Microsoft Holding 'Screw Google' Meetings In DC 331
Runaway1956 writes "Microsoft's chief Washington lobbyist has been convening regular meetings, attended by the company's outside consultants, that have become known by some beltway insiders as 'screw Google' meetings, DailyFinance has learned. The meetings are part of an ongoing campaign by Microsoft, other Google opponents, and hired third parties to discredit the Web search leader, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the matter. 'Microsoft is at the center of a group of companies who see Google as a threat to them in some combination of business and policy,' said a source who requested anonymity to avoid retribution. 'The effort is designed to make Google look like the big high-tech bad guy here.'"
This is time wasted (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft and its cronies are wasting time. They forget that it all comes down to what people want to use, choice in this case.
Re:Who else does MS usually have on board? (Score:2, Insightful)
I read "hired third parties", not "other third parties".
Those parties are probably lobbyists, who then talk to politicians who have previously been payed for.
Crush Compaq (Score:1, Insightful)
Nothing to see here, move along.
Do you expect them not to lobby? (Score:5, Insightful)
Meh. Were I a Microsoft stockholder, I would sue them for malfeasance if they didn't exhaust every cost-effective, competitive resource available.
Every large corp. lobbies the government for market favoritism. Any large corp. that doesn't is screwing its shareholders.
The problem is that you can do this at all, when the government is supposed to regulate (i.e.: even out) commerce and promote the general welfare (i.e.: not pick winners and losers).
--
Toro
In other news.. (Score:2, Insightful)
I.e. a practise otherwise discribed as a standard procedure of strategic competition in corporate America. You don't have to like it, but it's not exactly news. Catching them in the act of trying to bribe a congressmen/senators would be news.
Re:This is time wasted (Score:5, Insightful)
Corporate SOP (Score:2, Insightful)
All major corporations have strategic meetings about their main competition. Why is this so different just because its Mircosoft doing it?
Or is news really that slow today?
Crowdsourcing? Hmmm. (Score:4, Insightful)
A previous poster described this as collusion. Conspiracy might be a better word, but that might be construed as a "theory" rather than something that was actually documented.
Now if Microsoft is having meetings with their competitors to take down Google, I have to wonder just how cooperative Microsoft really is. Given the level of paranoia exhibited by MS, anyone MS deals with is a potential threat to them. The vast majority of partners and collaborators with Microsoft have wound up either dead or permanently handicapped. I wonder if all of the attendees at those meetings have considered that trend. To see the trend, go here [groklaw.net].
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Do you expect them not to lobby? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Were I a Microsoft stockholder, I would sue them for malfeasance if they didn't exhaust every cost-effective, competitive resource available."
Sure. They should be "competitive." But competition does not include finding and executing ways to harm others. That would be another another term. "Destructive competition" is a term coined on the wikipedia page on the word "competition" but I don't think it does well to put those two words together as, to me at least, the word competition implies honor and fair play. Putting the word "destructive" in front does not adequately remove the implications of the word competition. Worse, doing so makes "destructive competition" seem acceptable in civilized society and I cannot subscribe to that point of view. Clearly, however, you can.
There are times I wish I could be an active member of an important legislative body so that I could make a real, positive contribution to society. Unfortunately, I doubt I could withstand the "competition" I would experience in the process.
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the perception is that everyone is aware that Microsoft is evil, so there's no need to muster up that much hate any more. Besides, all that hating is kind of tiring. I'd rather work on the solution than whinging about the problem. Also, it has become clear that Bill Gates is "in" with the "powers that be". It was never more clear than when Ashcroft gave Microsoft a free pass after it was found to have operated anticompetitively in basically every way. Attacking Microsoft (in the USA) has become more unrealistic than ever. It's better to just work on getting Another System Started and ignore them, which is to say, just go Open Source.
It's also hard for me to bitch out Microsoft while I am forced to tell people who actually want to use websites with flash (such as full screen youtube) that they can't use Linux.
Bit of a credibility problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
The effort is designed to make Google look like the big high-tech bad guy here.
If your effort has widely become known as the "screw Google" meeting, it seems to me that you're doing a pretty bad job of it. Of course, this is DC... cash can easily substitute for credibility.
Re:Been there, done that. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Using google as default in ie8 (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure why it should take five steps to change your search engine to the most popular engine on the market. Remember that many, many users are extremely limited in their ability to make "simple" changes to a browser configuration (many will simply expect the browser to use Google, for example).
Is it really not possible for Google to exist in a pre-loaded list (or be downloaded automatically) and just be available as a dropdown?
Keep in mind that most users will go with whatever the default setting is, no matter how easy it is to switch (and later complain about the search quality). So Microsoft already wields enormous market power even if the switch is a snap. Making it a multi-step process (where you have to go online, find the provider, then separately make it the default) is going to exclude a shocking number of novice users. And I can't help but think that Microsoft knows this.
(On second thought, Microsoft has a fiduciary duty to know this --- if you're a stockholder and Microsoft tells you they aren't doing this to screw Google, you'd better be unhappy with them.
