Google Microsoft Battles: Tactics for 2011
January 1, 2011
“The 10 Bloodiest Battles Microsoft and Google Fought in 2010” provides a good run down of the most visible dust ups between the two giants. The write up covers legal hassles between the two companies and the more interesting squabbles about how office workers should access their fact-filled, action-packed PowerPoints, Word files, and Excel sheets. Two points of conflict that stand out in my opinion is the struggle for US government contracts and cloud services.
My take on the fights is that this article as well as most of the others written to explain what Google is doing and what Microsoft is doing are missing the main point. What is the main point? Google does not have to win any battle. In fact, since 2005—based on my research—Google has been implementing the “death by 1,000 cuts” strategy. (The illustration shows a whimsical kitchen knife block which reminded me of the “tiny cuts method.” I saw this kitchen gizmo at a holiday party last weekend.)
Google and its surgical approach to challenging Microsoft. Image source: http://slashcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/voodooknifeblock.jpg
Microsoft depends on revenue from slapping Windows operating system license fees on PCs, netbooks, and notebook computers. Microsoft also has done a great job of getting Windows servers and enterprise software into organizations behind the foot soldiers with Microsoft certification. Like the Oracle database administrators, those certified professionals depend on Microsoft to pay the bills. In other sectors, Microsoft has turned in a mixed record.
The Google is wise enough to know that distraction exacerbates Microsoft’s organizational methods will continue to operate in their traditional manner. Need I mention the Kin as the exemplar of the outputs of the Microsoft system? Google, therefore, takes small steps like offering a cloud based alternative to Microsoft Office for a low ball price. Microsoft reacts and rolls out a product that is more expensive. Go figure.
Farewell, Google. Hello, LinkedIn
December 21, 2010
Former Endeca co-founder and chief scientist, Daniel Tunkelang, who jumped ship to Google, protesting that he was not working on its ecommerce technology has left and gone to work on the data science team at LinkedIn, a social networking outfit using Lucene for search and retrieval.
In a recent Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal article, “Another Google Exec Leaves for LinkedIn”. ), Tunkelang said “the decision to leave Google was agonizing, but that he was excited to work with a data set he had coveted for years.”
Those social content and services companies exert a powerful magnetism on Xooglers it seems.
Christina Sheley, December 21, 2010
Freebie
Yahoo and a Not So Merry Holiday
December 15, 2010
I am burned out on Yahoo. I did my first Yahoo analysis in 2002, and the company bored me then. I found the Semel and Yang escapades amusing. I even perked up when the Yahooligans made a commitment to search and then generated results for my test queries that left me baffled. Even the new US Department of Treasury search system looks good when compared to Yahoo’s results. For a test, open a new browser window, click on the shopping tab, and do a search for “Angel perfume.” You don’t need the quotes. Here are the first two results. Remember. I want to buy a bottle of perfume.
The hit under the pictures has this headline: “Angel Perfume Is Dangerous.” Click on the link. I get a weird animated page with the title “Clarins and Thierry Mugler Acknowledges that Angel Perfume Is Dangerous.” Great information if I were doing this search on a general Web index: “’Angel perfume danger.” I am not. I want to buy perfume.
This is an example of Yahoo’s search. I hope the Yahoo ad sales people don’t pitch the Angel perfume account. This query is not what I expected. I want to buy the perfume, not learn that it, like any similar substance, will burn or kill me if I drink it. Buy is the operative concept. Run the query on Google Shopping and you get links to buy perfume. The Math Club gets it right. The Yahooligans do not.
“Yahoo Still Silent On Today’s Layoffs, But Employees Vent” did not amuse me. In fact, it forced me think about the trajectory of online services companies. When money is flowing, there is no investment in managing the business. When times get tough, management becomes a tough problem. In fact, some online companies may be unmanageable. Google’s solution is to manage by controlled chaos. After more than a decade of “controlled chaos,” Google is starting to show some signs of strain. I mean two operating systems plus the Google infrastructure, the Buzz thing, the Wave thing, the hassle with every offended Street View weak sister, et al.
Here’s the killer quote from the TechCrunch article cited above:
The atmosphere here has never been worse.
That will keep the blue chip folks busy. Will Yahoo survive? Will a white knight ride to rescue the Yahooligans? Will AOL cut a deal that makes 1 + 1 = 3?
Not sure. What is clear to me is that first AOL lost its way, now Yahoo. The question is, “Which big online outfit is next?”
Stephen E Arnold, December 15, 2010
Freebie
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
