Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft The Internet Businesses Google

Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? 255

Posted by Zonk from the a-fight-for-the-soul-of-the-interweb dept.
faria24 writes "For the past decade, Microsoft has largely ignored the Web as an emerging platform for application development with fears that it could render Windows obsolete. But that will all change next week, as Microsoft unveils a new strategy for transforming its Web properties into an open platform for developers. As part of its new 'Web 2.0 Platform' strategy, Microsoft will expose application programming interfaces, or APIs, for MSN Search using SOAP. MSN Virtual Earth, Desktop Search and MSN Messenger will all be opened up for outside developers to extend." Coverage on CNet as well. From the article: "Microsoft's online rivals, notably Google and Yahoo, already provide the hooks that let third-party Web developers write applications that tap into their Web services, such as search and mapping. Because these Web applications rely on a Web browser, they can, in theory, run on any operating system. Microsoft, meanwhile, has always drawn third-party developers to Windows. But even with its commitment to Windows, analysts said, Microsoft needs to more fully address the growing popularity of online Web development. Having a healthy ecosystem of third-party add-on products helps drive traffic to Web properties. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? More

Can Microsoft Out-Google Google?

Comments Filter:

  • Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:29PM (#13526614)
    No. Next question.

    "Can Google Out-Microsoft Microsoft?"

    • Re:Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Can Marklar out-Marklar Marklar?

    • Re:Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:46PM (#13526713)
      No

      Agreed. I worked for several years in MSN, starting from the beginning. I have to say that during the entire time I was there, I didn't see much strategic thinking going on. That's not to say that we didn't have some really good people, but Microsoft isn't a service organization. Microsoft is a product organization, and you just can't "productize" the Internet no matter how hard you try.

      The biggest reason that Microsoft can't compete with Google is that it has become a big, bloated bureaucracy. Why do you think that all the top-flight talent is leaving? Sure, money has something to do with it, but it also has a lot to do with the fact that Google is a hot-bed for new ideas and actively fosters innovation. Microsoft, on the other hand, has become very risk adverse, so it's not willing to stake its future on new ideas. That's why we're seeing incremental changes in Vista. It's why Microsoft is reluctant to use open schemas in its Office products. The problem is that when you adopt this kind of thinking, you slowly rot from the inside out.

      So I guess what I'm saying is that Microsoft is not a real threat to Google. The biggest threat to Google is its own hiring practices. As long as they hire people whose job it is to contribute then they'll be ok. The second that they start hiring "strategic thinkers" and "efficiency experts" then they're in trouble.

      • Re:Can Microsoft Out-Google Google? (Score:4, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:38PM (#13527012)
        That's not a big bloated bureaucracy. That's just Ballmer's paunch. Throwing chairs and making death threats always gives him an appetite.
      • The biggest threat to Google is its own hiring practices. As long as they hire people whose job it is to contribute then they'll be ok. The second that they start hiring "strategic thinkers" and "efficiency experts" then they're in trouble.

        Uh oh. [slashdot.org] Too late.

      • The biggest reason that Microsoft can't compete with Google is that it has become a big, bloated bureaucracy.

        Microsoft, on the other hand, has become very risk adverse, so it's not willing to stake its future on new ideas.

        You sound like there was a time when Microsoft was really innovating. Was it?

  • competition (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 42Penguins ( 861511 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:30PM (#13526615)
    As much as I love Google, and as schweet as it is, I'm sure it could be even sweeter if M$ put up some real competition.

    Whether that will happen or not, however, is another question.

    • Re:competition (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Lifewish ( 724999 )
      Just as long as Microsoft doesn't end up actually managing to kill Google. Microsoft can afford to throw far more cash at the situation than Google ever could.
      • Yes, Microsoft could afford to throw far more cash at the situation than Google. But will they actually do it? And how will this actually help?

