ie8 fix
Click Here

Googling Google

Christopher Dawson

Microsoft screwing themselves while they try to screw Google

By | August 29, 2009, 6:03pm PDT

It turns out Microsoft has been busy holding weekly “Screw Google” meetings, trying to figure out how to throw roadblocks in front of Google as they continue to dominate the search arena. It’s easy for me to say, but doesn’t it make a lot more sense to spend millions of dollars making something that’s actually better than Google rather than simply trying to make them look bad?

I wonder how long it will take before the “Screw Microsoft” meetings commence? Probably never. It probably won’t happen because Microsoft is doing a good enough job themselves, and I like to think Google is smart enough to know money is much better spent elsewhere.

It’s likely Microsoft is grasping at straws as Bing’s market share has only increased a very small amount — even after their massive marketing campaign. In addition to that, Google is stepping on Microsoft’s toes with two of their own operating systems (Android and Chrome OS), Google Chrome internet browser, Google Docs, Gmail and their own Enterprise efforts.

It’s time for Microsoft to stop wasting their money worrying about Google, and start breaking their own trails. Microsoft does have some diamonds in their rough though — one example is their development tools, frameworks and platforms. This includes WPF, Silverlight and Microsoft Surface — and in my opinion, Microsoft needs to invest more heavily in those technologies.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Garett Rogers has always had a deep interest in computers and the Internet, which led him to a degree in Computer Information Systems. He is currently employed as a programmer for iQmetrix.

Disclosure

Garett Rogers

Garett Rogers is employed as a programmer for iQmetrix, which specializes in retail management software for the wireless industry. He has no other formal associations with any software or hardware companies.

Biography

Garett Rogers

Garett Rogers has always had a deep interest in computers and the Internet, which led him to a degree in Computer Information Systems. He is currently employed as a programmer for iQmetrix, which specializes in retail management software designed specifically for the cellular and electronics industry.

Garett's journey into Google started with his employer asking him to "get a better rank on Google." Diving into search engine optimization sparked his curiosity for how things work and led him to create a blog dedicated to what interests him most--Google.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
132
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Exactly. Try iTunes under WINE
bbneo 11th Sep 2009

Since I have broken away from Microsoft and am running Linux almost exclusively, my computers are more about what *I* need to do (document scanning, browsing, email, etc.) and not about Microsoft's latest patch Tuesday or "Windows Update" notification.

Next step... installing iTunes under WINE. I've heard it works. That is about the last app I need Windows for.
0 Votes
+ -
Amen!
allenfalcon 29th Aug 2009
In business, you play offense by innovating and
outperforming your competition. You may play
defense if you need to catch up to your
competition.

In thinking of ways to make Google look back,
Microsoft is doing neither. They are sitting
in the stands trying to distract the other
team.

=Allen
0 Votes
+ -
Where's the story
Wildfire365@... 2nd Sep 2009
It looks like there's not much of a story clicked on the link to find a story and just found a few lines and realy didn't say much. Whats up.
0 Votes
+ -
Instead of bashing Google, Microsoft should try to understand what Google is doing right.

Google produces quality, innovative products, based on OPEN standards. People use them, not because they are forced or locked-in to use them, but because the products address their needs and they are happy with them.

Microsoft, on the other hand, produces lessor quality, lessor innovative products, based on PROPRIETARY standards that have a great deal of lock-in potential.

Which relationship is more attractive to you?

1. One where:
- your partner is attentive to your needs.
- new things are constantly coming into the relationship, to keep it interesting.
- dependencies & manipulation are not used, to keep you in the relationship.

2. One where:
- your partner is not particularly attentive to your needs.
- new things seldom happen, unless your partner is forced to do it.
- dependencies & manipulation are used constantly, to keep you in the relationship.
0 Votes
+ -
I disagree
rynning 29th Aug 2009
Microsoft has done a lot of things right.

Office is great, though I think they took a step backwards the new ribbon "feature."

