Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 1:05 a.m.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. Microsoft makes a product that 95% of PC users are willing to use (Microsoft hasn't forced them and in this day and age there is choice) and yet people complain that Windows favours other Microsoft software! When's the last time you heard Sony complaining to car manufacturers that there is too much support for iPods in their car and not enough for their own range of MP3 palyers? If Google doesn't like the way Microsoft makes their software, they should try making their own operating system!

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 1:35 a.m.

#37649 obviously has no comprehension of the legal and practical issues.

The fundamantal problem, an ongoing one with profound effects upon numerous software and related markets and upon consumers' costs and choices -- is that Microsoft consistently, and arguably illegally, leverages its monopoly position to gain dominance in additional markets.

By this means, Microsoft often destroys potential competition before it's even materialized. Fortunately there are entities such as Google who have managed to establish themselves in niche markets despite Microsoft's anti-competitive behaviors, and are in a position to oppose them.

A paucity of competition for Microsoft would mean a paucity of innovation and of consumer choices. In fact we already live with that circumstance in many respects. The search issue is only one of many raised by features and functions of Vista, which effectively leverages Microsoft's position in numerous other markets -- in violation of the intent if not the letter of the law.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 1:44 a.m.

Issues are clearly different. In thew case of iTunes software for the iPod Apple is also being watched and even litigated in Europe.

However I agree with you that Google can not rely on search only to reach people's Desktop. It isn't that hard to make an Operating System: Linux+Attention to Detail.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 3:27 a.m.

#37652
I am interested to see google encroaching into MAC teritory.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 3:53 a.m.

Don't forget that Apple doesn't make cars and car manufacturers don't make iPods.

The problem is people are willing to switch search operators for an OS, but not switch OS for a search engine.
Does this mean search companies that don't make OSs have no right to exist?

Here's an analogy: Imagine having all car manufacturers unite and come up with their own mp3 player. Suddenly all future cars would come with that mp3 player built in, and it would be wired in to the engine so it couldn't be replaced. To buy music for that mp3 player you'd have to go to their own store and music bought on that store would only work on that music player or it's portable version.
Would you recommend Apple start making cars?

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 3:55 a.m.

I agree Microsoft should not suffer because they have the bigest market share in the OS front.

If they want to be bulies they have the right to be bullies. and if the world does not like it they should grow up or learn to fight back and not run to the coughts and cry mumy Microsoft wont let me play on the swing.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 3:57 a.m.

I will agree that having an effective desktop search is needed in todays hugh amounts of information. However, the user community should have the ability to choose the software and not have it packaged with other software. I am always asked to fix pc's that are running slow only to find that they have programs running that they didn't even realize that it was there. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like when you buy a new pc or install new software, you get some google, yahoo, or other software that is suppose to enhance your desktop experience. If I want the software, I will install it.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 4:14 a.m.

Internet Explorer is a perfect example of Microsoft's dominance and it's associated stagnation.
Once MS knocked Netscape out of the race, IE6 sat with no improvements.

If it wasn't for Firefox coming out of the wreckage of Netscape, we would still have IE6. With competition, we move forward.

I doubt we would have Desktop Search from MS if it wasn't for Google showing how good it could be. And I admit, I now use MS search over Google Desktop, just because it's in the start button, and built into Outlook. But, before that I loved Google's search.

Majority of people will not change the defaults. IE7 was a simple upgrade that MS recommended as 'security patch', but Firefox was a new install. Who installs, when MS is an automatic update?

Having the option to change the default Desktop Search is important to keep MS on it's toes. Most won't change unless Google (or some new upstart) shows a major benefit to changing defaults.

Choice. We need it. Don't stifle it.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 4:20 a.m.

"If Google doesn't like the way Microsoft makes their software, they should try making their own operating system!"

Sshh! Don't give them any ideas.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:32 a.m.

Garbage. Pure garbage.

Search is a function of the OS. Third party utilities are welcome, but should not be integrated into the shell. Hopefully the programming interface used isn't as shot full of holes as is usual for MS, otherwise Google's whining will open vunerabilities for millions.

Or imagine the impossible: Google's own team develops flawed software, and MS inheirits the damage.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:35 a.m.

All I can say, reading Google's statement, is that their soul meter did a big dip towards Evil today.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:38 a.m.

Google wants to have it's search indexing software on your computers so they can continue to track your movements on the web and when you're offline.

