EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

04.06.10

Google Starves Microsoft’s Sacred Cash Cows, So Microsoft Forms Relationships With Communist China, Other Proxies

Posted in Asia, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Search at 7:44 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Mao Zedong portrait

Summary: Microsoft sidles closer to totality in order to weaken Google, which is now taking away lucrative customers away from Microsoft

MICROSOFT has ignored the disruptive trend harnessed by Google for far too long. And now, argues a pro-Microsoft Web site, Google Apps is a “threat” to Microsoft Office.

Apple has taken share from Windows operating systems, and on the lower end, consumer netbooks from Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) and other PC manufacturers have Linux-based operating systems as an option. While these challenges may be a blow to Redmond’s pride, they have yet to be a threat to its business. However, with Google Apps, Microsoft is seeing a major challenge to one of its most important products: Microsoft Office.

The above statement is not true. GNU/Linux is already harming Microsoft a great deal, especially when it comes to margins. Free software has ruined Microsoft’s margins in several different areas, by Microsoft’s own admission.

“Free software has ruined Microsoft’s margins in several different areas, by Microsoft’s own admission.”Other news articles say things like “Microsoft’s Office Suite May Be Challenged By Google’s Alternatives” or even “Microsoft Office Faces Challenge From Free Google Tools,” but they are ignoring the core component of Google’s tools (which are proprietary software built on top of Free software).

Microsoft hardly has any datacentres compared to Google and Windows has lower capacity, so it’s an uphill battle for Microsoft. The price pressure is showing.

Microsoft is so desperate to stop Google that it is now “enabling tyranny” [1, 2] despite pressure from the US government. Here are some new articles on the subject:

Let’s talk about straight business issues and not whether anyone is right or wrong. Although I think the moral and ethical issues are clear if you’re not running a company involved in China, things get murkier when there’s business to conduct and you have not only self interest, but a legally-mandated fiduciary responsibility to investors.

I may have been a bit harsh when saying that this was only a business decisions for Google, and it seems clear that the situation had an impact on company co-founder Sergey Brin, but given how long the company was willing to hold its nose, you know that morality can take a back seat to pragmatism. From purely business considerations, it would be much harder for Microsoft to pull out of China than Google.

A closer look at the past week’s news may also reveal that Microsoft is looking for low-wage labour in China and in India. New facilities are being built in China (also banking relations), whereas in Western countries Microsoft keeps laying staff off. Is this Microsoft’s future?

Microsoft said it would stay in China and continue to obey the country’s censorship laws, which include forbidding pictures of tanks and protests when one searches for “Tiananmen Square,” for example.

Adding insult to injury, Microsoft attacks Google’s Web browser using ammunition that it cannot conceivably use.

Microsoft has publicly attacked Google Chrome, accusing its arch web rival of compromising user privacy with the browser’s data-gathering address bar.

In a video posted to Microsoft’s TechNet site and tagged with the title Google Chrome Steals Your Privacy, Internet Explorer product manager Pete LePage uses a web traffic logger to show Chrome sending data back to Google as he types a url into browser’s more-than-an-address-bar, dubbed Omni Box.

In reality, both companies should reduce their data collection and Microsoft is in no position to take such a stance where it mocks Google for doing exactly what Microsoft does. They are being total hypocrites again and Dave Methvin calls them on it:

The tempest that Microsoft is trying to brew in this teapot basically boils down to this: Google’s Chrome browser combines the function of the address bar and search box in a single input field. When you start typing things into that box, Chrome sends the partial results to Google so that it can send back relevant results.

Let’s clarify a few points here. First, Internet Explorer will happily send back the same sort of information if you type into the search box, rather than the address bar; it’s not as if this is top secret stuff. Second, just about every search engine (that includes Google, Bing, and Yahoo) includes the same ajaxified search box that sends back partial results as you type. Third, if you trust Yahoo or Bing more than Google, you can easily change your Chrome default search provider to them, or turn it off completely. (Notice how the Microsoft video makes some noise about “default settings” in explaining this.)

Here is Microsoft using other companies to slam Google (and admitting this).

But isn’t Foundem just a Microsoft puppet? Its founders say no. Foundem does belong to trade group ICOMP, which is funded in part by Microsoft, as Google pointed out in a blog post. (As Google also pointed out, one of the other complaining companies, Ciao! by Bing, is a Microsoft subsidiary.) In addition, the Register notes that ICOMP’s legal director wrote some “legal bits” of Foundem’s EU complaint.

