digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

The final days of Google

pbs.org — Back in the 1990s Bill Gates said the company that would eventually beat Microsoft probably had yet to be founded - some people believe that company is Google. But what about Google itself, who will kill Google? An interesting analysis of who is most likely to form "the next big thing".

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Garrey, on 10/11/2007, -11/+51Very nice article to whom ever wrote it.
    • alanflores, on 10/11/2007, -26/+7"That's 40 world-beating ideas. And after the 40 absolutely top ideas, let's say there are another 360 ideas that are pretty darned good."

      before youtube, google has no video idea..
    • TomPlansMedia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+39i wonder if google has some sort of "those ideas you come up with on our time/dime are owned by google" policy in place. anyone know anything about this?
    • woxidu, on 10/11/2007, -19/+3"to whoever* wrote it"
      grammar++;

      Oh, and I agree with your comment, even though I don't usually pay much mind to Cringley...
    • fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16They almost certainly do tomplansmedia. They're a company paying people to maintain and produce revenue streams, not a starbucks where people just hang out for socialising.
    • martinj88, on 10/11/2007, -5/+146Google won't die, it will evolve........and change it's name to Skynet
    • TriZz, on 10/11/2007, -16/+44How are Google and Microsoft even comparable? Microsoft is a software company. Google is an advertising company. Sure, some of their other ventures drain into the same pool where they compete, but the main sources of revenue for both companies are completely different! Until Google creates an OS that will lure people away from Windows (I don't see Google doing this anytime soon - as OS X is much better than Windows and only has like 5% market share) then MS will certainly not be ousted by Google.

      Sure, Microsoft wishes it had snagged some of Google's money. Invested in search technologies sooner, got into online advertising earlier, but that's lost/Google's money now. Microsoft is not worried about Google.

      PS: I am a huge fan of Google. I think they're a great company...but in reality, they are NOT going to "de-throne" Microsoft. They're playing two different sports.
    • fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -5/+43They're competitors because Google has a web based version of Microsoft Word..pad
    • mickeyknoxxx, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Google is going to go out of business. It's true.

      Google it if you don't believe me.
    • CogitatorX, on 10/11/2007, -14/+1@fkr3

      "They almost certainly do tomplansmedia. They're a company paying people to maintain and produce revenue streams, not a starbucks where people just hang out for socialising."

      Gotta block you due to your crushing case of Pompous Asininity.
    • fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Oh noes :(
    • rhoul, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3@Trizz

      You don't really seem to understand how the dynamics of big business work. It is not what a company "does" that counts - it is the amount of market share they command. And Google is not an "advertising" company - they are a service provider. Ad Words are simply one service they provide among countless others. Check out Google Labs. They also happen to control the world's most popular search portal, which in turn gives them nearly exclusive access to the most complete and compelling market data research ever recorded. And you don't think MS minds?

      OS matters less and less as ubiquitous high-speed wi-fi Internet access are making web-based services viable desktop replacements. Personally, I already use Gmail for mail, Google Calendar for personal organization, Google Notebook for research, Google Docs for spreadsheets, and Google Groups for online collaboration. And I work on a Macbook Pro (that can run Windows if I really wanted to, which I don't). What do I need MS for? I haven't opened Office once in the last 6 months.

      MS is, and always has been, riding on IBM's massive DOS blunder from thirty some odd years ago. That's singlehandedly the only reason they managed to establish the monopoly that's kept them going on top since. But its days have been numbered for a long, long time. Microsoft dropped the ball with the Internet years ago, and has been trying to make up for lost time ever since without poorly conceived and too-little-too-late buyouts and bullying (Hotmail and Netscape, to a name a few).

      Google, on the other hand, thrives on it - they control the single most valuable asset for all future software development - user data. What MS can only guess at, Google knows - because they have the data to back it up.

      How can Microsoft compete in the long run?

      Windows "Live" is an embarrassing clout. Vista is practically a still born (not to mention a half-bastard clone of OS X). Linux is skyrocketing in favour amongst security-sensitive and server applications. And despite those die-hard Windows users who will claim otherwise, I think it's fairly safe to say Mac OS X has intercepted the consumer market. Mactels now run Windows, and Jobs' media deals are far outstripping anything MS can reasonably compete with. After years of being a die-hard PC evangelist, I finally switched to Mac and haven't looked back. Thousands of others are doing the same.

      MS is riding on an established (yet weakening) monopoly fueled by distribution deals which will evaporate with a significant change in market share. If Google is not the killer, Apple and Linux's sticks are only getting sharper...

      I'd say the chips are down... I'm curious - What ace does MS have up its sleeve?
    • dengzhi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3@fkr3 "They almost certainly do tomplansmedia. They're a company paying people to maintain and produce revenue streams, not a starbucks where people just hang out for socialising."
      no, google _is_ a place to hang out, play pool and eat free food.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8@rhoul, Vista is practically a still born

      Then OSX and Linux are still borns, too. My logic is that Vista has already sold more copies of both operating systems, put together.

      Keep in mind, shipping an operating system to a system vendor counts as a sale. But other than that, there are more Vista computers than OSX and Linux computers IN PEOPLE'S HOMES. Vista is hardly a "still born", but like the PS3 people were ***** all over the large companies.
    • Bamborzled, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5@rhoul
      "And Google is not an 'advertising' company - they are a service provider. Ad Words are simply one service they provide among countless others. Check out Google Labs. They also happen to control the world's most popular search portal, which in turn gives them nearly exclusive access to the most complete and compelling market data research ever recorded."

      If by "service", you mean "advertising", then yes, they are a service provider.

      Google is an advertising company. A large majority (if not almost all) of Google's profits come from its AdWords business. Sure, they provide other services, but until they turn a profit from any of those (I'm looking at you, YouTube), they are an advertising company because that is how they make their money. Think about it: Their search engine now exists only to drive you to its advertisement pane on the right-hand side of your search results. All of Google's services are to draw you into the ads Google's sponsors pay them to display. Yes, there are some services that are free of ads, but the majority of them include ads for a reason.
    • diggcopblowme, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6Final days of Google? ***** please.

      Buried for sensationalist *****.
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"""Then OSX and Linux are still borns, too. My logic is that Vista has already sold more copies of both operating systems, put together."""

      I didn't agree with his comment either, but if you read that back to yourself, it doesn't make any sense for 3 reasons. :-)
    • wooptoo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"who will kill Google?"
      nobody. Google is the big brother :P
  • mahdroo, on 10/11/2007, -10/+85This is a great article. Basically, Google is producing more ideas than it can pursue. Eventually/soon some employees will sell their stock options, leave, and go start companies doing whatever great ideas Google didn't develop on. Those companies are what will someday kill Google.

    This author says all that, but with better sentences and thoughts :-)
    • Buckiller, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1Absolutely agree. We've seen it in the past with gaming companies and even semiconductor companies... what makes google different?

      That being said, unrelated, I would like to work at google, and google stock is going to be over $600 soon.
    • diggcopblowme, on 10/11/2007, -13/+3Wrong. Look what Robert Scoble said about his friends at Google this morning:

      "My friends at Google are unhireable. Why? Cause they are happy and engaged in the mission of doing Google’s work."

      Buried this story for the lame sensationalist title. Final days? Yeah right.
    • revmitcz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6@diggcopblowme :
      Nothing lasts forever. To think that Google's always going to be the top of the top internet-based companies is naive, at best. Those employees who are "happy and engaged in the mission" are one day going to be sick and tired of working under a boss (or many bosses) and they'll have a ridiculous amount of cash that they've had little or no time to spend, and perhaps... with this 20% time and all, they'll say "it's time for me to put my money where my mouth is" and move on.

      There was an article on here about a month or two ago, talking about the Google employees who have vested stock and Google's paranoid about trying to keep them at bay - but they're struggling to do so cause what can you offer the newly-made millionaire that he doesn't already have?

