13 replies to this topic

[websage]

Q: Microsoft Research has done a lot of work in search technology. So how did you let Google become synonymous with search?

Bill Gates: Because we mistakenly didn’t apply a lot of our advanced ideas to do a Web-scale search engine. We were relying on an outside supplier for part of our search. That’s our mistake. There’s lots of need for improvement and I think you’ll see us innovate. We didn’t make it as much of a priority as we should have, and a year ago we recognized that and we’re on the job.

From Newsweek:
http://www.msnbc.com...43.asp?0cv=KA01

[OldWelshGuy]

Yeh well thats no suprise, he did the same with the internet, sat back thiking it was not 'that' important, then suddenly he dived in and took over the browser game.

[SearchRank]

I wonder if Bill will be able to win the search engine war like he did the browser war, the operating system war, the office suite war, etc.? I wouldn't bet on him because Google has a far superior product than Bill's other victims. Time will tell. I guess that's why Google will finally do an IPO so they can survive Bill's attack. Can't think of any other good reason. I'm betting on Google to beat them.

[Ron Carnell]

Because we mistakenly didn’t apply a lot of our advanced ideas to do a Web-scale search engine. We were relying on an outside supplier for part of our search.

Uh, excuse me, Bill, but what advanced ideas? You've been relying on outside suppliers since DOS surfaced, circa 1981 ...

[OldWelshGuy]

We all know he will not beat Google on search relevance alone, as there are more relevant results available currently, and many know this, but stick with google.

To beat them he is going to have to do some smart cookie positioning in the marketplace, he did it with Lotus, replacing their superb suite with that dreadful office suite, but managing to position his product better.

IMO he is going to have to steal search by stealth, ie. get his own browser search built in (as per puffin/googlebar) he is going to have to build search into his office suite to allow people to search without leaving (although if he does this he could be hit with another anti trust writ).

I can see no other way of beating G @ their own game, as many have an inbuilt distrust of Microshaft and all things MS, if they can bypass this feeling with inbuilt usability then they might just win.

[bobsledbob]

With Microsoft, let's certainly not forget that it's not about being the 'best', it's about being the market leader.

I agree with you all, Microsoft will likely never come up with a search engine as good as google. But, does that really matter? Windows is arguably the least innovative, least advance operating system out there. That doesn't matter though, because when you have market share, you don't have to be the best.

Same thing with search engines. If Microsoft puts their marketing and coding might against a task, you can bet they're going to come up with something that is worth paying attention to. Will it ever be as good as Google (or any next up and coming search engine)? Probably not. Will millions of users use their search facility? Most definitely.

By the way, and slightly off topic, I predict Microsoft buying out Ask and therefore getting Teoma, which is a potential Google beater. This is not a new idea of course, it's been talked about before. But I thought it might be relevant to talk about here, because with a buyout of Ask, Microsoft might just land a decent enough search engine to compete with Google afterall.

[McFox]

I think Microsoft have a good chance of taking over Google sooner or later.

Microsoft have made overtures (how could I not use the pun? ) towards acquiring or at least merging with Google.

NY Times article: Microsoft and Google: Partners or Rivals?

Even if Google goes for the IPO, Microsoft will eventually grab it. I think the smart money is on a merger or acquisition.

McFox

[mcanerin]

I'm not really much of a MS apologist, but I do like the fact that when they screw up they (usually) admit it rather than pretend it was the plan all along. Of course, they also usually wait until they have a plan to fix it before admitting they screwed up, but that's another point entirely.

I've got a lot of respect for MS as a corportation. Can you imagine what the world would be like if SCO had MS's position? Ouch.

Ian

[OldWelshGuy]

Microsoft have made overtures (how could I not use the pun? ) towards acquiring or at least merging with Google.

Nope I was aghast to read this headline.

http://www.usatoday....-17-gates_x.htm

Bill Gates denying that MS ever spoke to google re merger.

Another urban myth?

[OldWelshGuy]

< imaginarly conversation with Microsoft helpline>

Excuse me i am having a problem with your search engine software it will not return any results...

reply,

Oh thats how it is supposed to be, its a value added feature.

But my screen is saying displaying 0 of 1 page results there are NO results!

reply

Thats right sir it is an in built labour saving feature of our new search software.

But surely thats a fault?

reply

No sir its a feature

[websage]

I'm not really much of a MS apologist, but I do like the fact that when they screw up they (usually) admit it rather than pretend it was the plan all along.

I've got a lot of respect for MS as a corportation.

Ian

I agree with Ian. We all might curse Microsoft and call them names, but one cannot claim that all they have done is only crap. The reality is that in business as in any other human activity, it is impossible to have a pure and original idea without reference to previous discoveries. Take music for example -- a number of J.S. Bach's works are "covers" of Vivaldi. So what? The world needs both Vivaldi and Bach. No inventor, scientist, artist, creates out of the blue. We do not exist in vacuum.

At any rate, the reason of this post was to indicate that Microsoft has openly admitted that is has missed on search. It is a testimony to the importance of this business field. And let's face it, whether we have figured out how to work with Google or not we are slightly scared of the impact of a Microsoft search engine on SEO. Whether they take only 15% by virtue of having the PC monopoly or 55% by virtue of bringing a superior technology, the point is that the things are about to change and we all need to be prepared.

[SEO-Richard]

Search is search is search, surely? Does it matter if it's MS or G? Not to me, unless they figure out some way to make me pay a licences fee or something.

I think the worry is that MS will dominate and become de-facto standard and then start asking for money.

Think about it - BIll has done a brilliant job bringing computers to us all. There's still huge competition in myriads of areas. Chip makers, PC component mnftrers, software - graphics packages, games, a whole range of stuff isn't dominated by him. OS , yes.

And what's happened? There's Linux bubbling away in a 'will it won't it' nether land, can't quite work out if it's going to take over servers, might be used in Asian countries that don't want to be reliant on US software; there's different browsers, maybe based on IE but there always seems to be a new one popping it's head over the parapet before disappearing....and from what I've read the Office Suite and the OS are nearly as damn good as anyone has a need for. I'm still on Win 98 (throwback!) because I don't need any more.

Personally, I think MS is hunting around for new produccts (X-box anyone?) and services to offer because it can see that it's soon going to be vulnearable. There's all sorts of competition nipping at MS's heels.

Which means if it messes up it could hurt. Get a SE wrong, demand too much money say and ruin the SERPS, whilst finding that the market for its OS and Office Suite has peaked, tand hat X-box sales are down, and it could start to lose its grip. I would have thought it was in its interests to behave 'ethically' and produce good quality searches.

In which case, I'm not worried

[websage]

I doubt search will ever be paid. What might happen is what happened with Hotmail. MS bought them for traffic and online community and then started offering a paid and "advanced" version. To make paid search feasible, one would need to introduce some serious geo/local searching -- if they had your credit card number, they would have your zip/postal code, thus would be able to offer something more relevant (potentially) than generic search solutions.

[SearchRank]

I doubt search will ever be paid.

True, true! They are still not making us "pay" for Yellow Page books. They make plenty off the advertising and combine free stuff along with it. I would never pay for a Yellow Page book and I would never pay to search.