However, the article says Foundem hasn’t received any money from the trade group or from Microsoft, and neither company has any ownership interest in the other.

More here:

* Microsoft’s head algorithms guru says that Google’s search engine beat Microsoft because Microsoft ignored the long tail of search queries. If Google and Microsoft made different product design choices and the marketplace liked Google’s choices better, doesn’t this make it hard for Microsoft to complain about Google’s “anti-competitive” practices? I wonder if this talk was pre-cleared by Microsoft’s antitrust counsel.

It is rather disappointing that Wolfram got itself involved with even more proprietary software companies after it had given in to Microsoft in exchange for a payment.

The latter question was answered in August when Wolfram Research partnered with Microsoft. For those willing to switch from the almighty Google, Microsoft’s Bing displays Wolfram’s fact-based, data-rich results in some search results alongside traditional pages culled from the Web.

That agreement (and a check from Microsoft) facilitated in a way Wolfram Alpha’s move to “ubiquity,” as the developer refers to changes it announced Wednesday.

Microsoft tries to limit options such that the only viable option other than Google becomes Microsoft. This relates to the previous post about Yahoo.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Team UPC is Interjecting Itself Into the Media Ahead of Tomorrow's Lobbying Push Against the European Council and Against European Interests

    A quick look at the growing bulk of UPC lobbying (by the legal firms which stand to benefit from it) ahead of tomorrow's European Council meeting which is expected to discuss a unitary patent system



  2. IP Kat is Lobbying Heavily for the UPC, Courtesy of Team UPC

    When does an IP (or patent) blog become little more than an aggregation of interest groups and self-serving patent law firms, whose agenda overlaps that of Team Battistelli?



  3. Leaked: Conclusions of the Secretive EPO Board 28 Meeting (8th of September 2016)

    The agenda and outcome of the secretive meeting of the Board of the Administrative Council of the EPO



  4. Letter From the Dutch Institute of Patent Attorneys (Nederlandse Orde van Octrooigemachtigden) to the Administrative Council of the EPO

    The Netherlands Institute of Patent Attorneys, a group representing a large number of Dutch patent practitioners, is against Benoît Battistelli and his horrible behaviour at the European Patent Office (EPO)



  5. EPO's Board 28 Notes Battistelli's “Three Current Investigations/Disciplinary Proceedings Involving SUEPO Members in The Hague."

    The attack on SUEPO (EPO staff representatives) at The Hague appears to have been silently expanded to a third person, showing an obvious increase in Battistelli's attacks on truth-tellers



  6. Links 28/9/2016: Alpine Linux 3.4.4, Endless OS 3.0

    Links for the day



  7. Cementing Autocracy: The European Patent Office Against Democracy, Against Media, and Against the Rule of Law

    The European Patent Office (EPO) actively undermines democracy in Europe, it undermines the freedom of the press (by paying it for puff pieces), and it undermines the rule of law by giving one single tyrant total power in Eponia and immunity from outside Eponia (even when he breaks his own rules)



  8. Links 28/9/2016: New Red Hat Offices, Fedora 25 'Frozen'

    Links for the day



  9. Team Battistelli Intensifies the Attack on the Boards of Appeal Again

    The lawless state of the EPO, where the rule of law is basically reducible to Battistelli's ego and insecurities, is again demonstrated with an escalation and perhaps another fake 'trial' in the making (after guilt repeatedly fails to be established)



  10. After the EPO Paid the Financial Times to Produce Propaganda the Newspaper Continues to Produce UPC Puff Pieces, Just Ahead of EU Council Meeting

    How the media, including the Financial Times, has been used (and even paid!) by the EPO in exchange for self-serving (to the EPO) messages and articles



  11. Beware the Patent Law Firms Insinuating That Software Patents Are Back Because of McRO

    By repeatedly claiming (and then generalising) that CAFC accepted a software patent the patent microcosm (meta-industry) hopes to convince us that we should continue to pursue software patents in the US, i.e. pay them a lot more money for something of little/no value



  12. The US Supreme Court Might Soon Tighten Patent Scope in the United States Even Further, the USPTO Produces Patent Maximalism Propaganda

    A struggle brewing between the patent 'industry' (profiting from irrational saturation) and the highest US court, as well as the Government Accountability Office (GAO)



  13. Patent Trolling a Growing Problem in East Asia (Software Patents Also), Whereas in the US the Problem Goes Away Along With Software Patents