Windows XP is good enough for me, and Windows 7 is supposed have fixed all the problems with Vista.

The XBOX 360 is very good, and they will always fix the RROD problem for free.

And I understand Bing is good, though nobody really cares.

If Microsoft keeps their focus within just these areas while providing incremental improvements (and gets out of all the non/low-profitable ventures), they'll continue to be very successful.
0 Votes
+ -
And...
BIGELLOW 29th Aug 2009
...that's exactly the problem. These days,
Microsoft is only making "incremental
improvements". True innovation is gone these days.
0 Votes
+ -
I would be happy if...
epitax 30th Aug 2009
...Microsoft would just focus on building a good operating system and use open standards. Alas, MS paranoia requires them to use vendor lock-in via closed standards.

Worse, Microsoft makes a game of *destroying* their competition rather than competing on the merits. Every competitor they "destroy" is a choice lost in the market place.

Personally, the best thing that could happen to this country is for the corporation called Microsoft to be dissolved. If they want to continue as a partnership or some other organization that subjects the owners to personal liability, that's their business.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft no longer anti-competitive
rynning 30th Aug 2009
Didn't the Justice Department make them quit their anti-competitive ways?

Sure, Microsoft still dominates in desktop OS and Office applications, but they haven't "destroyed" a competitor in at least a decade competing on merits. Look at their stock price for evidence of that!
0 Votes
+ -
Zebras cannot change their stripes, like how the anticompetitive bully certainly won't change their ways.

They know that what they have can't compete on merit so what else can they do to stay in business? Maintain their monopoly and take advantage of it into new markets of course, what else.
0 Votes
+ -
They still block competition
Richard in Phoenix Updated - 31st Aug 2009
For example, TrueCrypt would like to add the
ability to make volume snapshots work on non-
system volumes on Windows. But Microsoft won't
license the API under opensource-friendly terms,
effectively blocking TC from having this
capability. Yet obviously their own BitLocker
encryption supports this, but is only available
with the ultimate/enterprise version of Windows.
Seems anti-competitive to me...
0 Votes
+ -
EU
bigpicture 2nd Sep 2009
No that was in the EU not the US. They have too many
US politicians and judges in their pocket, so just a
small wrist slap and business as usual. You know
Linux contravenes 250 of our patents, but we won't tell
you which ones. FUD, FUD, FUD.
0 Votes
+ -
I would NOT be happy...
shadfurman 2nd Sep 2009
"Personally, the best thing that could happen
to this country is for the corporation called
Microsoft to be dissolved."

Really the BEST thing? I'm just going to assume
that is your exaggeration.

I continually look for an OS that I consider
better than Windows.

I've tested:
BeOS
Fendora 10
Ubuntu
Windows 7
OpenSolaris
and many small or old fun OS'

...recently. I'm running Windows Vista, I found
early on that claims regarding Vistas
instability and incompatibility were GREATLY exaggerated. I've seen evidence suggesting that
it was the result of a smear campaign started
even before its release.

My point? I would be very sad if I had to use
an inferior product. You can argue all you want
that such and such OS is better than windows,
but I've tried them for myself and I disagree.
The next best thing is Apple, and I don't
particularly like Apple computers or the way
Apple treats it's customers or developers. I
love linux, but it's user friendliness is a
decade behind regardless of any technological superiority.

Singling out MS as the end all of EVIL
companies is quite childish. Many, and I would
say MOST large companies use "anti-competitive"
practices... funny thing is, I see most of
these practices as only MORE competitive. Apple
is one of the worst of all, but people don't
care cause it has less than 12% market share.
Even "do know evil" Google has engaged in some
heavy competitive practices. Business is not
SUPPOSED to be easy, if a company can't compete
than get out (or they'll be pushed out). There
are plenty of companies rising to dominance
regardless of the big players currently in the
field. I use Windows NOT because of MS "anti-
competitivness" but because I CHOOSE to continually.

I'm not saying MS is good, but I wouldn't say
it is evil either. They are a big business
struggling to maintain happy share holders just
like every other publicly traded big business.

And they are NOT a monopoly for cryin out loud!
0 Votes
+ -
I disagree too
Serpamac 2nd Sep 2009
This is exactly the problem: "...and Windows 7 is supposed to have
fixed all the problems of Vista".

According to Microsoft many years ago, Vista was supposed to be THE
OS that would show how brilliant and innovative the corporation was.

Well, despite its multi-multi $billion R&D budget, years of waiting and
many postponing of the Vista OS, they ended up with an OS even
Windows people did not want to use!

Microsoft promises, develops and then does not deliver or delivers
scrap!

As for Microsoft Office, if you compare let's say Office 95 or 98 to
today's newest version, can you believe how poor and feature-missing
the improvements have been over the last 15 years? Office still doe
not let you just place a normal Microsoft-made .AVI movie inside a
Powerpooint presentation without having to do olympic-grade
gymnastic.

Imagine if Linux or Apple had their hands on Microsoft R&D budget
years after years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft is a leader in creating standards, these
standards are not always the best standards, but
they are standards none the less... which is very
important. Often Microsoft formats become standard
by shear dominance. Open source formats are often
considered standard cause they are open source,
but just because they are freely available does
not make them standard.
0 Votes
+ -
Exactly. Try iTunes under WINE
bbneo 11th Sep 2009

Since I have broken away from Microsoft and am running Linux almost exclusively, my computers are more about what *I* need to do (document scanning, browsing, email, etc.) and not about Microsoft's latest patch Tuesday or "Windows Update" notification.

Next step... installing iTunes under WINE. I've heard it works. That is about the last app I need Windows for.
0 Votes
+ -
these same meetings themselves? But then iQmetrix is such a small company compared to the companies you continue to blog on, I would guess you have a bit of a nieve view of how businesses of that size got to be businesses of that size.
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong, on so many levels...
Zogg 30th Aug 2009
Your first problem is that you obviously have no ethical problem with MS having "Screw Google" meetings. Your second problem is your inability to believe that others can rise above the bottom of the barrel, just because you can't. Thirdly, if you could demonstrate that Google holds "Screw MS" meetings then that would be contrary to Google's "Don't be Evil" policy - except that we both know that you can't do any such thing, because you're only spreading FUD.
0 Votes
+ -
Sad
TylerM89 30th Aug 2009
You actually believe "Don't be Evil" has an meaning nowadays.

Google has proven time and time again that Don't Be Evil depends on what your defintion of "be" is...
Since "Screw MS" meetings would be a violation of Google's "Don't be Evil" motto, producing evidence of them would actually serve MS's purposes.

But the fact is that you haven't produced any evidence, because you have none.
0 Votes
+ -
We have no evidence
John Zern 30th Aug 2009
that any company holds any type of meetings, we just know that at a certain level, companies have to have those cetain types of meetings.

We have no real proof that Apple has brainstorming meetings, but experience has shown that that they must exist as Steve Jobs can't be responsible for every idea Apple has had.

So you still belive that Google doesn't hold the same style meetings?
0 Votes
+ -
This is presumably what you're desperately trying to deflect attention from.
0 Votes
+ -
And really...who cares?
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
If you can dig past the obvious bias you have against Microsoft and
realize that EVERY company in a free marketplace will do EVERYTHING
IN THEIR POWER to be more successful than their competitor, you'll be
much happier.

These companis will not care if some guy named Zogg on ZDNet
TalkBack didn't get the memo concerning this afternoon's "Screw
Competitor X" meeting.

In fact, instead of trying to prove a company DOES have meetings
about how to crush the competition, how 'bout trying to prove they
DON'T.

Until then, I doubt anyone is impressed with your loyalty to a company
that exists to do no "evil".
0 Votes
+ -
Geez Guy, get a grip!
Zogg Updated - 31st Aug 2009
The story here is that MS is holding "Screw Google" meetings, when it could be spending that time and money on making better products to compete with Google instead.

Sheesh. Another MS apologist with no sense of ethics...
0 Votes
+ -
Don't pretend, Zogg...
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
...to know you're audience.

I typed the my initial response from a Mac Mini running a fresh Snow Leopard install. I am a recent convert to using Mac products after becoming disenfranchised with Windows as a consumer platform.

I know what the story was about. I don't care. I'm confident that Google would love to see Microsoft "screwed." And all you need to do is look at Google's current ad campaign for Google Docs to know it. To think that Google hasn't had the same kind of "screw 'em" conversations about Microsoft that Microsoft has had about Google is to lie to yourself.

What really annoys is me when a know-it-all with an apparent lack of experience in the very thing they're spouting off about doesn't know when to zip it.

I digress.
0 Votes
+ -
You saw nothing wrong with what MS did.
Zogg Updated - 31st Aug 2009
You might approve of "Screw Google" meetings - I do not.

I don't care if you wrote what you wrote from a Mac; the cap fits.
0 Votes
+ -
You caught me...
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
...on the wrong day. So, let's go.

At which point was I "Microsoft apologist"?

Pull a quote from my text above, paste it into the little box, and show me and the rest on ZDNet TalkBack where I became a "Microsoft apologist."

Quote me.

You see, when you encounter a viewpoint that doesn't quite fall in line with your own, simply typing "You're a Microsoft apologist!" over and over doesn't make it true.

But please, DO keep this enlightening stream of consciousness flowing freely. Good fun.
realize that EVERY company in a free marketplace will do EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER to be more successful than their competitor

Does it say "I apologise for MS"? No, it does not.

Does it try to excuse MS's "Screw Google" meetings? Yes it does, using the "But everyone does it!" argument.

Does it make any attempt to point out that companies are ultimately bound by the Law, and possibly we should hope for some notion of morality too? Nope, definitely not. Quite the opposite, in fact. ("EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER" indeed! It's precisely that kind of thinking that has led to MS being convicted of violating anti-trust law on 3 separate continents.)
0 Votes
+ -
Everyone knows you can't prove a negative, AlanGuy.
No More Microsoft Software Ever! 31st Aug 2009
Your FUD is amazing! Maybe you need some more schoolin'.
0 Votes
+ -
I Don't Care...
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
...who Microsoft decides to screw with a meeting, or a phone call, or a greeting card.

I'm pretty confident that Microsoft, Google, Coke, AT&T, Budweiser, and any company in the business of an attempt at profitability will do what it takes within the law to do what they need to please the P&L. I applaud that attitude. Every time.

OH...and I SO LOVE the adorable old argument that takes us back down Memory Lane and Microsoft's antitrust case(s). And I always go back to this: Becoming a monopolist isn't against the law. And you haven't broken any laws AS a Monopolist until somebody tells you so. Until then, you're NOT breaking the law and you continue each day...business as usual.

As for the tired "apologist" tag? I don't apologize for anyone but me. I don't pretend to have to. The marketplace is smarter than me and will eventually make any necessary corrections.

When Microsoft pulls an Enron, you can spew the "ethics" and "morals" rhetoric until you're out of air. Until then, I believe what you refer to as potentially "immoral" is called "competition" in business circles. And I believe Google can deal with it.

It would behoove many people who believe they have anything useful to say in ZDNet TalkBack to do the same.
0 Votes
+ -
GuyAlan - what is your problem? You sure had alot to write!
No More Microsoft Software Ever! 31st Aug 2009
Yet you still refused to answer the real question. Why can't you prove your statement rather than ask someone to prove a negative (which can't be done).

Silly man, take your meds!
0 Votes
+ -
No More Microsoft Software Ever!?
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
Really?

In the context of this discussion, your Screen Name (and therefore, your opinion) recieves zero credence. (From me, at least.)