        In my opinion there is nothing that Microsoft can do in order to stop Google. Absolutely anything. (If we were living in the Starcraft World they could try to rush the Googleplex [wikipedia.org] though)

      • Re:competition (Score:5, Insightful)

        by toddbu ( 748790 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:44PM (#13527045)
        Google has something that Microsoft doesn't - a brand name that's used as a verb. I don't care how much money you have, nothing beats having Jessica Simpson say "I googled for it" on national TV. Having a brand like this means that you have all the free advertising that you want.
      • I'm not sure sure. Google's [google.com] market capet (or "mkt cap", defined here [uga.edu]) is only 3 1/2 times smaller and they just got all the money recently. On the otherhand, Microsoft [google.com] got it's money a long time ago and has spent quite a bit of it.

    • Re:competition (Score:2, Insightful)

      by guildsolutions ( 707603 )
      But do you really want Microsoft in charge of this? Just as MSNBC requires you to use IE to view there video, which leaves Mac and Linux users out to pasture. What will happen if MS uses the same for there services in the future? Microsoft has a long, long colorful history of requiring people to use there software, and outright flatly refusing to make it compatible across the boards. Google on the other hand has done a marvelous job of doing just that, cross compatibility to every browser. Even my mobile p

    • Re:competition (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MrAnnoyanceToYou ( 654053 ) <dylan AT dylanbrams DOT com> on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:38PM (#13526658) Homepage Journal
      I guess it's possible, but so many people who are great coders who kinda help Google out on the fringes of its business (and possibly even the center) absolutely hate Microsoft and won't contribute that it may be harder than Msoft thinks to accomplish this kind of facelift.

    • Re:competition (Score:5, Insightful)

      by w3weasel ( 656289 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:48PM (#13526726) Homepage
      Be very wary of it being a real 'fair and open' kind of competition thogh... in the same way that MS tried to taint and skew Java, Javascript, CSS and other web technologies, you can be pretty sure that this 'open' web 2.0 scheme will ensure that you develop for use only on IE (which still doesnt fullort support a multitude of W3C standards), with a long term aim of steering you off of a dangerously open platform standard such as a browser, and back into the Windows OS proper (where you can be safely contained and gradually bled of your cash).
      • And you think with the rapid adoption of Firefox (which may be supported in the future with a "Google Browser"; a Firefox dressed in Google's clothing) that people will stand for these Microsoft moves?

        Most of the time, an API is platform-locked; once you learn an API on one platform, there's just about no way to use it on another. Unix tried to deal away with this in a lot of ways (POSIX..), but the truth still holds true today that when you move platforms, you'd better be prepared to relearn everything;
      • Traditionally this has been the case, but MS seems to be showing different colors now.

        They've endeavored to make IE7 standards-compliant, they hired a guy to work with Linux, they've finally started addressing the security concerns, etc.

        It wouldn't be too hard for me to believe that they're also changing their company policy to be less harsh on open standards and open source. Well, with the exception of the Balmer monkey I could believe it.
        • How can they do this? If IE7 is standards-compliant, it won't load most of the pages out there! What are they going to do about that? Also, will it be standards compliant just like how Word's format is XML and accessable?

        • Re:competition (Score:2, Interesting)

          by madprof ( 4723 )

          You have to be JOKING!
          Excuse the capitals but that's a hilarious suggestion.
          Their company policy is to benefit Microsoft shareholders. Open source and open standards are not directly conducive to growing Microsoft's bottom line.
          They make their big money on Windows and Office. These are the archetypal definitions of closed, proprietary platforms that become de facto "standards" through their sheer dominance.
          Microsoft is not going to risk its bottom line so do not expect much to change in future.

          They end

      • I love to take jabs at MS as much as the next guy, but this:
        "As part of its new 'Web 2.0 Platform' strategy, Microsoft will expose application programming interfaces, or APIs, for MSN Search using SOAP" ...is a good thing. Its really hard to lock someone into proprietary technology if you're talking about SOAP (which is a beautiful thing, really).

        Oh, and Firefox has its own standards compliance issues (as much as I love it).

  • Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bigtallmofo ( 695287 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:31PM (#13526623)
    MSN Virtual Earth, Desktop Search and MSN Messenger will all be opened up for outside developers to extend...Google and Yahoo, already provide the hooks

    Exactly how is introducing web services months after Google has introduced them a possibility of out-Googling Google?

    Wouldn't Microsoft have to actually come out with a web tool that people use that Google didn't already have to even have the possibility of that description?

    • Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google (Score:4, Insightful)

      by FatRatBastard ( 7583 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:41PM (#13526680) Homepage
      Wouldn't Microsoft have to actually come out with a web tool that people use that Google didn't already have to even have the possibility of that description?

      Nope. Its a matter of trying to cut off each other's revenue stream. If MS takes eyeballs from Google products then Google receives less advertising revenue (which is their bread and butter revenue stream). If Google can produce pivotal applications that don't require MS OS or applications to run then MS (in theory) would receive less revenue from selling operating systems and applications (which is their bread and butter revenue stream).

      This looks less like a battle of "what can I build to make more money" than "what can I build to fark my competition."

    • Great Question, Here's the Answer (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ieshan ( 409693 ) <ieshan@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:44PM (#13526705) Homepage Journal
      For all relevant details and discussion, see "Netscape".

      • Re:Great Question, Here's the Answer (Score:5, Informative)

        by ciroknight ( 601098 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:59PM (#13526785)
        Netscape was different; netscape, though being the leading competitor, was also the far less powerful competitor. They had virtually no finances to fight the battle, and their development teams seemed to keep starting over, or getting pissed and spinning their wheels.

        Google, on the other hand, has the lead, and the money, to fight Microsoft in this market. Their recent IPO has freed up billions of dollars to throw around as they see fit, and I'm fairly certain they are going to be expanding their bases of operations quickly. Alliances in SIP (VoIP), quick competition with Google Talk, and Gmail, and Google Earth's rapid media acceptance (see Hurricane Katrina for details) are all ways Google hopes to stay superior.

        This won't be a battle like Netscape vs Microsoft. This time, the software isn't tied to Microsoft's infrastructure in any way (see the prevalance of cross platform tools from Google; they haven't completely full compatibility, but I insure you that they are working on it feverishly). Pair this with extreme competition from Microsoft in market dominance (Apple's catching up fast with the recent iPod successes), and you start seeing a really pissed off Microsoft.

        It seems at this point, Microsoft, as well as News Corp, along with EBay, are all feeling the on-coming war, and are sweeping the playing field clear, buying up their places on the battlefield so that Google and Microsoft won't destroy them. See the recent purchase/intent to purchase GameSpy, Skype, etc.

        This is war, and a war that Google can fight. Don't expect them to roll over and die like Netscape did.

    • Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google (Score:5, Funny)

      by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:50PM (#13526737)

      Wait for us, we're the leader!

    • Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google (Score:5, Informative)

      by dioscaido ( 541037 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:51PM (#13526752)
      You misunderstand the game. It's not who gets there first, but who grabs the largest market/amount of traffic. Google has been coming out with some sweet services, but at the same time MSN, as it stands now, has many times more users and traffic than Google in those same applications (except for search of course). # of users: hotmail >>> gmail, msn messenger >>> google's chat, my spaces >>> blogger.com.

      I'm glad Google is around because it woke up MSN, who was pretty lame and coplacent. And it definitely looks like they are gunning for Google, and have tons of resources all focused on that.

      As long as both google and msn keep improving their services, we win, so god speed to both companies.

      • As long as both google and msn keep improving their services, we win, so god speed to both companies.

        As long as no one puts the other out of business. (which seems unlikely at this point, but still...)

      • Re:Too Little Too Late != Out-Googling Google (Score:5, Interesting)

        by ciroknight ( 601098 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:08PM (#13526829)
        Number of users doesn't matter when it comes to amount of money made per user. Google's business grows faster because though they may have a smaller number of users, those users are generating a much larger part of their revenue (in fact, virtually all of it).

