Microsoft and Google's battle for supremacy

If history is any indication, battle for talent and relentless quest for next new thing will be keys to victory.
The New York Times

The story "Microsoft and Google's battle for supremacy" published May 10, 2006 at 4:49 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

[itispals]

Nice piece of information

Some of the points related with history is absolutely true. Some of the Market leaders have lost their position just because they refused to adapt and foresee. But still there are some leaders who have survived many decades, just like COKE and IBM. We are really interested in seeing whether Microsoft Stumbles or Microsoft Withstands. We personally feel a lot depends on VISTA for Microsoft. Though it might be a single stellar performance of Google, yet it is the kind of quality that it delivered has given it such a huge fan following.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.buckleupnow.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.buckleupnow.com</a>

[200mbpsBPL]

GOOG in $230M Broadband via ELECTRIC LINES Investment

Is the one who owns the access has all the right of way ???

read: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://broadbandoverpowerlines.blogspot.com/2006/05/google-gs-sensustxu-ge-earthlink-put.html" target="_newWindow">http://broadbandoverpowerlines.blogspot.com/2006/05/google-gs-sensustxu-ge-earthlink-put.html</a>

Google, GS, SENSUS,TXU, GE, EarthLink put $230M in Current Communications ~ 10 Mbps Symmetrical speed Broadband over Power Lines Internet service !!!

[Captain_Spock]

WHY MICROSOFT WILL WIN - ALWAYS!

This article states in part that; "History, then, suggests that past success is often an anchor holding a company back, and that Microsoft is at risk from the Google challenge. "The wind is really behind Google, and Microsoft's main tool for navigating the future is the rear view mirror," said Paul Saffo, a director of the Institute for the Future, a forecasting consultancy in Silicon Valley..." without making any references to the overall development of the computing industry in general. While the exmples of the automotive industry are classic ones rest assured that the competition with regards to the automotive industry when compared with the competition within the computing industry are not the same and here is why - there were no widespread outsourcing of production activities in the automotive industries to places like INDIA and CHINA like it is today within the computing industries; as such, history has shown what the development "prowess" of the company from REDMOND that done to companies like Netscape Communication and IBM who were the front runners in their cases. As it is widely known the come-from-behind MICROSOFT has dominated the very technologies that were initiated by these companies and in the IBM's case was in the "SMB PROTOCOLS" which is today the focus of attention in European Courts.

If by today's rising oil prices one cannot forsee the need for the "analytical capabilities" of the 90% plus market share in the control Microsoft then the answer can be obtained at the "fuel pumps" and the changes in "air travel expenses" et cetera, et cetera. If consumers will not have extra cash to spend on the consumer items that are advertised... the big question is - will the "advertisement" business model survive? GOOGLE does not have an Operating System and a complex array of Applications of its own for the delivery of certain *computing* functionalities like MICROSOFT can!

[Sandra_Kerns]

Microsoft vs Google = Exxon vs Chevron = No competition; go AnooX

To say that there is competition between Microsoft, Google &#38; Yahoo, it is the same as saying there is competition between Exxon, Chevron
Which means no real competition/difference at all.
I mean what is the REAL difference to the people from the competition between Exxon, Chevron &#38; BP, etc. Big oil:
1) Do we get oil from one at 50% off the price compared to others? NO.
2) Do we get alternative renewable sources of fuel from one compared to others? NO.
OTOH - you have a small Brazilian oil producer which is producing alternative renewable fuel from Sugar Cain which is then enabling Brazilian people to have a real choice from Monopolies of Exxon, Chevron &#38; BP, etc. and as a result get
fuel at about 30% of the price of Oil being sold by these mega corporations.
A real competition which is Good for the people, good for the environment.
Just goes to show how good real competition and resulting choice is, compared to NOTHING real difference between Exxon, Chevron &#38; BP, etc.

The same NOTHING real difference is what we are getting from the so called competition between Microsoft, Google &#38; Yahoo.
What is needed in search engine market is the equivalent of the small Brazilian companies to the effective monopolies of Exxon, Chevron &#38; BP.
I know of one such a choice, it is this search engine called ANooX:
www.anoox.com
Anoox is a real alternative to the effective monopolies and resulting no real difference of Microsoft, Google &#38; Yahoo because:
1- Anoox search results are better due to being ultimately generated by the knowledge (vote) of the people worldwide
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.anoox.com/whyanooxsrbetter.jsp" target="_newWindow">http://www.anoox.com/whyanooxsrbetter.jsp</a>
2- Better because Anoox is operated on an Open &#38; De-centralized model where different providers through out the world operate it for their local (country) market, so no one company will centralize &#38; control all search engine information
and value as is the case with Microsoft, Google &#38; Yahoo
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.anoox.com/sep-overview.jsp" target="_newWindow">http://www.anoox.com/sep-overview.jsp</a>
3- Anoox is better because cost of Advertising on it is a fraction of Ad rates on Google &#38; Yahoo because of their Community (not-for-profit) business model.

So if you like real choice and resulting value, then support Anoox or other independent search engines you know. If you like getting screwed by effective monopolies of Google &#38; Yahoo &#38; Microsoft; same as you are by the effective
monopolies of Exxon, Chevron &#38; BP, etc. then don't.

[Charleston Charge]

Sandra we've missed you

but Anoox still sucks as a search engine.

[Andrew J Glina]

Still waiting

Either name your "Small Business" or admit that you work for AnooX.

[Captain_Spock]

IT IS RATHER FUNNY....

... that this article opens with "The Microsoft-Google rivalry is shaping up as a titanic corporate clash for the ages..." when some time ago when BROTHER BILL was asked which company was likely to keep him up late at nights his answer was that it was the INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION (IBM) because of its sheer size when compared with MICROSOFT and not GOOGLE as this article is stating; so then, this article should have at least included a few other companies such as IBM with its already entrenched battalions arrayed with: "executives, engineers, marketers, lawyers and lobbyists..." (plus the *SPECIALIST SERVICES FORCES* that serves IBM that neither MICROSOFT nor GOOGLE can boast of at this time) therefore, rather that a two-way battle for supremacy in the "corporate clash for the ages..." there is very much likely to be a *three-way* one at least from this perspective because of the *SERVICES BUSINESS MODELS* that more or less has to be included in the overall battle!

[KickinA]

MS's all out assault on GOOG

The writing is on the wall, MS is going leverage all existing and future platforms against GOOG. Think about it, GOOG currently makes all its revenue via search advertisements. MS wants to place ads in every platform MS makes, from MSN\Live Search, XBOX, to Windows Mobile. GOOG has a search portal, but does it have a gaming platform? Does it have a cell phone OS? Does it have an embedded OS used in set top boxes like the ones from Comcast? Get the picture? its going to be all out war against GOOG from every place where MS owns a platform.

[Captain_Spock]

Paul Saffo,, "a director...

... of the Institute for the Future, a forecasting consultancy in Silicon Valley" has stated that "Microsoft is at risk from the Google challenge. and that "The wind is really behind Google, and Microsoft's main tool for navigating the future is the rear view mirror," when *STAR DATE LOG* informs some us that during the very early stages of the PC COMPUTER DEVELOPMENT it was MICROSOFT's strategies that enabled it to be where it is today in the computing world as we know it. Here is a short history about the development of the PC Operating System: "IBM decided early in the development process of the PC that they did not want to hire a bunch of programmers to write software for it - especially an operating system. IBM wanted the hardware business and did not care about the software. Since there was no clear-cut contender for an operating system at the time, IBM approached three organizations about writing one for the PC.

IBM first approached Digital Research and asked them to create a version of CP/M (Control Program/Microcomputer). The owner of DR - Gary Kildall - snubbed the IBM lawyers and went flying or golfing (depending upon whose story you hear) instead. My latest information indicates that he was flying and did not golf.

IBM then turned to Microsoft. Bill Gates was very receptive to the IBM overture and also had information about an operating system which had already been written that would fill IBM's need very nicely. Gates said yes to IBM, bought the operating system called DOS for a relatively trivial amount of money, $20,000 to $80,000, again depending upon who is telling the story, and modified it somewhat to run on the IBM PC.

For you trivia buffs, the other OS delivered with the original PC was the UCSD P-System (University of California at San Diego Pseudo code System). I will permit those who make a living from documenting the history of computers to describe that operating system elsewhere...." read the rest of the article here:

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.millennium-technology.com/HistoryOfOS2.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.millennium-technology.com/HistoryOfOS2.html</a>

From the above article it can be clearly seen that if there is a winner to be picked... for all intent and purposes it will be the MICROSOFT CORPORATION with who by now must be endowed by large battalions of *SEASONED VETERANS OF THE COMPUTING BATTLES* to be thrown into any forseen battle for supremacy!