Have a great day, though. wink
0 Votes
+ -
Really? Are you trying to remove my right to NOT purchase MS warez?
No More Microsoft Software Ever! Updated - 31st Aug 2009
You read like many other Microsoft shills with your 'How Dare you NOT purchase Microsoft software'.

I have a right to my opinion. It's valid. If you, however, care to just live in your Microsoft world and ignore anyone who does not live there with you I'm afraid you're gonna get real lonely and increasingly less educated.
0 Votes
+ -
So basically...
Zogg Updated - 31st Aug 2009
Becoming a monopolist isn't against the law.

True.

And you haven't broken any laws AS a Monopolist until somebody tells you so. Until then, you're NOT breaking the law and you continue each day...business as usual.

I believe what you refer to as potentially "immoral" is called "competition" in business circles.


So you think that companies always need a Judge to tell them the difference between "Right" and "Wrong", then? Surely only if those companies are full of amoral people?

I'm never going to agree with you on that score. It's basically the same as saying that the crime is not the deed itself - merely that you were caught doing it.
Microsoft Cooks Books
http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M990112.html

Microsoft Cooks Books
Microsoft fills the "cookie jar" in good times and dips into it in bad to create an appearance of steady growth. FTC does not approve of this accounting method.

Former Microsoft chief of internal audits, Charlie Pancerzewski, charged Microsoft in court for wrongful termination under the Whistle Protection Act. When Judge Carolyn Dimmick approved the case for trial, Microsoft settled out of court (reportedly for $4 million).
0 Votes
+ -
What is your evidence?
marksashton 31st Aug 2009
One article with an un-named source? Really?
0 Votes
+ -
Pretty Much...
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
So you think that companies always need a Judge to tell them the difference between "Right" and "Wrong", then? Surely only if those companies are full of amoral people?

A statement like this implies that you believe that corporate America and capitalism as a whole should be held liable for any business activity that doesn't pass muster with a pastor...?

Going before an antitrust judge doesn't make you amoral (or immoral). It means you may have screwed up in the wide, surprised eyes of the business world. Potentially overstepping your bounds in business with finesse is quickly becoming an art form. Some are good at it, some are not.

I'm never going to agree with you on that score. It's basically the same as saying that the crime is not the deed itself - merely that you were caught doing it.

I didn't ask you to agree with me. I didn't say I agreed with anything Microsoft has done.

You speak like Microsoft walked into a Best Buy and stole all their big screen television's without paying for them. THAT is illegal.

Antitrust? It's not so black and white. By it's very nature, that charge and the penalty that follows can only come one company at a time.
0 Votes
+ -
We can keep religion out of this
Zogg Updated - 31st Aug 2009
A statement like this implies that you believe that corporate America and capitalism as a whole should be held liable for any business activity that doesn't pass muster with a pastor...?

I see no reason that anyone with a title of "pastor" (or similar) should be considered an ultimate authority on right and wrong. That is a completely separate subject.

But I do expect people and companies to aspire to the spirit of the law, and not (say) to go around stabbing each other in the back because there's money in it and/or because they think that no-one's looking and that they can get away with it.

And I certainly do not trust companies where the CEO has thrown a chair across a room in a fit of rage, screaming "F****** Eric Schmidt is a f****** pussy. I'm going to f****** bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f****** kill Google."

http://valleywag.gawker.com/5035799/microsoft-ceo-steve-ballmer
0 Votes
+ -
Nothing but blue sky...
GuyAlanDye 31st Aug 2009
I do expect people and companies to aspire to the spirit of the law, and not (say) to go around stabbing each other in the back because there's money in it and/or because they think that no-one's looking and that they can get away with it.

I agree that it would be so groovy for all companies to only aspire to behave and to only do good things that contribute to a better business environment for all. To put your trust only in those that offend few and choose CEO's that scream only when dropping a paper weight on their toes is noble.

Problem is: You'll probably find a tap dancing unicorn first.

And I certainly do not trust companies where the CEO has thrown a chair across a room in a fit of rage

I've been on the receiving end of an employee telling me that he's leaving for the competitor. As an employee is an extremely expensive investment, knowing they're walking out with everything they know about your company and taking it to a competitor sucks. A lot.

As this person turned in his notice and explain to me that he was going to do the same thing for somebody else, I did not throw a chair, but I did yell a lot (later) to a business partner.

So...just for fun, let's see:

F****** Eric Schmidt is a f****** pussy.

I don't claim to know if this is true.

I'm going to f****** bury that guy!

Wall Street would reward Microsoft richly if Ballmer were to pull this off. It would be good for anyone involved with Microsoft's bottom line if Baller can live up to that promise.

I have done it before, and I will do it again! I'm going to f****** kill Google.

He has. And he might.

??
0 Votes
+ -
Precisely - you were angry afterwards
Zogg Updated - 1st Sep 2009
I did not throw a chair, but I did yell a lot (later) to a business partner.

In other words, you weren't stupid enough to vent your anger in front of the employee, so that the employee could later recount the incident as part of his sworn Court testimony.

I'll also bet you didn't publicly swear vengeance, either.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree w GuyAlanDye
mathcreative 31st Aug 2009
I agree with GuyAlanDye. Companies put profit over morals and ideals, and exspecting otherwise is not only unrealistic it's unfair. Cause it's really human nature. If they are doing something wrong without doing something illegal it's really the governments responsibltiy to change it's laws so that the negative things they are doing can be unprofitable for them.
0 Votes
+ -
hehe duh
shadfurman 2nd Sep 2009
Every company has meetings on how to out do
their competition. Every (pratically) company
uses tactics other than "make a better product"
to get to the top. Its the game of business,
and its not unethical, its the way its always
been done. To restrict such business with laws
is to take away the rights of the people who
run the companies and destroys the capitalism
that drives the economy. The only think that
needs to have a damper placed on it are
monopolies that are using anti-competitive
practices. A monopoly does not have significant
competition. Once there IS competition, anti-
competitive practices are legal. Just because a
little guy can innovate on a product but not a
business model does not make this immoral. Of
course smaller business owners get pissed off
when their businesses fail, but businesses
fail... not everyone who starts a business can succeed, and success is NEVER gurenteed.
Someday a company will usurp Microsoft, just as
Microsoft usurped Apple and Google usurped
Yahoo. Its the name of the game folks, it's how
it work and it works well. That model has been consistently churning out the most innovative
products and services for centuries now, a few
bad pieces of fruit (don't want to be fruitily
biased) does not make another model better.
There are many other models that are being
practiced through out the world and have been
through history, but none has worked better
than capitalism across the board...
SO GET OVER IT!

Rediculous people complaining about people
having meetings about how to best the
competition. (said in a pho-little-girls-voice)
no don't tell me it isn't true... (confused)
wait are you asking me to tell you its true, or
not tell you... or to tell you its not true...
or not... what?
0 Votes
+ -
Business as usual?
Jkirk3279 3rd Sep 2009
"Once there IS competition, anti-competitive practices are legal"

NOT if they amount to Restraint of Trade, or Intellectual Property theft, both
crimes M$ has been accused of.

I don't know where you live, so I can only guess why you wouldn't know that.

Any business can compete by producing a better product, developing better
relationships with customers and partners, etc.

But the fact you blithely excuse immoral and unethical conduct is disturbing.

Your quote "its the way its always been done." could easily apply to Slavery, BTW.

For centuries our ancestors fought to end slavery as being immoral and unethical,
at the cost of many lives, until they finally succeeded.


Your argument that enforcing ethical conduct would destroy capitalism must
mean that you believe capitalism itself is unethical.

I disagree. Many companies cheerfully make good profits off good products
without trying to kneecap their competition.

We won't really advance in this new century until we stop tolerating this kind of
cr@p.



0 Votes
+ -
Rediculle..
boweb 4th Sep 2009
...Trade has always been around, but the scale we have to day hasn't.
If you look at the yearly dead toll in an advanced country like America, you really have to wonder why it is so high. O yeah, it part of the way of life, right?

Trade is good, capitalism is not. Just as communism is good on "some" point, but not as the way it way executed.
Capitalism is against socialism. Capitalism is egoism. Every man for him self, and fight for that freedom to be every man for him self. Fight for the freedom to be afraid of everyone, nice..

Its like the idea of expansion, why does it need to be?
The problem is that some capitalistic country's are leaded by predatory behavior, and if that doesn't cloud judgment, then what does.

It is not that capitalism must disappear, but its influence in every day life has become to large.
The effects are war and destabilization all over the world.
Country's like Africa where around for millenia with there trible laws and customs to keep people in line. Now we have millions and millions dieing every year because of pure capitalism and the need to sustain one community that can only exist in it current state by overflowing there people with so called presents.
But what we can even well just call loot, because that is what it is.
All in the name of peace? What peace, we still need to send our sons, our children to the altar, in the hope the will survive. Most don't.
Our "peace" frustrates our children just enough to enlist and kill. When they come home they talk about Peace..

Capitalism needs to run society as an motor, not direct it. And that is what happened now because we still live in an caste world like the Indira do.
But we have it virtual they physical.

But hey, it has always been like this, right..?

0 Votes
+ -
Was!
Patanjali 31st Aug 2009
They abandoned it!

Coundn't keep up the pretense?
The only reference I can find to Google quietly dropping its "Don't be Evil" motto is this artice from April 1st 2009:

http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2009/04/google_quietly.php

Do you have any others? Ever wonder if you'd been "had" wink ?
0 Votes
+ -
Really?
John Zern 30th Aug 2009
And when MS and Yahoo first taked merger, Google was one of the first ones to run off to the SEC.

Do a search, how many time has Google gone to the SEC when MS anouces some future plans or whatnot?

Garret I can understand, he'll spout anything pro Google/anti-MS cause he just looking for talkback dollars, nothing more.

What's you excuse for believing in all this Google make believe?
0 Votes
+ -
So much FUD, so little time...
Zogg Updated - 30th Aug 2009
What's your problem with the SEC? It's its job to be concerned about both MS and Google?!

Garret I can understand, he'll spout anything pro Google/anti-MS...

Yay! It's "shoot the messenger" time!

What's you excuse for believing in all this Google make believe?

Actually, the source was "DailyFinance":

Nevertheless, one source familiar with the meetings says, "Law Media Group has several people who work full-time on Google-bashing. Everybody knows Microsoft is trying to throw roadblocks at Google and knock them off their game. Microsoft is trying to harm Google in the regulatory, legal, and litigation arenas because they're having problems with Google in the competitive marketplace."

It's a fair bet that no-one from Google was invited to these meetings, so it's hardly "Google make-believe" wink.
0 Votes
+ -
Sorry, but...
boweb 1st Sep 2009
...Google isn't as clean as there image.
You must know they are using pattern recognition systems to extrapolate information from there server, to sell for advertising perposses.

No secret.

And they life by the idea that an company must grow to survive. As most big company's do( that not a good thing)
I don't think your private information will be an issue when the time comes.
If you look at facebook, they are tricking people into giving information of very private nature on an global scale.

Do you think they care about your privacy?
And before you go into he idea, that other peoples private information isn't important, think again.

They are manipulation the landscape on an global scale here.

For the moment I don't like Bing a bit. There results feel a bit to confining if you ask me.

If Google say's "Don't be evil" well, then we believe it.
For me it says "Don't draw attention"..
0 Votes
+ -
Neither MS or Google
Michael Alan Goff 1st Sep 2009
are the "evil empires" that everyone seems to love to paint them as. Both of them are business. They both seek to make a profit. Both companies misstep at times, as nobody is perfect.

And I prefer the term "Don't be evil" to be a subject of question. "What is evil?"

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix