No shock here: MS wants Google

[idea_hamster]

Can't say that I'm surprised that MS has turned its drooling acquisition machine toward Google -- but it seems from

this short piece from Reuters picked up on MSNBC.com

that MS is approaching the clear winner among search engines with a bit more respect than usual. Looking for a merger or partnership first rather than to their checkbook says to me that MS knows that this may be a target that between success, fame, and good old popularity may not be susceptible to hard-ball tactics.

It also may be timed to preempt Google's rumored IPO.

[overt bias]
Lets hope that Google's management realizes that while selling to MS might make them rich, they -- just like everyone else -- will have to use Ask.com for the best search forever after, since we all know that MS's touch can blight plants and turn fresh water salty.
[/overt bias]

 

[Kid Red]

NO FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS GOOD!! NO!!!

I really deeply and truly hope M$ doesn't get Google. Not only for the fact of my deep hatred towards M$ and my pro-Apple stance, but I'd hate to see the end result of M$'s grubby corporate hands molesting Google. I don't want red/green/yellow/blue table cells all over the web page with ads everywhere touting free MSN subscriptions and M$ updates and news.

NO!! I will be deeply saddened, because I would be them first to jump ship, however, there aren't many ships to swim to if Google goes down that path to darkness.

 

[wdlove]

I too am very saddened by the thought that Mircrosft would acquire Google. It just sadly seems to be the trend. Apple should purchase Google or try to make an alliance.

 

[voicegy]

Originally posted by wdlove
[...]Apple should purchase Google or try to make an alliance.

Actually, that would be friggin' awsome.

Fortunately, so far Google's co-founders have resisted Microslop's blandishments, and continue to hold out for the IPO. Rumors are also swirling that they might undertake a so-called "Dutch auction," in which they would spurn Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and other investment banks competing to sell the IPO and, instead, sell shares directly to investors.

Google is THE search site...I expecially am impressed by how quickly and easily I can get images on just about anything from A to Z. And the way they change their front page logo from time to time (the second "O" in "Google" was once the classic Alfred Hitchcock profile with a bird on his head to celebrate his birthday, and just yesterday (the 31st) it was a really cute Halloween-theme) shows off its independent spirit and playfulness....hallmarks of Apple, to be sure, and would be destroyed by an alliance with Microsoft.

 

[Sayhey]

I think I will do a google search for "grasping, bloated, dispicable monopoly" and see if Microsoft comes up. What do you think?

Too bad - they must not have updated their references lately.

 

[Independence]

i have Google set as my homepage for quite a bit of reasons. if microsoft aquires Google, i'll find a different page.

 

[5300cs]

If m$ gets Google, they'll hump it to death and leave it a smouldering carcass by the side of the road.

m$ kills everything it touches, hotmail is a perfect example. I was on hotmail when they had only 20,000 subscribers and they were a GOOD company- now it's full of msn crap and hard as hell to navigate.

I ditched infoseek because it was linked with disney, if Google gets bought by m$, I'll find another search engine...

 

[Squire]

Originally posted by 5300cs
m$ kills everything it touches, hotmail is a perfect example. I was on hotmail when they had only 20,000 subscribers and they were a GOOD company- now it's full of msn crap and hard as hell to navigate.

I don't know when that was but I had a Hotmail account in '96, I think. It has since gone downhill bigtime.

Actually, I've never really used Google. If the comments here are any indication, I should give it a try. Thanks.

Squire

 

[coolsoldier]

I don't use Google for web search anymore -- it's too saturated with garbage pages now and their page rankings seem to be getting a little off. I finally set up Safari to use Teoma for web search, but nothing beats Google for Image, usenet, or news searches...yet.

All in all, if MS ruins Google, I suspect somebody else will step up to the plate...

 

[Phil Of Mac]

Google shouldn't even IPO, just to prevent a hostile takeover by MS. KEEP GOOGLE FREE!

 

[Sabenth]

i set all my computers browsers to google.com or .com.au fast searches it finds just about anything i need i do not need a dog a robot or what ever else M$ WOULD CHUCK IN IT i dont need more porn either HOTMAIL"

this is really bad if this happens then well looks like were back to the begining of the net again..


POLL TIME!!!

oh on a side note google goes though a patch were its searches get all muggled up but thats due to the shear size of it

 

[MrMacMan]

Arg, I read this before.

But no one knows how much money google has...

They would be worth BILLIONS... and few people know.

They aren't a public company they don't have to report much...

They could be worth tens of billions of dollars from advertising.

 

[matthew_goldin]

Oracle predicts... if Microsoft buys google, Apple will go bankrupt. Microsoft will probably charge users to use the search engine. Apple will then have no choice but to surrender. Then Microsoft will get even more cash when they are able to control the market. No!!!!