Re:Crush Compaq (Score:5, Insightful)
An "internal" campaign doesn't include other companies in the same markets and "hired third parties"; when you add those in, it becomes more like a cartel or trust.
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:1, Insightful)
This was clear long before Gates started Microsoft and became a card-carrying member of the financial elite.
No it hasn't, all that's happened is that DOJ has undermined its ability to regulate markets. Nobody can be punished for monopoly abuses without creating a shitstorm over the DOJ/Microsoft issue. Hopefully Google (ie: the unregulated market) will be able to succeed where the DOJ failed.
Sure they can...
You'd think google would do something about forcing users onto the command line like that.
Re:Do you expect them not to lobby? (Score:5, Insightful)
Any large corp. that doesn't is screwing its shareholders.
Yup, that's absolutely right kids. A company screwing their shareholders is in fact grounds for a lawsuit. Screwing employees, screwing customers, screwing the government, screwing the entire US economy, and screwing the environment is all just good business.
This bit was interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
The new details about Microsoft's D.C.-based efforts to undermine Google shine a light on the role of third-party firms, funded by tech giants, that engage in activities such as astroturfing, corporate propaganda, and misinformation. Media reports have hinted at a "whisper campaign" undertaken by entities acting at Microsoft's behest to undermine Google, both with policymakers and the public.
Coupled with Microsoft's long standing campaign to influence social media discussions in technical forums, like this one. Instead of investing that money in making better products, we've come to the point where success has to include not only dominating the market, but influencing social media and the regulatory environment. It's almost like their operating system business is an afterthought for Microsoft these days. They're not about building better products as much as hanging on to their market share and putting down competition.
Remind me again why the artificial person that is a corporation deserves the same freedom of speech protections as an individual? Seems like they sort of have an unfair advantage already when it comes to getting their free speech packaged and distributed.
Re:Turnabout is fair play (Score:1, Insightful)
Thank you for this interesting combination of lunatic fantasy and revisionist history. Well done.
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:5, Insightful)
While Flash on 64bit windows still is nonexistent.
Search Engine procedures in the major browsers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's the procedures for the major browsers as I find them 'intuitively'; e.g. I'll double-click an item expecting a dialog of options to come up.. in lieu of that, or in the case of fields, I right-click the thing expecting a fly-out of options.
There might be shorter routes, but in that case they weren't very intuitive -to me-.
I had to cheat for FireFox's Address bar, doing a google search, to find out that setting was hidden in about:config .
=====
IE8
As above, but please note that it's the dropdown -next to- the search box, on the right of the magnifying glass.
=====
For the remaining exercises, let's try adding Bing to the others (for demonstration purposes - though I guess if you like Bing...), making it the default, and then removing it again.
=====
FireFox 3.5 (3.5.1) - 'Default' Search: Google
-----
Adding Bing
-----
1. Click on the drop-down arrow on the left hand side of the search field
2. Select "Manage Search Engines..."
3. Click on the "Get more search engines..." option
You will now be presented with the FireFox add-ons website. None of the top-listed options are the major search engines, and bing is nowhere to be found in page 1, so...
4. enter "Bing" in the search field
5. change the "within" dropdown to "Search Tools"
6. click the big green Search btton
7. the first result should be the official, Microsoft bing! team-supplied, search engine. Click on the Download Now button
8. click on Accept [the license] and Install (if you want, read the license first.. It's Ms-PL)
A "Add Search Engine" dialog will now pop up
9. Click the Add button. ( You can check the "Start using it right away" option if you want, but that won't make it the default. )
-----
Making Bing the default (while adding: n/a; from scratch only)
-----
FireFox doesn't really have a 'default search'. It will simply use whatever you have selected last in the search field.
One could argue, however, that any junk entered into the address bar, which leads to a search engine (guess which?), is akin to a default search engine. So to that point...
1. Enter "about:config" in the address bar.
1.5. If you haven't previous ignored the "This might void your warranty!" (what warranty would that be, Mozilla? Tongue-in cheek humor, eh?) warning, click the "I'll be careful, I promise!" button.
2. Double-click on the entry "keyword.URL" (scroll down, use filter, not counting that as a 'step')
3. Enter the string: "http://www.bing.com/search?q="
(For arbitrary engines, you'll have to figure out which part of the address is the keyword bit and make sure that's the last item, etc.)
4. Click the OK button
-----
Removing Bing
-----
1. Click on the drop-down arrow on the left hand side of the search field
2. Select "Manage Search Engines..."
3. Select the Bing item
4. Click on the Remove button
5. Click OK
=====
=====
Google Chrome 2 (2.0.172.43) - Default Search: Google ( XD )
-----
Adding Bing
-----
1. Right-click on the address/search bar
2. Choose "Edit Search Engines..." from the context menu
3. Click the Add button
4. Enter as Name: "Bing"
5. Enter as URL: "http://www.bing.com/search?q=%s"
(For arbitrary engines, you'll have to figure out which part of the address is the keyword bit and make sure to place a "%s" in the place where the keyword would occur.)