        That being said, Microsoft's revenue stream is entirely Windows and Office, thus the need now to diversify, and quickly, as their upcoming offering is about to be outclassed in every way by the competition.

        The game isn't "who gets there first", nor is it "who has the most traffic". The game is entirely "who makes the most money off people". MSN's artificial lead could be strapped from Windows all together with an anti-trust lawsuit ("Microsoft is competing unfairly by strapping MSN to the operating system" "But we can't remove it!!!!1 It provides core functionality!!"...) As for hotmail, you heard it here first: hotmail has been dying for a long time, and as for my "proof", every hotmail user I know shy of one has moved to Gmail (and she stays with hotmail because it's tied to MSN).

        By the way, Myspace is owned by News Corp, who also recently bought GameSpy; they're trying to move these services out of the way of the oncoming Google/Microsoft war, as if either got into those positions, it is likely the surrounding businesses like Myspace would be absolutely slaughtered by the competition (anyone using myspace can tell you why).

        This is war, the way that the web has been from the beginning. Just because Microsoft won some early battles doesn't mean that this war is over by a long shot; it's been brewing in the back alleys and corners all over the internet. And now (in the eyes of the Geek) the benevolent Google verses the evil Microsoft battle is going to be dominated by a player who's eye is more on helping the community than destroying it.

        Can't wait for Google's reaction come next week.
      • hotmail >>> gmail, msn messenger >>> google's chat, my spaces >>> blogger.com

        Do you have any tangible data to back this up? If not ... don't just STFU, this is /.
    • For the past decade, Microsoft has largely ignored the Web as an emerging platform for application development with fears that it could render Windows obsolete.

      The summary is wrong anyway. Microsoft hasn't ignored the Web as an emerging platform. They've specifically targetted it, controlling standards with a non-standards compliant browser, breaking Java to keep people dependent on Windows, and now introducing the Avalon/.NET APIs to attempt to deliver applications through Internet Explorer. All to keep
    • v. To introduce a knock-off of someone else's web service months after they introduce it. Often used in relation to Yahoo, or even AOL.

      So, to out-Google Google would probably be just to introduce a knockoff of a Google service months after even Google got around to doing it.

      It seems like Microsoft is heading down this track. So the description of out-Googling Google makes sense to me.
      • and who was the one that had a websearch that got pages worth something before google?

        • altavista (Score:3, Informative)

          by YesIAmAScript ( 886271 )
          Your question is pretty strange. As if people didn't search before google?

          I know Google when they came on the scene were far better than everyone else, they really did a much better job.

          But that doesn't mean that worthwhile search tools didn't exist before Google.

          I really should have put something after my knock-off comment in my post. Google has done some great sites. Few original ones, but a couple great ones. But still, that doesn't mean MS can't come in even later and out-do Google. And before you spout
    • Well, I think that it is more likely that Google will out-Microsoft Microsoft than Microsoft Out-Googling Google. However this would mean that Google will turn evil, which is also very unlikely (at least at this time).
    • TerraServer predated Google Earth by years. MSN Messenger predated Google's offering by years. And depending on how you look at search, Microsoft's search offerings were there first. Google is making them think about opening up the services to third party applications. The services were there before Google became a player.

      -everphilski-
  • "Can Microsoft Out-Google Google"
    Can Microsoft imitate google properly ?
    So can Microsoft muscle into this market .
    • Well, most of Microsoft's forays into areas that weren't operating systems or office suites haven't done so well.

      And, if Microsoft is successful in out-Googling Google will they be able to do that running Windows on the server side? Or will they have to come up with some other solution?

  • Marketing bullshit (Score:5, Funny)

    by RootsLINUX ( 854452 ) <rootslinux@gmail.cDEBIANom minus distro> on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:35PM (#13526640) Homepage
    I like how they call it "Web 2.0", as if Microsoft were the ones that originally invented the web. Gotta love that marketing department!
    • As far as the average end user is concerned, Microsoft may very well have made the internet. This only stands to exacerbate that view. It's kind of like AOL. AOL is not, in fact, it's own internet, but shame on should you try and explain this to someone that uses it.
      • On their defense, AOL kinda used to be it's own internet, back to the 8-bit computers days...

    • Re:Marketing bullshit (Score:5, Informative)

      by Bogtha ( 906264 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:36PM (#13527009)

      Actually, "Web 2.0" is a buzzword that originated outside of Microsoft and typically refers to "next gen" web technologies, like web services, AJAX, etc. Google it for more information.

      Still stupid, vague to the point of meaningless marketing, but in this case, it's not Microsoft's fault, they are just using the same terminology as a lot of other people.


    • Not only that, but didn't they steal the Web 2.0 moniker from something else, like W3C?
    • Every bit as stupid as dot net or .net whatever the heck it was.
    • "Web 2.0" isn't an MS term [wikipedia.org]. It's a general reference to the proliferation of things like feeds, web services, AJAX, etc... and the transformation of the Web to more of an an app platform rather than a static "read-only" platform. It's easy to blow it off as a buzzword, but the transition is happening and it's pretty neat.
  • When will Gates finally just buy out Google?

    Then we'll have Googlesoft or Microogle to complain about.

  • you linux sycophants don't get it (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    MSFT will kill google.

    Vint Cerf is an MSFT hater. At MCI he led the investment into Netscape.

    John Doerr (http://investor.google.com/board.html [google.com]) is on google's board and was on netscapes.

    There is a struggling conspiracy that believes MSFT's capitalist successes are unfair and they must be killed.

    Or, there is a natural balance to the world in which MSFT forces innovation through challenges, but overcomes those challenges through its own innovation.

    MSFT's brainpower and cash reserves dwarf google's resources.

  • Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spiritraveller ( 641174 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:41PM (#13526681)
    --- VERY IMPORTANT NEWS - VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---

    Microsoft, the most innovative company in history is about to embark on a bold new way of doing things. They are going to open up the APIs for their search engine (that noone uses), their messenger service (that noone uses), and their Desktop search service (which surprisingly, nobody uses).

    Oh wait a sec, this just in... they're going to open up the APIs for Windows users only.

    Of course, Google and Yahoo, whose services people do use, opened up their APIs sometime around 1997.

    --- VERY IMPORTANT NEWS - VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---
    • MSN Messenger is highly popular in some regions/demographics (although I don't use it).

      BTW, Google hadn't received that name yet and I know of no "public API" back for Backrub or Yahoo in 1997. Those were the days when a Javascript controllable HTML DOM was part of everyone's wet dreams.

      Furthermore, it's quite hard to make SOAP Windows-only.

      So, nice trolling, I was stupid enough to get hit.

    • --- ALSO VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---

      "noone" is not a word. No one should be writing it.

      --- ALSO VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ---

  • PR from the Redmond chair throwing contest? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Microsoft can't out-anybody-anything without being unethical, unless it involves office furniture.
    To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: lawyers

  • In a word: No (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Elrac ( 314784 )
    Google is about making information available. Microsoft is about selling Windows. They're not in the same business.

    Microsoft is unlikely to make a REALLY significant dent in, what so far has been rather foreign territory, breathless news blurbs notwithstanding.

  • The Google Iceberg (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Cowdog ( 154277 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:43PM (#13526697) Journal
    They can certainly copy the visible parts of Google, the products that are out (heh, mostly in beta) now.

    But what about all the other stuff that's still hidden, that's in the Google pipeline? You could call it the Google Iceberg. The cool stuff that is yet to come. It looks like Google is pretty good at staying ahead by innovating.

    As always, Microsoft is claiming to innovate, while actually just copying what they find out there in the marketplace already. They don't move the ball forward, they just keep the pressure on.

  • Last week it was a new line of retail outlets. This week, they're openning up thier apis. Tommorrow they're going to learn that web commics are big, and so we'll see a commic dedicated to the adentures of 'Microsoft Bob and Clippy'. After that who knows?

  • Out-google Google? Unless the following happens (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bogaboga ( 793279 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:48PM (#13526723)
    Out googling google will not be easy unless M$ creates the following environment:

    Here it is:

    M$ MUST make sure that the services Google and Yahoo provide at present do not work very well with IE. So in this situation if one wants to use Google's virtual Earth, it becomes impossible making this individual resort to Microsoft's offerings.

    On the other hand, Google could fight back this way: It could create a utility that makes the dependence on IE for most of Microsoft's services irrelevant. I am still looking for a way to remove IE from my Windows box in a sane and neat way.

    If Google can create such a utility, I can see most users removing IE. The trouble at present is even after making Firefox the default browser for example, looking at some link in some applications would still "call" IE. I guess this young man called "DVD Jon" can help here.


    • You can't remove IE, it is tied to the OS. Except for the OSX version. And the unix version.

      And you need IE for little things like windows update and braindead websites that only work in IE.

      Can you even just delete the IE icon off the desktop in XP? They used to lock a few icons on the desktop requiring reg hacks.

    • What might help is the work to emulate the MSHTML COM interfaces through Gecko to actually get useful. That doesn't require any genius. It just requires lots of tedious work. It should be somewhat similar to ripping out COMCTL32.dll in a Win32 system; more or less user mode only, no extremely strange dependencies, but it's quite a lot of functionality to duplicate with a very specific interface to get everything working. It should be no surprise that, last I heard, the ones pursuing any such addon to Gecko
    • "M$ MUST make sure that the services Google and Yahoo provide at present do not work very well with IE. So in this situation if one wants to use Google's virtual Earth, it becomes impossible making this individual resort to Microsoft's offerings."

      Virtual Earth is owned by Microsoft. You mean "Google Earth". And Google Earth is a separate application, so it has nothing to do with IE or Firefox. Did you mean Google Maps?

      Even then, Google just releases a new version of Google maps that sniffs the new versio

  • Goodbye Google! (Score:5, Funny)

    by qualico ( 731143 ) <<worldcouchsurfer> <at> <gmail.com>> on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:53PM (#13526760) Journal
    Ballmer is going to f***ing kill Google. Remember. :->
  • Haven't read the article yet, so maybe I should hold off, but as a web programmer working mostly with IE-dependant internal corporate apps, my first reaction is, "Oh great! What Microsoft skills that I mastered 2 years ago do I have to throw away now?" I used to be a hot shot ASP/VBScript developer. Now I'm finally up to speed on C# and ASP.Net. I'm getting tired of switching to the newest Microsoft thing du-jour that everybody wants to use because it's new.
    • It's not like seamless interaction with remoting, including SOAP web services, was one of the selling points of C#, although that's not a main use in practice.
    • This is another reason why you should use standards. I've been programming in PHP for years and the fundamentals haven't changed. Granted, being in the IT field means you have to learn things quickly, but if you get away from Microsoft you find things tend to be a LOT more interoperable.

      Of course, if your job forces you to use Microsoft APIs... I pity you.

  • Two references to Google... (Score:3, Funny)

    by urdine ( 775754 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @01:56PM (#13526770)
    ...in the title of an article about Microsoft. A /. classic!

  • Whew (Score:4, Funny)

    by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:02PM (#13526798)
    Whew, I was getting worried we weren't going to have YAGS (Yet Another Google Story) today. And this one has Microsoft in it. Bonus!

  • Headline (Score:4, Informative)

    by R.Mo_Robert ( 737913 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:04PM (#13526808)

    I'm not trying to rant, but...

    Normally, BetaNews rips stuff right off the front page of Slashdot, but this time it looks like it went the other way around. I mean, was it really necessary to copy the exact headline, word for word, from the linked BetaNews article [betanews.com]?

  • Microsoft cost me months of lost life. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Helpadingoatemybaby ( 629248 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:05PM (#13526812)
    I'm a developer and look at Microsoft's actions from my point of view.

    I just spent the last two weeks building a replacement Microsoft's ADO/DAO in our product using sqlite. Why? Because on rolling out we discovered that ADO would fault on half the machines, and DAO would fault on the other half of the machines. Weird error messages. Strange unrelated machine problems. Both implementations ran fine in the lab, but in the real world they would fail. Who has time for that?

    So we ripped out both and replaced them with a brand spanking new sqlite version. Wasted a lot of programming and testing time, but it was the only way to make sure that our program would work in the real world. In a similar vein, we had to remove all the Microsoft calendar controls from our product because some of the machines in the real world would fault. Working around Microsoft's problems is not what programmers should be paid for.

    Now, given a choice between Google's products, which are generally stable and just work, and Microsoft's API which will potentially lead to a lot of uncomfortable surprises on rollout, which would I choose? It's a no brainer.

    No thanks, Microsoft, but you had your chance. When we got to the point that we had to set a policy to minimize the use of Microsoft controls as much as possible you lost any chance of ever getting us back in the fold.

    • Re:Microsoft cost me months of lost life. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MemoryDragon ( 544441 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:16PM (#13526862)
      Working around the myriads of problems imposed by shoddy or non standard compliant microsoft software is what programmers are paid for 90% of the time, the bosses or customers simply do not see that directly. If Microsoft would comply to web standards for instance around 50% of all web programmers probably would lose their job because the worktime could be cut by half... Usually if you do html programming it is like that, make a page, which works on every browser, spend the rest of the time (which is somewhere between 50 and 90%) to get it up and running in IE as well...
      • This is just PURE speculation, and seems quite far from the truth to me. But ... well, this it's /.
        • Maybe I should explain why your numbers seem wrong to me. First because you think that all software development is web-centric. Well, it is not. Second, even for web-centric applications there are always (many) programmers that do the server-side bussiness logic and data binding. They don't have to worry about Internet Explorer at all.

          Finally, your frustrations are justified, only for those developing web interfaces. I know there are a lot of you guyz out there, and I really understand your problems. And

  • Not quite true (Score:3, Funny)

    by hritcu ( 871613 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:06PM (#13526819) Homepage
    For the past decade, Microsoft has largely ignored the Web as an emerging platform for application development with fears that it could render Windows obsolete.

    What about ASP.NET or IIS?

  • Web services for MSN Search ... who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hritcu ( 871613 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:12PM (#13526842) Homepage
    As part of its new "Web platform" strategy, Microsoft will expose application programming interfaces, or APIs, for MSN Search using SOAP. Third party applications will be able to access up to 10,000 search results per day.

    As long as Google offers the most relevant search results, for free, what would be the incentive to use MSN Search? Unless Microsoft pays developers to use their crappy search engine, there is no incentive.
    • Nothing, apart from the next version of IE will default to MSN Search. As will the next version of Windows. And Office, and every other program MS produces where it's remotely applicable.

      And 90% of Microsoft users won't/don't know how to/won't be able to change it.

      Microsoft's desktop monopoly means they don't have to be the best - they only have to be just barely good enough, and they win the war with the next round of upgrades to their existing products.
      • Of course that Microsoft's products will default to MSN, with all the consequences you stated. However, Microsoft didn't need open APIs in order to do this anyway. The article was about Microsoft opening up their APIs to third-party developers. And these developers should be somehow motivated to use the Microsoft services, instead of the ones provided by Google or Yahoo! The problem (for Microsoft) is that their services SUCK (especially the search). So, I'm very curious on how will Microsoft lure developer
      • Every version of IE since 5.0 has defaulted to the MS search engine. Has it helped MSN Search's market search? No. Office? Why do I need my word processor or spreadsheet to go to a search engine. Changing your default search engine will always be easy - largely because the anti-trust settlement requires it.

        The constant refrain of (IE will default to it) doesn't change the fact that this strategy has already failed.
  • ... SOAP. MSN Virtual Earth, ...

    Great! Now I can combine cutting edge technology with free 1996 data! I've been waiting nearly 10 years for something like this to come along -- this web thing is gonna be BIG!!

  • New stuff from MS more cross-browser compliant (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dantheman82 ( 765429 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:28PM (#13526955) Homepage
    OK, so I'm a huge fan of tech in general, so I've gobbled up every single one of Google's offerings because they were quite simple and technically amazing. I got myself an invite on Gmail when they were going for $10/apiece on eBay, etc. etc.

    However, I've noticed what seems to be some young (and new) blood on the MS campus that is definitely very interested in putting up a valiant fight within blogging and maps and other stuff. Virtual Earth, while coming second and with slightly older maps in some area than Google Maps, actually allows click zooming and scroll wheel zooming in FIREFOX! I heard Scoble during an interview specifically mention stuff like that and there is a much greater openness among their developers about the competition and increasing a userbase no matter what. BTW, Google Maps still don't zoom in Firefox using the scroll wheel, a real pain...and printing from Google Maps only seems to work if I use print screen.

    Also, MS is saying "bring on the hackers" by offering $1000 in a contest to build the best plugin on top of Virtual Earth. Furthermore, MS is offering the Virtual Earth maps for free for commercial use. Furthermore, the virtual earth is integrated with the MySpace bloggin. Meanwhile, Google has tried to squash some commercial ideas built on their mapping, and there is no integration between their gmail, virtual earth, and blogging capabilities.

    However, what I find cool is that there are some devs who are creating a bridge so that plugins can work on Google Maps AND Virtual Earth, which is awesome for increasing compatability between mapping services. Check out the video here [msdn.com] (warning...requires WMP). Or you can read up about how to code it up here [viavirtualearth.com].

  • New slogan: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hemabe ( 532570 )
    Microsoft ... always one step behind.

  • Why would we want to lock-in to Microsoft again? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IGnatius T Foobar ( 4328 ) on Saturday September 10, 2005 @02:32PM (#13526984) Homepage Journal
    Microsoft isn't the sweetheart of the developer universe anymore. Anything they offer now is too little, too late. Nobody trusts Microsoft anymore. And besides, would you want your "Web 2.0" apps to depend on Microsoft products and services? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you use Microsoft tools and API's, you're not going to end up with "web applications" -- you're going to end up with "Windows applications that are delivered via the web."

    Around the turn of the century, the phrase everyone was spewing was "whoever controls the browser, controls the Web." Microsoft proved that this isn't true. They had a near-monopoly on browsers for years, and they blew it. They just let the browser stagnate while they went back to focusing Bill Gates' pet projects, like tablet computing and putting a database in the filesystem. Now Google is finally realizing the Netscape dream of turning the web into a pervasive computing platform, and suddenly Microsoft has to go into react mode again. Microsoft does not innovate. Microsoft reacts. And Microsoft gets pissy whenever someone other than them starts succeeding in the technology world. They're a bunch of spoiled brats. Is it any surprise that those of us who are building the next generation of applications are hesitant to go anywhere near Microsoft? [citadel.org]
  • Microsoft is one of the least innovative corporations. To be fair, large corporations with cash cow products typically don't risk innovation. Innovation comes from small, nimble startups, which are then sometimes purchased by large companies.

    It is unlikely Microsoft will "out-Google" anyone. Microsoft is better at using dirty tricks like well poisoning, and they do have a lot of monopoly power to abuse. Never underestimate the ignorance and ambivalence of their customers either.
  • If that means "producing lots of way-cool, innovative Web-based products that are so marvelously designed and implemented that nobody uses Google anymore" then I would have to say the answer is, no, they can't.

    But that doesn't mean that they won't eventually manage to "f**kin' kill Google" (hey, Ballmer's alleged words not mine.)

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Close