMail will run on Mac OS and on Linux. GMail will run on any computer with a graphical browser. So your web browser (hopefully Firefox or Opera or Safari or Konqueror) suddenly becomes a document viewer (google docs and spreadsheets), a cartographer (google maps), an email client (gmail)...

None of this requires Windows, and it keeps getting better and more powerful.

This is partly because the code only has to be written twice - once for proper browsers, and then once again for Internet Explorer.

Why is Internet Explorer so backwards?
BECAUSE IF WEB APPLICATIONS GET TOO GOOD, NOBODY WILL NEED WINDOWS ANY MORE.
Not that Windows will ever die, and certainly not because of the advent of the internet. It'll be some time before web applications can rival desktop applications, and even so if Windows died, Microsoft would surely live on in some form or fashion.

Microsoft needs to maintain Windows' image as a modern platform which is easy to develop for, and which has a great number of applications available .. for .. it.

My point to all this? Well like I said at the start, you have a lot more control over the browser market if you control the search market.

Controlling search gives control over browser market
Controlling browser market gives control over pace of development of internet [applications]
Controlling the richness and quality of internet applications controls the level of platform independence of common tasks
Platform independence hurts Windows


Why should we care?
Internet Explorer.
BECAUSE IE IS SO HARD TO WRITE CODE FOR. __NOTHING WORKS__ IN IE.

Seriously, I'm a webmaster (just for "fun") - I've stopped writing code for IE altogether. If Internet Explorer can't display my work properly and all the other browsers can, to Hell with it. I don't care. Yes, the users suffer and complain, and I say better them than me. Hopefully they will try proper browsers as a result.

Microsoft, I love you, but I hate your prehistoric browser. Yes, that's right, IE7 is prehistoric. It barely supports ten year old standards, and half the time my CSS will lock up or crash the browser, or IE will drop positioned elements or multiply them - even the standards it claims to support just don't work and are buggy beyond reason.

Internet Explorer is a joke and it's a nightmare to try to make a page that works in said browser.

IE7 is a big improvement over IE6, but for me it's too little too late.

If Microsoft were to acquire Yahoo I think I would leave the internet in disgust.