6. Click the OK button
7. Click the Close button
-----
Making Bing the default - from having added it
-----
( do not follow step 7 above )
7. Click the "Make Default" button.
8. Click the Close button.
-----
Making Bing the default - from scratch
-----
1. Right-click on the address/search bar
2. Choose "Edit Search Engines..." from the context menu
3. Select "Bing"
4. Click the "Make Default" button.
5. Click the Close button.
-----
Removing Bing
-----
1. Right-clic
Re:Using google as default in ie8 (Score:3, Insightful)
Eh. See my list below for how -other- browsers have this implemented and you might wonder how MS managed to get it down to just 5 steps.
The answer: http://www.opensearch.org/Home [opensearch.org]
( Note: FF and Chrome are also OpenSearch engine descriptions compatible, so if you happen to be browsing a search engine's site that offers an OpenSearch engine description file, you should be able to simply click it and have the search engine added in no time. )
I counter with.. ..for all the other browsers.
"Is it really not possible for Bing/Yahoo/Altavista for all I care to exist in a pre-loaded list (or be downloaded automatically) and just be available as a dropdown?"
I do agree that IE8 -should- come with Google as an option in the drop-down pre-installed; but given that on first-run of IE8 you already get asked what you want your default search engine to be and are easily led to all the major search engines.. I don't find it that much of an issue.
Re:Corporate SOP (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right. You're absolutely right...
And "the news" isn't supposed to exist simply to satisfy the public's craving for a steady supply of entertaining stories (yes, I know how naive I sound saying that because that's not really how it works).
Take a chill pill (Score:2, Insightful)
Take a chill pill, fanboy. Yes, I get it. In your little world, everyone who isn't at Microsoft's throat, must be some kind of "Microsoft drone" and "acting like victimized kittens".
Meanwhile, the rest of us have better things to attach our self-esteem to, than to either corporation. You know, actual personal achievements, not "I barked for my corporate master like a good doggy today." I swear some people should have been four-legged.
Briefly: rest assured that some of us are merely amused at the whole butthurt fanboy act, rather than being pro-Microsoft. But, then again, if you had enough brain to understand that, you wouldn't be a fanboy in the first place.
But, yes, thanks for amply illustrating my point. It's exactly that kind of idiotic fanboy foaming at the mouth act that I was referring to.
Re:Been there, done that. (Score:3, Insightful)
I could reprise all of First Amendment doctrine for you, but I won't. It's not illegal, and it shouldn't be illegal. Speech that you object to must be countered with speech, not suppression of the speech that you object to.
Re:pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides that, Microsoft has proven time and again that it is dangerous to do business with them: they not only destroy their competition, they will destroy their business partners if it makes them a buck.
Re:pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the real issue is that Google has found a delivery model that is almost entirely platform-neutral. As long as you've got a browser that's capable of handling Google's AJAX apps, you can access their services. It doesn't matter whether it's a PC, a Mac or a smart phone. Microsoft is just going to have to bloody well compete in the modern market place, and while it's starting to, it's history since the mid-1990s of competing with any of the leading web portals has been dismal. They weren't even able to take on Yahoo when it was king of the hill.
Re:pathetic (Score:4, Insightful)
Google is no better than Microsoft, they just have a PR firm that has managed the nerd-cred more effectively.
That is simply wrong.
1: MS have a long history of abusing their monopoly. Google haven't.
2: You can easily switch away from the Google stuff that you use. You can not easily switch away from your MS stuff.
Okay, Google may be an evil corporation, but they haven't done anything obviously evil yet. I think...
Re:pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget the whole "Don't be Evil" thing. Notice that Google is not having "Screw Microsoft" meetings in DC, and if they did, everyone would be shocked. It's funny how much this sort of thing effects company actions. Overall, I'm a fan of both Microsoft and Google, but I trust Google to be a better steward of things I care about, like a digital on-line library. You have to like Bill Gates for his foundation, and for supporting the disabled with special Windows features, but his company has been ruthless and underhanded in business for decades.
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:3, Insightful)
But as a 32-bit process.
Re:pathetic (Score:3, Insightful)
Tracking != abusing.
Recommended reading: any recent EULA by Microsoft.
And compare it to license agreements which come with Google products.
Regards,
Ruemere
Re:pathetic (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, the *future* Google OS is just going to be a branded Linux platform. Unless, and I don't know how they would manage it, they block anyone from running any code they want to, there'll be nothing stopping people from running Firefox, or heck, installing Wine and running Internet Explorer. If Google truly wanted that kind of lock in, then they ought to be like Apple and the iPhone.
But hey, don't let any sense of accuracy or even logic get in the way of trying to score one against Google.
Re:Actually, I'm kinda getting nostalgic ;) (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, there's hope for Microsoft yet, in another decade or two. After Gates, Ballmer needs to leave too.
Re:pathetic (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the difference between Google and Microsoft is that Microsoft's Business Model is based on customer lock-in. It's well known and documented. They do this by deliberately creating incompatabilities, MS-only "standards", formats, etc.
Google has become sucessful by creating the best search engine. You always have the choice of using the search engine you like best. But, most people use Google because they feel it is better.