      Cringely tends to write sensationalistic "doomsday" articles, but this one's pretty spot-on.
    • specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14In such case, Google can simply buy such small companies at overinflated prices. Just what they do now.
    • oepapel, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Nobody (not even google) can buy every company. Remember, a significant fraction will be people that left because they didn't want to work for Google anymore. So why would they sell? Even if they did sell, many would just take the money from the sale and start another company (read competitor). After a few iterations of this, those lucky few will have enough money to band together and BUY google. But by that time it will be a bloated and unmanageable hodgepodge of companies that never really integrated so they'll just chop it up for parts and throw away the hull. In time, some taiwanese company will buy the marketing rights to the google brand and slap it on a third rate digital camera and sell it to those that still remember the good old days of google.
  • korupture, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3meh.
  • holyskeleton, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13nah all you need is a goal and constant improvement.
    • czech2007, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1The rumour has it that Misrosoft is looking to buy Yahoo, that would certainly give them the muscle they need to compete in the search arena. Google is buying up companies to gain market share, it remains to be seen if these companies can be absorbed.
  • DeskFlyer, on 10/11/2007, -16/+25Google will never die.
    • moocow1452, on 10/11/2007, -2/+47Death and Taxes, man.
    • t0mmmmmmm, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Google will kill itself
    • meatmcguffin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Stupidity and (possibly) the universe
    • HigherLogic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I would disagree. Most, if not every, company eventually falls and someone else rises, some just take longer than others (e.g. Microsoft).

      // Remembers using (this one is a real blast from the past) WebCrawler, Excite, AltaVista, Infoseek, Lycos, HotBot, Yahoo, etc. before Google and PageRank came about...

      Someone will inevitably come up with a better algorithm, better method for displaying information, and so on, and so on.
    • allenu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1But the soul still burns!
    • resplence, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Remember the empires.
  • Stonedonkey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+46The gist of the article is that Google's own employees will come up with bright ideas and start their own companies.

    Not exactly an explosive revelation. I hope I saved some people the time it would take to read through that guy's meandering internal monologue.

    Well played on the sensationalistic headline, though.
    • kindrobot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17"The gist of the article is that Google's own employees will come up with bright ideas and start their own companies."

      Companies Google will then buy.
    • astrosmash, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6> Companies Google will then buy

      Google was started by just a couple of guys with some servers. It didn't occur to Microsoft nor anyone else to purchase them then, and if Microsoft had purchased Google back then we wouldn't have seen the innovation that made Google what it is.

      Likewise, no one could have imagined what would happen to that little company that licensed QDOS to IBM in 1981.

      Like Cringely (and Bill Gates) says, the company that will eventually kill Google does not exist today. In fact, the company that will kill Google can not even be imagined today.
    • max4077, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0Ha ha. Truly. Common sense prediction gussied up with the demeanor of insightful speculation.
    • undetected, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Yes, but it's a different time now. People build to flip, not to last. Now if you get 100000 users, companies are looking to buy you whether or not you're looking to be bought.
    • SystemCrasher, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0I agree with you, Stonedonkey: I think that this article is too sensationalistic. Google is a growing company, that is also expanding its business. It doesn't seem to be ready to fail in the near future... :-D
  • facelesscoward, on 10/11/2007, -2/+25Nay, I think Google can survive on its search engine alone. I've yet to use one I liked more.
    • toconnor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7That logic could be applied to almost every piece of software you use. If there was something you liked more wouldn't you be using that already? The point being that something survives until that point where something else new comes along that you and the intended audience like more.
  • Jah30, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Great article! Google is a giant, but being big doesn't mean you are the best. They are a great company to work for, but just like any job goes, you get bored or discontent with it after a while. I am sure many employees at Google are just waiting for their shares to vest and they are out.
  • slipgrid, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4For a start-up to beat Google, they have to be in a different business. And really, one of the hardest and more important functions a computer can do is search and sort data. So, short of finding a hard, important, and profitable problem, or computing moving away from both Windows and client-server computing, I doubt Google will be beat soon.
  • redxii, on 10/11/2007, -3/+38Right, they killed Microsoft because we're all using GoogleOS.
    • kalleanka, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17Lol exactly, MS is still more than twice the value of Google.
      Google Search is of course larger than Live Search, but Microsoft is not mainly a search engine company.
    • dengzhi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1"MS is still more than twice the value of Google."
      only twice? and how long has Google been alive? and Microsoft?
    • Kazbaeden, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7@dengzhi

      Companies can't grow exponentially forever. Every company has it's own carrying capacity, and when it reaches it, it will generally just produce revenues very steadily as it operates at its most economic levels. Microsoft, being much older and mature, is at that stage. Google is not.

      So with a company as large as Google, being twice as large is something, because it's impossible to be say ten times as large.
  • uselessexpert, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Isn't it to early to sit there and ponder on this?
    Unless some of us work at Google, big freaking deal.

    For all I care, let all those wonderful PHD's come up with all that wonderful technology that I can put to good use, and the day Google comes down crashing, I will either be dead not to see it, or to old to give a ***** about who cleans up the Google crumbs and takes over.
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"""Unless some of us work at Google, big freaking deal."""

      1. If you applied that sort of logic to all articles on digg, the site would disappear in a puff of logic.

      2. Don't be misled by how much people ass around anonymously on Digg, there are people here from all sorts of companies and projects - certainly Novell, MSFT and IBM, KDE developers too, to my knowledge, why not Google?
  • h3xZ, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2"who will kill Google?"
    Chuck Norris...
  • DeathRay2K, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2I don't think this will ever happen.
    For a company to kill Google it would have to be more diverse than Google, and I can't imagine one, or even several disgruntled Google employees having more and more diverse talent than the many talented Google developers.
  • muffins, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2How many people does this guy honestly believe are going to go start their own company? Sorry but its unrealistic to think that there will be some huge revolution where all the employees leave and create top grade companies. Even if somehow this anomaly occurred, Google still has what it developed so far which cannot be crushed. Also, if these other companies somehow spring up, Google can just continue to buy other smaller companies and making more ideas.

    The author wrote the piece assuming Google won't find more employees to continue developing.
    • omgroffles, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I completely agree. You guys are also probably crazy enough to think that it's possible for a few people from England to sail a ship across the ocean and settle down in newly discovered piece of dirt that would one day turn into a nation that would eventually become the most powerful and influential one in the world...all because they weren't happy with where they came from.

      Ya you guys are crazy.
    • noisebleed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Muffins, You make it sound as though just starting a business is a nearly insurmountable challenge. You're right that Google won't have much trouble finding more bright young programmers, but at least here in the SF bay area almost every tech-minded person I know has long-term plans to go off and pursue their own projects. Most won't find huge success, but some are bound to and will then become competitors with the older established companies. It's hardly far-fetched. Just look at the history of the business.

      The fact is that almost no one will get truly rich working for Google at this point, so anyone with enough ambition and intelligence will naturally be drawn to doing their own thing that will potentially take them a lot further. Why not try to be the next Larry Page and/or Sergey Brin?
  • Alegoo92, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3That artical was kindof bogus. The first 5-7 paragraphs repeated themselves, and reality could easily prove the opposite of their condemnation.
  • tast01, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15one day google will buy the internet
    • futureb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7they're already buying huge amounts of dark fiber...they just don't advertise it.
    • BeyondGoodNEvil, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4But what would they do with all the tubes once they bought the internet? Start a plumbing business. That's what. The biggest, FASTEST plumbing business this world has ever seen.
    • regeya, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Someday there won't be any World Wide Web that ISN'T AltaVista.

      There, I said it.
  • eksai, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12Google will be killed when advertisers realize that click fraud is getting out of hand.

    And google shouldn't be worried about people quitting and starting new companies based on the projects they created while at google. Google has the full IP rights in this case, and I'm sure when you pitch an idea its documented.
    • kindrobot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Click fraud, to me, will only ever be little more than a way to adjust ad rates. It's similar to attempting to track ad RESPONSE in television, radio and newspapers. You can track it to a certain extent, but you will never, EVER know exactly what's happening once those pairs of eyes leave the newspaper, TV or computer screen. You can do surveys, study sample groups, etc, but you will never be able to track everything perfectly.

      Google may get the most eyes right now, but it's not like those same rules won't apply to some other online advertising giant. And sounding the death knell of online adverts, period, is a pipe dream. As long as there are eyes and computers and an Internet, it'll be there.
  • bootle, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1This guy Cringley (is it pronounced "cringe-lee" or "kring-lee"?) is a bag of hot air. He's the NPR equivalent of John C. Dvorak.
  • malvado, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Put down the meth pipe, author.

    You actually had me until the 400(?) very good ideas that are "festering" .

    Don't make life, nor Google, that complicated. It's (they're) not.
  • thomas, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2So when is this self destruction suppose to happen? Google has been using this strategy for years and it hasn't fallen apart yet. No digg here.
  • vanden9, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6We need Google PC

    Google cant die till i get one of these.
  • JJayguy23, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3What a terrible thing to write about. They offer many great services, and they seem ethical.
  • kahlessreborn, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Very nice article good read.
  • Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2its possible for a company to be more diverse then google
    if sony went into interweb territory it would have a advantage of japenese market and platforms to diversify on
    • kindrobot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Nah. They'd probably just make the internets require a new battery that only they sell.
  • 0Xtreme, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Whoever wrote the article obviously wrote it for purpose of presenting "Exciting" and "Interesting" information to the public -- whether the info is right or wrong.

    He knows nothing about google. It's like me or anywhere here suddenly coming up with our own theory 1 year ago why Launch of Windows Vista will make Microsoft loose 50% of it's share price due to some X event.

    Well, did that happen? NO! But wait a min... "I don't care about the future. I just care to publish some ***** that's so interesting that I'll increase **MY** credibility and popularity!". That's the kind of ***** going on with these fu*kers who write this.
  • balph, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Cringely == liar (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1998/11/11/DD94762.DTL)
    • balph, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1998/11/11/DD94762.DTL
    • widman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Wow, I didn't know that. Also I don't understand the fanboys digging you down, it's a valid and founded comment.
    • balph, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0As someone who also irrationally diggs down comments, I can't really complain.
    • Wi1d, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1everyone == lies one time or another. Doesn't mean we can't have good ideas or opinions.
    • spinchange, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1No Wi1d, Not everyone lies about being 1) A PhD and 2) A Stanford Professor -- while hosting a a show on American public broadcasting & publishing books!!!

      Those aren't "white lies" -- Especially in the field of journalism, for crying out loud.

      This is evidently "old news," but something I had no idea about. I am very surprised and disappointed because I kind of liked reading this guy. I don't think I will anymore - Good Ideas or not.
    • Wi1d, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1You should Work on your reading comprehension spinchange. What Crigely has lied about in the past has no reflection on his current opinion and predictions of the future. I don't think being a Professor or having a PhD has ever been criteria in either profession of a psychic or columnist.
    • spinchange, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1It is a tremendous reflection on his credibility as an author!

      If these credentials don't matter to what he does, why did he ever feel compelled to lie about them in the first place?? You're correct: they are not criteria, so why fabricate them then, hmm??

      That has nothing to do with *my* reading comprehension - It has everything to do with *his* credibility. I don't care to waste my time reading a columnist who has lied in print about being something he's not to needlessly bolster his credibility. You may, and that's fine.
    • Wi1d, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I don't mind reading articles written by liars if the article is more for my amusement. I would even guess that lying takes a little bit of creativity so it might even be a good thing in writing fiction.
  • miriguy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I agree with this article. That's why we can see a lot of geeks are setting their own companies.
    Especially the part that says everyone have their own pet project that have been rejected by the company. That's going to be the reason they're leaving.
  • ZaNkY, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7The finals days of Google will be at the hands of...... John Connor!

    The "computer company" that Sarah Connor tried to bomb and landed her in a mental institution was really Google's HQ in Mountain View, it's less than 5 hours away from LA......
  • Cymrubeats, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2The only 'truly' untapped commercial enterprise that hasn't been courted by the mainstream is porn. They know there is so much profit to be made, but taboo's and 'morality' stop them from diving in.

    I wonder who will be the first company to really stick their head out.
  • stringerbell, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Now it probably won't kill Google (although, it would be rather ironic if it did), but, Google's search results have been almost completely useless for years now... The whole reason they became the giant they are is because they produced the best search results on the internet - now they just suck as bad as everyone else, perhaps even worse. That sort of thing (massive quality drop in your core product) is NEVER good for a company's bottom line over the long term...
  • mikewill7seven, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3How does this not make me want to work for Google? Wait for my stock to mature, get a message, wait for my stock to mature some more, get something to eat, create some ideas, let them get turned down, leave Google, invest in my own idea, get rich! Who care what happens to Google after I got mine.
  • TooManyHobbies, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1@stringerbell Who says google's results are no good? I never noticed any quality drop.

    Google's doing fine for now. Useless article.
    • kindrobot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I don't agree that the article is useless, but I think the results are better lately, not worse. I agree with that. And I do think google will be doing VERY well for the foreseeable future.
  • Craig42, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Microsoft started "search" technologies far after Google, and it's not microsoft's primary motivation for existing. It's a commercial software company that exists because of its OS, not because of it's search. To say a broad statement like "they beat them", you imply the entire company. It's just a stupid and disconnected comparison. You might as well throw Apple and Nintendo in there and say Google beat them too.

    Google has certainly demolished the chance of any SEARCH company competing with them though. The only search companies that come close to beating them, are companies that license Google technology! (i.e. yahoo). It has a brand of quality and innovation. They attract the best and most creative employees. All of their products are free. All of their products are extremely simple and and easy to use. You can't get anything more simple than Google search.

    People have generally known how the algorithm has worked for the last couple years and yet people still haven't been able to "crack the code" and make something similar and better. They would have to make it more efficient and more simple to use. It's just not going to happen.

    No one has beat Microsoft in the OS department. Not Apple or Linux, and these two are still successful, but they will never be able to "beat" Microsoft. The same can be said about other search companies and Google. There will be individual success, but no one will beat them.
    • Avalontor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Microsoft had search way before google, get your facts straight before making asinine comments. I was browsing a used bookstore and found the AltaVista book, the one that shows you how to use the worlds most powerful search engine. Nothing last forever except Linux fanboies who think each year is the year of the desktop.
    • Craig42, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Of course they "HAD" search. Online search has been around since the birth of the internet. They never gave one thought to making a significant search engine that could be a significantly profitable product of the company, until Google came along.

      They never really took search seriously until Google came along, that's what I was saying and that's a fact. If it wasn't fact, then we would have something like Windows Live 10 years ago, but we didn't.

      Once they witnessed the success of Google, they started REAL SEARCH TECHNOLOGIES, with REAL R&D and REAL FUNDING, and suddenly we now have Windows Live Search, which was created years and years (almost a decade actually) after Google started. So, during a good chunk of Google's life, they were "beating" Microsoft in a race that Microsoft never really declared itself in. Since 2006 they have "entered the race" though, with Live. You misread what I was saying, but I hope I clarified.

    • Avalontor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2there was msn search 18 years ago. Didn't I tell you to shut up if you didn't know what you were talking about.
    • Craig42, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1That's your rebuttal? Did I prove my point too well sweetie? I stated that they HAD SEARCH SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE INTERNET, but they never took it seriously until Google came along, and now we have Windows Live. That was the point of both posts. I'm tired of walking you through logical thought. Seriously though, are you a water head? If you are, don't worry, it's not your fault. God works in mysterious ways.

      Reading isn't a hard concept. Left to right and top to bottom. You should try it out before posting. Otherwise, be a good little boy and shut your ***** mouth.
  • moixa, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Why are both of these companies are American?
  • partriv, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1nice article, but buried as inaccurate due to title
  • davethewebb, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Great start-up companies are already being created constantly. What happens to them? Google (or another big company) buys them.
    And of course, no start-up is going to compete successfully with Google's core product - search.
  • ChayD, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3The main problem with Google, Microsoft, Apple etc, is that when a company initially starts out small, they are nimble enough
    to run rings round the big boys, but company growth gets to a point where there are so many people, politics,
    standards, quality programs, investors, rewards, share schemes, paperwork, competitors, change management
    processes, takover bids, IPOs, reports, proposals, sales quotas, company cars and all the other 'big company'
    afflications that they eventually implode in a shower of corporate bulls**t, leaving the little guys to take over
    (until they become equally huge - then the process beings again). In short a corporation is self-destructive to a certain degree.
  • compcaddy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Just curious who people would rather win this "battle of the giants". Digg this up for Google, down for Microsoft
    • Avalontor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4there is no battle dude, they are not even in the same playing field. grow up
  • johnnyrocket, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I increasingly getting more and more concerned about Google. They have too much information, and too must mindshare and power in the market. I recently met a Google engineer, who was showing off one of his 20% project. I was neat and all, but this gentlemen was quite an arrogant prick, and seemed to think Google can do no wrong. I understand loyalty, but a little humility never hurt, ( see: Roman Empire ).

    Google is just much to powerful now. It may have been just a few years, but in the tech world, it's long enough....time to move on from Google.
    • thailand1972, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Go to Matt Cutts blog if you want to experience this kind of arrogance. He frequently cuts down the competition with harsh words, while totally dismissing genuine complaints made by posters about Google (always, there's an excuse). Nothing wrong with being proud of the company you work for, but as soon as that becomes hubris, it's just bad PR.
  • Blainex, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1I bet you that the dude who wrote this works at Microsoft or something. Google will never die it's God. I depend on google every day to survive
    • Avalontor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4People said that about AltaVista. nice try tho.
  • kisore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2well said
  • advisor, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Google is dying. That's for sure.
  • HaMMeReD, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1The idea the good would be responsible for microsoft's downfall is a joke.

    Although the online office suits make it easier and easier for people to change.

    Also mac's and linux's progress in the last 10 years has been amazing, in another 10 people will want to switch away from MS. Their OS is going to *****, just look at vista, and it's all built on top with more and more junk piled up on it, to truly make a good os they would need to make it from scratch and somehow provide more functionality then posix systems provide, while also convincing people to scrap backwards compatibility and pay to relearn a new OS from scratch.

    Basically the decision to switch away from microsoft becomes easier and easier every day, eventually posix will win, the software availability excuse back in the day is starting to lose it's effect. OSX Proves that idiots can use unix. Windows is stale, it can't be upgraded for fear of breaking all applications. Linux on the other hand has no qualms, it is in a constant state of flux rapidly expanding as a superior os. Microsoft's only real option is to do what Apple did, inherit some posix system and use your developers to modify it enough to make it unique in the market so people will still pay. RIP WINDOWS.

    Oh and since this may have come off totally anti MS, I would like to say I love my 360 just for the record. I don't wish them any harm, just stating the truth.
  • GeneralSun, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2One line summary: People working for Google are developing good ideas that will destroy Google.

    The End.
  • edebolt, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2MS still has twice the market capitalization of Google. So might be premature to say they killed MS.
  • andrewdundee, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Speculative/Stupid argument,
    Apparently:
    1) Google will fail because it hires smart employees
    2) apparently 99.75 (I need a citation on this made up number) of Google employees ideas are rejected
    3) They will leave their awesome free food/and a week where 1/5th of the time is dedicated to thinking up stoner ideas, to go to another, almost certainly a less lucrative company (there aren't many companies bigger than Google). Creativity and Corporation don't go hand and hand, unless that corporation is Google.
    4) "Say the Google Geniuses come up with 4,000 business ideas or technologies per year, which is probably around the current number." - how about some actual numbers.
  • thinker1999, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Dogpile.com will win in the end.

    Goodbye Google hello Dogpile

    Enough said....
    • psykiv, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2remember the search engine c4? IMO, that was the best one back in the day.

      Now I'm afraid if I type in c4.com into the address bar, Ill be called a terrorist.
  • websurrfrr, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I don't use google except for checking the most popular news stories but now that I found DIGG I have won't even be doing that.

    I adjusted my search and clicking habits about a year ago. For me google is just too agressive in wanting to collect and control information. A recent story confirms this, they hope one day to be able to tell you what to do on your dayoff. Not me! And aspirations like this are googles downfall.

    And now that I've discovered DIGG, I'm never going back to google. Digg provides a wide variety of links to interesting and imformative articles and is way better then google news.

    Please go away google. die die die.
  • thaindian, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2what would be funny is groups of employees leaving google... forming their own company around google with an excellent idea at hand... then on getting bigger they buy google... LOL
  • gmoney2003, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0i don't find this article very credible....
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.