I also don't see Google going after Apple for their "Spotlight", which as far as I know cannot be changed.

"Don't be evil" at this point is just a joke around the Google campus. Keep in mind that nothing is 'free' Google is netting more profit from their data mining than Microsoft is making from designing and selling the ONLY software out there that's any good for business use.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:41 a.m.

I sometimes agree that checks and balances should be made against large monopolous companies. However, the search feature is just that, a FEATURE, of the new operating system. OS X has it too and noone is making them turn it off. Now, honestly I do not know how OS X responds to google desktop search, and i don't care. The point is, people complain constantly that microsoft is behind OS X or Linux and it is these stupid little arguments that keeps them behind. Apple is just now seeing how hard it is to deal with monopolozing with its iTunes and as they get more market share they will continue to learnw hat MS has been dealing with for years. It is companies like Google that PREVENT MS from developing newer and better, not speed it up. MS has always tried to stay on the cutting edge of Operating System features while at the same time trying to remain backwards compatible for older systems. Vista really is the first time MS has just said, ok guys, time for you to upgrade. And it IS TIME TO UPGRADE. Holy crap, get rid of those windows 3.1 Point of sales computers and get something that doesn't crash every 10 minutes. (I know because I worked retail for a long time through college) The point is, Google is a smart enough company to figure out a way to integrate the desktop search into Vista without MS having to change the OS, but they are too lazy to spend the time to do so. They'd rather cause a media frenzy and force MS to make their job easier. And how much you wanna bet that, because of Google's request for this change, it will open up a security hole in the OS. I'm a sofware test engineer for Military aircraft Navigation systems and trust me I KNOW how hard it is to catch every single bug in software code.

Think about that.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:42 a.m.

Silly! Microsoft should be free to put what they want in the OS. If you don't like it don't buy it. If you can't make a product that is better to work with that OS that makes the default one obscure then you don't belong in the playing field.

What is good for consumers is for more things by DEFAULT to be incorperated into the OS. This way when we buy a system we don't have to spend another XXX $ to get functionality. In the long run Google does this to get money from our pockets. Maybe they will not charge us for it, but they will toss a few adds which in turn will come back to our pockets. Micorsoft is very competitive for ownership of its desktop as its the source of income for the company. Damn them for trying to stay on top and not letting the little (not so little IMO) guy win!

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 7:46 a.m.

Stop whining about Microsoft all the time. We just have a lot of jealous people out there that want ride on the success of Microsoft. They make products that run on Microsoft Operation Systems and hope that they can make as much money as Microsoft does without making any effort from their end. Make your own operating system if you feel that Microsoft is hogging all the limelite. Make sure that it better than Microsoft and maybe people will start to buy yours.

It is Microsoft that spends the time and effort to make things. What do they get in return? Companies that want a piece of the cake though they are not invited to the party.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 8:01 a.m.

I am sure you can get innovative Google. You are acting like a whiny kid that has no new ideas to put out there. You guys hire some of the best innvotive minds. Put it to good work.

Growth is all about learning and inventing, and that is something Microsoft does better than all the other companies. They should be allowed to put anything they want in their operating systems. You want them without security holes? Then stop letting 3rd party companies shoot them.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 8:15 a.m.

GOOG is all for freedom of choice except when it's them bundling. Then they're happy for consumers to have restricted or even no choice.

It's kinda comical hearing them state that it's a "clear" violation of the consent decree when the DOJ and States couldn't agree with that. I guess GOOG is now judge and jury? It's too bad that making some changes was legally expedient for MSFT. Otherwise, they should have dug in. Search has always been part of the OS and GOOG shouldn't get access to that just because someone is using GOOG in their browser.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 8:16 a.m.

Not going to change my OS or security. Why would you want all your files search and listed then sent up to the Google servers for all to see? They hold your search data for two years - Google your not that good!
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9013159

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 9:02 a.m.

When I buy a product I should be asked if I want X or Y products why doesn't Windows ask me if I want IE or if I want the MSN page as my main page? I understand that many people are not very bright and that windows is Anti stupid but why do they treat everybody as Idiots. why when I install windows it doesn't give me an option of "would you like windows to choose suggested programs for you or would you like to choose your own?" why am I not given the option of changing my Windows OS as I please?? I don't see BMW telling me I can't change the hood of my car. If I screw Up is my fault, and if I do screw up I can always format my PC and install windows again. I am tired of windows harassing me with their Updates and always treating me as an Idiot that doesn't know what he's doing.
I am paying a large sum of money for an Operating system I should be given the option of "would you like your operating system with untouchable features which has MSN support or would you like to choose everything by yourself which limits your support."
Yes I know there are other Operating systems. Every time you buy a laptop it always comes with Vista Installed and If I change the OS it voids the warranty or at least that's what they told me at the company. Give me options don't lead me I want to be able to choose what I like and want.

Microsoft keeps on screwing us with their stupid "you can't touch this" features. who do they think they are MC hammer?!! some day this has to stop the easy or the hard way

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 9:09 a.m.

I've been through all the the post above and with the exception of one, I've read a lot of bullshit.
Keep your emotions aside. This isn't a whining competition, its just competition. Google can do what they can do and Microsoft will do what it will do. What matters is the law.
If what Google did was against the Law, then Microsoft would not have given in to the pressure. The fact is that (and write this down for future reference):

MICROSOFT IS USING ITS MONOPOLY IN THE OS MARKET TO ENHANCE ITS POSITION IN THE DESKTOP SEARCH MARKET.

And I'm sorry to break this to all of you but this is against the law. And microsoft knows it.

And yes, Apple does have spotlight, but they dont have an OS monopoly which they're using to promote spotlight. So it isnt against the law.

Understood?

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 9:28 a.m.

"MICROSOFT IS USING ITS MONOPOLY IN THE OS MARKET TO ENHANCE ITS POSITION IN THE DESKTOP SEARCH MARKET."

What monopoly? Oh right, the one that was predicated on Linux not being a valid alternative and AAPL being distinct from the Intel-market? How's that work out?

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 10:27 a.m.

So many of you display such ignorance. For example, #37697 wrote:

GOOG is all for freedom of choice except when it's them bundling. Then they're happy for consumers to have restricted or even no choice.

First, the change Google has just forced on MS is good for more than Google. Yahoo, among others, will benefit directly.

Second, precisely how has Google ever restricted anyone's choice in any matter whatsoever? They're hardly angels anymore. But this insinuation is just stupidly wrong. No examples exist.

It's kinda comical hearing them state that it's a "clear" violation of the consent decree when the DOJ and States couldn't agree with that.

LOL! DOJ is in MS' pocket, buy a clue. The States, almost one for one, saw the legal facts. So did MS. Do you think MS would EVER have backed down if they didn't KNOW they would lose? As soon as MS saw the charges were going to fly (DOJ can't block the States), they surrendered, promising to amend the OS to the exact degree they thought they HAD to, to make the litigation go away.

I guess GOOG is now judge and jury? It's too bad that making some changes was legally expedient for MSFT.

Not legally expedient. Legally unavoidable. If forced by a court, their control over the changes would have been minimized and they'd have lost far more ground than they have.

Otherwise, they should have dug in.

There was no hope. MS would have lost, and badly. It really was a CLEAR violation. It's still on the raw edge as proposed, but no longer quite worth litigating.

Search has always been part of the OS...

What undiluted BULL. It can be ADDED. Just as a browser can. And antivirus. And multimedia. And DRM. And extensive data-retention of everything significant the user does. And, and, and. And, any and all of those things can be integrated into the O/S so as to be un-removable unstoppable, and un-replaceable by the user. Which is where we're headed if MS isn't restrained.

and GOOG shouldn't get access to that just because someone is using GOOG in their browser.

It's amazing to me how many people don't understand the real issues. MS is a voracious, predatory monopoly. It can and it DOES put competition out of business, irrespective of the merits of their products and the value of their innovations. If allowed, it simply WILL crush Google and its ilk, all the antivirus and security vendors, et cetera ad infinitum, because it possesses the means to do so: complete control over the content and behavior of the overwhelmingly dominant O/S.

If MS could succeed on the MERIT of its products, as it has with a few of them, I (and the law) would have little or no complaint. But as it is, MS can and does force inferior software, at superior profit to itself, down the throats of a public it deprives of the efforts of uncounted non-MS innovators. If we can't begin to understand this, and where it leads, then maybe MS will succeed in all its goals. What a black day that would be.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 10:37 a.m.

This debate makes me ill. I'm usually with google but this is just too much.. Microsoft can't be expected to make tight working code and yet have every single tiny thing modularized. What happens when someone complains that the window rendering engine can't be ripped out to be rendered with their own custom renderer instead?

It's a package, and searching is a deep O/S function. Do we get to change how it copies files? Do we get to change how it interacts with the underlying file system? NO. That's the job of the O/S.

We might as well complain that video cards don't let us swap in another chip or modify the logic gates... it's a complete closed-source package, and if you don't like it,go with opensource.

It's just too much... i can't believe I actually feel BAD for MS.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/20/07 3:12 p.m.

#37731 wrote...
I'm usually with google but this is just too much.. Microsoft can't be expected to make tight working code and yet have every single tiny thing modularized.

Since when did bloat-master Microsoft make tight code??? And not to burst your bubble, but the Vista search-bloat in particular is a massive performance hog. I'm desperate to find some way to turn it off completely.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/21/07 3:04 a.m.

Google shouldn't be complaining, if programs are built so tightly into the operating system it only improves security.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/21/07 3:35 p.m.

Why dont google ask you if you want results from windows live or ask or yahoo when you hit search on their page. This is ridiculouuuuuuuusss.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/21/07 7:46 p.m.

A search engine company is telling Microsoft how to run it's softwear business?

That really sucks off google!

Posted by unregistered user at 6/26/07 1:19 p.m.

Why dont google ask you if you want results from windows live or ask or yahoo when you hit search on their page. This is ridiculouuuuuuuusss.

Well said point - I guess google has started getting fear of loosing ground because of WIndows Search. They have realised their Desktop Search Technology is inferior, so they chose to fight legally than technically. They would also have sensed Microsoft would get Live Search into the Desktop search and theryby kill WebSearch as a whole.

A bit of effort. The Entire Live Framework could be integrated into That Little box in Start Menu.

Imagine searching, your Live Mail(oops Live Hotmail),Live Contacts,Your Live Feeds,Live Spaces,Live FOlders(Future) and what not without even opening a browser. Ill surely love it and I believe most of us would. Google peed in its pants sensing this, so they went to Big Daddy for Support.

Long Live Microsoft - GOD Damn Google!!!

Ahmad

Posted by unregistered user at 7/7/07 12:45 p.m.

Microsoft, and their competitive tactics, is the 21st century version of the Plague.

Microsoft brings NOTHING, ZERO, NADA innovative to the industry.
The have done more harm and held back more innovation than another other company in their respective industry.

Microsoft's would have NEVER created (nor thought of) desktop search were it not for Google's innovative practices.

The day will come (hopefully sooner than later), when Google releases their own OS, and Microsoft
Microsoft is a relic of the 1980's and thinks like a 1980's company.

Soon my friend, SOON, in a generation or so, Microsoft will be an after thought.

You don't believe a once powerful, cash rich, corporation can fail?

Think of the following dead dinosaurs.
Enron (Enron had 3500 affiliates and partners throughout the world).
Arthur Andersen
WebVan lost over $1 BILLION U.S with their failed business model.

Posted by unregistered user at 7/8/07 12:10 a.m.

To all you pro-Microsoft fans, Microsoft is nothing but a monopoly which has brought nothing to the computer market. MSDOS was originally QDOS(Quick and Dirty Operating System) which Microsoft purchased in the early 80's. Sheer chance(read up about the IBM clones and MSDOS) brought them into dominance over the computing market. From then almost every single product they brought out was either an imitation or purchased. Windows 95 imitated OS/2's look and feel. IE was developed from Spyglass's Mosaic Browser. Flight simulators, other software was all bought up from companies that might compete with them. Read up yourselves on their monopolistic practises and their "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" policies and their FUD campaigns. Don't just assume that what you are using is good software and NEVER say that other software is bad without researching it yourself. You are just being a parrot, thinking it has some shred of intelligence if it backs up its buddies. I hate to disillusion you but if you think so you are an absolute idiot. Think don't parrot. Try firefox and understand the arguments before you enter into a forum such as this and embarrass yourself.

Posted by unregistered user at 8/4/07 1:10 p.m.

F*** Open Source. Rot in Hell with ur f***ing Google. GOD Dam them and you all idiotic Open Source fanatics.

Posted by nike air force ones at 5/12/08 1:06 a.m.

Very helpful, thanks!!

air force 1 sneakers | air jordans shoes | nike air force ones shoes