 

[Phil Of Mac]

That's stupid. Who's going to pay to use a search engine?

 

[wdlove]

I think that matthew_goldin is being facetious. LOL. I don't see anyway that a purchase by Microsoft would have an effect on Apple. They don't control me. I definitely won't pay!!!!!

 

[matthew_goldin]

Yeah, but a few fools will pay. I can tell you that.

 

[idea_hamster]

Originally posted by wdlove
I don't see anyway that a purchase by Microsoft would have an effect on Apple.

I sort of agree and disagree: An MS take-over of Google wouldn't affect Apple per se. However, we all saw what happened to Virtual PC when MS bought that -- within months, it was malfunctioning and no word as to any time horizon to fix it.

That said, I think that the more good ideas that MS buys (read: wrecks), the more people will come to see "mediocre" as the industry standard. Anti-trust violations aren't the great stiffler of competition -- consumer apathy is.

 

[Sabenth]

If memory serves me correctly there is a search engine that you do have to pay for but is a new concept its called gacho or somthing like that they exspect you to pay to use the service at the momet to cover costs of reseach..


As for M$ Well only time would tell as to what happens to google i do know that of late the old google has been slowly changing of late it might just be me but i swear its getting more and more crap on it..

 

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by idea_hamster
I sort of agree and disagree: An MS take-over of Google wouldn't affect Apple per se. However, we all saw what happened to Virtual PC when MS bought that -- within months, it was malfunctioning and no word as to any time horizon to fix it.

Microsoft didn't break Virtual PC. The G5 broke it, by not supporting "pseudo-little-endian" mode, which VPC depends upon for emulation. And it takes time to fix. Even if Connectix was still around and selling Virtual PC, it wouldn't work.

Microsoft can be blamed for some things, but it's not a universal scapegoat.

 

[idea_hamster]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Microsoft didn't break Virtual PC. The G5 broke it, by not supporting "pseudo-little-endian" mode, which VPC depends upon for emulation. And it takes time to fix. Even if Connectix was still around and selling Virtual PC, it wouldn't work.

Microsoft can be blamed for some things, but it's not a universal scapegoat.

Fair point, but as I recall, there was an update released to VPC from MS after the take-over that met with (at best) mixed reviews. Also, there's been no suggestion from MS that they're pursuing this fix hotly -- at least when I was repeatedly disappointed by TechTool 4 rumors, I had faith that MicroMat was working hard on it. Why? It's a big part of their product line.

I just have a sense that "It takes time to fix" will be MS's mantra until we stop waiting for VPC -- or until the the Wine Project starts working for real.

You're right to say that MS shouldn't be blamed for all things negative, but they do (IMHO) have a tendancy to produce mediocre products and then hold them out as some sort of "industry standard". That lowers the expectations bar and leads to apathy as to quality.

I don't like to think of myself as an evangelist of any sort, but when I hear my friends say, "My computer works fine -- I only have to restart it once or twice a day", it makes me shake my head.

We can agree to disagree, but I don't believe that MS will strive to make Google better.

 

[Phil Of Mac]

Tell you what. Get an old used Connectix copy of Virtual PC. It won't work on the G5.

 

[idea_hamster]

True. But a factory-sealed new copy won't work either. I'd be pleased as punch to be proven wrong by MS -- all they have to do is give us a time-line on when they foresee VPC for the G5 and then come out with a copy (not necessarily right on schedule) that works at least as well as the last. Not better, simply just as well.

Time will tell, and you can be optimistic if you like. I suppose one of us should be.

 

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by idea_hamster
True. But a factory-sealed new copy won't work either. I'd be pleased as punch to be proven wrong by MS -- all they have to do is give us a time-line on when they foresee VPC for the G5 and then come out with a copy (not necessarily right on schedule) that works at least as well as the last. Not better, simply just as well.

Time will tell, and you can be optimistic if you like. I suppose one of us should be.

I don't know if Microsoft will get it done faster than Connectix. What I do know is that Connectix probably wouldn't even have it fixed by now, so berating Microsoft over this is fruitless.

If VPC is to continue as a product, it will have to be fixed. Did Microsoft buy VPC to kill it? They could have killed it easier than that, but if they wanted to discreetly kill it, this could be an adequate way.

 

[idea_hamster]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
I don't know if Microsoft will get it done faster than Connectix. What I do know is that Connectix probably wouldn't even have it fixed by now, so berating Microsoft over this is fruitless.

I don't know if MS will fix VPC faster than Connectix would have either. I think that MS could do it faster, but they have less of an incentive.

I agree that Connectix wouldn't have it done, but I suspect that their press releases would be talking about VPC's G5 compatability rather than a cavalcade of OS security patches.

As I said, I hope I'm wrong.