PCA Forums

This about hits the nail on the head....

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12603

Microsoft really, really wants Google. It wants Google for one reason, namely, to strip it naked and to castrate it. Microsoft wants to put an end to people being able to use the power of Google, especially as to the way that we all can use Google as a tool which makes the Internet particularly useful in helping us all to get through our days without depending on Microsoft.

Here's an exercise for all to try. Search Google for Linux Windows That gets you about 14 million pages, even with the English preference or filter turned on. Now, got to msn.com and search the Microsoft way for the same two words. You get exactly 18 pages. The word censorship doesn't seem to do justice to what Microsoft has done to a msn user who wants to compare Linux with Windows, does it?

Here's another exercise. Search msn for Linux. Note that the third item returned is tech.msn.com and that the page no longer exists. The fourth item deals with this topic "Alternatives to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP Learn about the Microsoft alternatives and how to move to them from open source products."

The mind boggles at the amount of fear that Microsoft has that people who search the Internet for knowledge, answers and understanding. Microsoft's fear is so great that it is willing to subvert what is truly one of the great inventions of history, searching the Internet, to a mere tool with one purpose, namely, to trick us all into buying Microsoft's software.

I am compelled to describe that this particular Microsoft stunt is patently, totally, absolutely, completely perverse. I can well imagine that the founders of Google could not have been able to sleep at night for the rest of their lives if they had allowed Microsoft to buy and cynically subvert their creation. After all, they already have more money than they can possibly spend in their lifetimes, they have a fantastic life of creative fulfillment ahead of them and they do have, well, their pride.

A hearty thanks to the founders of Google, then, for not selling Google to Microsoft, whatever their specific reasons were for not doing so. And, for the rest of us, a lesson in what the Internet and its resultant technologies would end up being used for if Microsoft had its way. To all the users of msn and its so-called "search" feature, I have to say, wake up & smell the coffee, kids.

And it couldn't just be that Google has a *better* spider technology that gets more pages more efficiently and that is why MS wants Google? This is nothing more than another MS conspiracy theory...

Oh I agree, it's a bit extreme, but you know - he's right about the linux searches on MSN. That CAN'T be accidental (or just a crappy index). MS certainly isn't beneath removing references from their search engine that they consider a business threat.

His point is valid - IF MS is in any way restricting the listings on their search engine, then it's not a true search engine, instead it's just an MS links page.

What REALLY concerns me is that if MS did buy it, Google would no longer be the useful resource it is. It would likely be molded into MS's idea of what a good search engine is, or they'd just use the name and essentially turn it into MSN.

MS doesn't always buy competing companies to incorporate the technology into their own products. MS often buys companies to BURY their better products so their competing product can be promoted without the competition. They've done this time and again.

I think all IT people (and anyone on this forum) would agree that Google is INVALUABLE as a research tool. Heck, first place I go when I have an issue troubleshooting a client's computer or network problem is Google and 90% of the time I find an answer there.

I'd PAY for Google if they started charging for it - it'd be a worth-while business expense.

If MS buys Google, I think we'll lose a valuable resource.

Originally posted by TruckStuff
And it couldn't just be that Google has a *better* spider technology that gets more pages more efficiently and that is why MS wants Google? This is nothing more than another MS conspiracy theory...

I tend to agree with FP on this one. However, this obviously doesn't apply to all of M$'s competition.

goto aol.com and do an AOL search (upper right) for AOL vs MSN and I get 9001 pages of results with that, I did the same on http://www.msn.com and did a AOL vs MSN and got 67805 results.

I would think that AOL being one of MSN's biggest competitors would end up with less results based on this guys thinking via the MSN search.

I did the same Linux Windows search that he reccomends in AOL search (which is enhanced by Google) and only come up with some 409,000 pages. nowhere near the 14 million that google shows (although AOL probably filters differently). MSN shows me 16 pages.

But I wouldn't doubt that there is something behind M$'s sudden need to acquire Google. I use it daily as a tech support specialist and like FP find about 90% of my answers through that. Granted alot of them lead to Microsoft Knowledgebase articles, there are still plenty that give me the info I need without going to M$.

As of October this year Google wasn't a publicly traded company, but there were talks and bank pressure to make it so.


The following quotes are from this article dated Oct 25, 2003

http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3.asp?ao=22592

The internet search engine, which has become one of the best known online brands with astonishing speed, is expected to be valued at between $15-billion and $25-billion.

....

The valuation compares with the current market capitalisation of $26-billion for Yahoo and $22-billion for Amazon.com.

...

The company is just five years old but has become so ubiquitous among internet users that "to Google" someone or something is now commonly used as a verb. It handles about 150-million searches a day.

...

The Silicon Valley-based company is expected to produce about $800-million in revenues this year and up to $200-million in profits. The motivation for taking the company public appears to be providing a market for existing investors, including venture capital firms and the more than 1 000 staff who hold shares.

Honestly if they go public, that may hurt them more because some of the shareholders will see $ signs and sell to M$..

As far as I've heard Brin and Page have shot down all M$ offers. I havn't done any research on it aside from reading what happens across the news though.

But figure this, if Google goes to a pay service, 150 million searches a day, off the top of my head, if even one 1/4 of a percent of those were unique searches .0025 (not people returning for different searches, but say one unique search), they'd be looking at 375,000 unique searches a day (again keep in mind these are completely random numbers im just pulling out of the air), that's 2,625,000 uniuque searches in 7 days.

so you've got 2,625,000 x 52 weeks, they're looking at 136,500,000 unique searches a year. Say they charge even $10 for a yearly subscription, they're looking at $1,365,000,000 income from those subscriptions alone. Thats not much more then the current $800 million in revenues they projected for this year. Add to that the money they get from the advertisements and they're even more.

Again keep in mind I'm just pulling those numbers out of my A$$ but hey, it's definately do-able.

Granted not everyone who uses Google now would feel like they need to pay $10 to search, but as a techie, it's an invaluable tool.

my .02

Google search for Linux = Results 1 - 10 of about 91,900,000. Search took 0.53 seconds

msn.com search for Linux = Results 1-15 of about 440 containing "linux

This my be a Microsoft conspiracy theory... but this one has truth to it. Do you really think that Microsofts spider technology is so bad it is missing 91million pages? That is called censorship.

google is like my left arm infact id probably give my left arm to own it

There were a number of rebuttal letterrs to that article on the website which mentioned that if you do an advanced search through MSN, you still get millions of results. So I tried it myself.

I decided to setup my own comparison by using the phrase "linux vs. windows". On MSN, I get 14,056 pages returned. On Google, I get 41,500 pages.

I think it's a combination of Google having better search technology and perhaps being a little more user-friendly but based on the numbers, I don't see a blatantly obvious case of censorship by Microsoft.

I still wouldn't want to see MS buy Google, though. I don't want to test my theory that far ...