    A look at two contrasting stories, one in Asia where patent litigation and hype are on the rise (same in Europe due to the EPO) and another in the US where a lot of patents face growing uncertainty and a high invalidation rate



  14. The EPO's Continued Push for Software Patents, Marginalisation of Appeals (Reassessment), and Deviation From the EPC

    A roundup of new developments at the EPO, where things further exacerbate and patent quality continues its downward spiral



  15. The Battistelli Effect: “We Will be Gradually Forced to File Our Patent Applications Outside the EPO in the Interests of Our Clients”

    While the EPO dusts off old files and grants in haste without quality control (won't be sustainable for more than a couple more years) the applicants are moving away as trust in the EPO erodes rapidly and profoundly



  16. Links 27/9/2016: Lenovo Layoffs, OPNFV Third Software Release

    Links for the day



  17. The Moral Depravity of the European Patent Office Under Battistelli

    The European Patent Office (EPO) comes under heavy criticism from its very own employees, who also seem to recognise that lobbying for the UPC is a very bad idea which discredits the European Patent Organisation



  18. Links 26/9/2016: Linux 4.8 RC8, SuperTux 0.5

    Links for the day



  19. What Insiders Are Saying About the Sad State of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Anonymous claims made by people who are intimately familiar with the European Patent Office (from the inside) shed light on how bad things have become



  20. The EPO Does Not Want Skilled (and 'Expensive') Staff, Layoffs a Growing Concern

    A somewhat pessimistic look (albeit increasingly realistic look) at the European Patent Office, where unions are under fire for raising legitimate concerns about the direction taken by the management since a largely French team was put in charge



  21. Patents Roundup: Accenture Software Patents, Patent Troll Against Apple, Willful Infringements, and Apple Against a Software Patent

    A quick look at various new articles of interest (about software patents) and what can be deduced from them, especially now that software patents are the primary barrier to Free/Libre Open Source software adoption



  22. Software Patents Propped Up by Patent Law Firms That Are Lying, Further Assisted by Rogue Elements Like David Kappos and Randall Rader (Revolving Doors)

    The sheer dishonesty of the patent microcosm (seeking to bring back software patents by misleading the public) and those who are helping this microcosm change the system from the inside, owing to intimate connections from their dubious days inside government



  23. Links 25/9/2016: Linux 4.7.5, 4.4.22; LXQt 0.11

    Links for the day



  24. Patent Quality and Patent Scope the Unspeakable Taboo at the EPO, as Both Are Guillotined by Benoît Battistelli for the Sake of Money

    The gradual destruction of the European Patent Office (EPO), which was once unanimously regarded as the world's best, by a neo-liberal autocrat from France, Benoît Battistelli



  25. Bristows LLP's Hatred/Disdain of UK/EU Democracy Demonstrated; Says “Not Only Will the Pressure for UK Ratification of the UPC Agreement Continue, But a Decision is Wanted Within Weeks.”

    Without even consulting the British public or the European public (both of whom would be severely harmed by the UPC), the flag bearers of the UPC continue to bamboozle and then pressure politicians, public servants and nontechnical representatives



  26. Released Late on a Friday, EPO Social 'Study' (Battistelli-Commissioned Propaganda) Attempts to Blame Staff for Everything

    The longstanding propaganda campaign (framing staff as happy or framing unhappy staff as a disgruntled minority) is out and the timing of the release is suspicious to say the least



  27. Links 23/9/2016: Latest Microsoft and Lenovo Spin (Now in ‘Damage Control’ Mode)

    Links for the day



  28. White Male-Dominated EPO Management Sinks to New Lows, Again

    Benoît Battistelli continues to make the EPO look like Europe's biggest laughing stock by attempting to tackle issues with corny photo ops rather than real change (like SUEPO recognition, diverse hiring, improved patent quality, and cessation of sheer abuses)



  29. Journalism 102: Do Not Become Like 'Managing IP' or IAM 'Magazine' (the Megaphones of the EPO’s Management)

    Another look at convergence between media and the EPO, which is spending virtually millions of Euros literally buying the media and ensuring that the EPO's abuses are scarcely covered (if ever mentioned at all)



  30. Journalism 101: Do Not Believe Anything That Benoît Battistelli and the EPO's Management Say (Also Don't Fall for the UPC Hype)

    A survey/review (or an overview) of recent articles about the EPO and why they're wrong (mostly because they parrot the official lies from Battistelli's department)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts