__/ [ hug ] on Friday 24 February 2006 15:03 \__
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>I thought this was worth quoting:
>>"...I've been growing increasingly concerned over how Google is starting to
>>do more... and the world is just letting it do more without asking
>>questions (because most users trust the brand blindly). Google is
>>everywhere. I want it to be everywhere, but I also don't want it to be
>>everywhere - because that's very scary. I trust that they will continue to
>>"do no evil" (as opposed to "do know evil?") - but perhaps there's such a
>>thing as "too big?" I have to prepare for the worst..."
> Microsoft was unstoppable as a force of nature because the time for
> the personal computer was upon the world and they were the ones
> delivering the goods to the masses.
Excellent analogy. Never thought of that one before...
> Google has had a lot of good ideas. The time for really good net
> searches is here. Is there any competition that can unseat The Great
> And Powerful Wizard Of Goog? I'm not seeing it. I'm seeing some
> better (read: more effective from my viewpoint) web bots (LinkWalker
> seems very comprehensive, it's probably a frustrated spambot LOL) but
> are any of them embryonic takeover candidates?
> We may need to join the US DOJ and just knuckle under to both
> Microsoft and Google for all I know.
I see a clear difference in terms of tactics though. To give just a taste of
what Microsoft have employed as dirty tricks:
* Microsoft were intervening with public opinion using Munchkins (*paid*
forum member) to promate and excite the masses, evangelising Windows and
* Microsoft turned a blind eye to privacy when it suited them, which get
people dependent on the O/S
* Lockins. Lockins. Lockins. Data and applications should ideally only work
in Windows. This is no longer the case owing to Open Source contributions.
* Destructive and aggressive competition: break (or 'extend') industry
standards, copying of ideas, bundling of software with the O/S
* Microsoft are suspected to have leaked money to SCO, who constantly sue
companies such as IBM for using Linux. Baseless and perpetually-failed
lawsuits like that threaten Microsoft's biggest rival.
On to Google:
* Google's initial low volume of ads can be compared to the piracy point
above, but not truly so.
* Google's 'evil' deeds are often perceived as the exploitation of
free-floating information that was out there, e.g. Google Groups (UseNet),
book scanning and some would say that mapping services that ignore certain
* Then emerge the recent issues of censorship (i.e. control of information,
which is resemblant to Microsoft's FUD compains)
All of the above pertain to ownership of information.
Google have not yet paid people to encourage others to use Google. They rely
on the public opinion which is largely positive and floats all over the
place. As for paid use, everyone is a criminal:
("Search Engines Start Rewards Programs", published yesterday)
Roy S. Schestowitz | Open the Gate$ to Hell
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
3:25pm up 7 days 3:44, 8 users, load average: 0.21, 0.36, 0.35
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms