The reason why Google having a monopoly doesn’t scare me as much as Microsoft having one is because Microsoft created their monopoly more through marketing and legal means and less on good products. Google’s monopoly on search came around entirely because they simply created the best search engine.
In short, Microsoft’s monopoly was created, Google’s was earned.
Its 350x probably because most techies prefer Google to Yahoo.
No doubt, it’s the free aspect. When something is free, you don’t feel like you’re being forced to choose.
There is a limit to the free aspect though, Google’s strength is that it’s free and it’s perfectly adequate. Google has done extremely well at making their products, maybe not as feature-filled, but definitely high-quality. Sure I can get better capabilities using Outlook, but who here has lost a corrupted .pst file? So far gmail has never failed me in quite the same momentous way. The only google related product that’s crashed on me is Google Desktop. I’ve never lost the internet because of a corrupted registry, like I have an OS install.
It’s interesting where free takes us though. I’m a professional software engineer getting paid to deliver a product. However I hate paying for software, mostly because there’s rarely a money back guarantee. Once I gained the ability to build huge applications that do complicated things, I understand why certain problems are hard, but I find it difficult to pay out for things that I could do better. It’s like a carpenter buying a dresser from Ikea. But once your competitor makes a free product, he wins my choice. Free beats out any time investment I could put in, and as long as it’s adequate, I won’t reinvent the wheel.
I think the more interesting bit is that you have no meta data associated with your pages. Death of metadata is on it’s way.
Google improved yesterday.
I seriously fear Google monopoly more than Microsoft. The extend of knowledge that they have about ‘us’ and with future plans like GDrive, its getting scarier.
In short, Microsoft’s monopoly was created, Google’s was earned.
Microsoft Word, Excel, and C++ (to name three apps) all had to compete against products that dominated the existing market. And the Microsoft products became the new market leader by being better and cheaper.
The problem is that Microsoft acted in a belligerent and bullying manner, whereas google has not. An no one feels locked in, because they can switch in an instant.
Advertisers, however, are not happy at all, which is why the FTC or whoever got involved and blocked the yahoo/google search deal
The list at, http://www.google-watch.org/bigbro.html , is pretty interesting.
The last point being very close to truth:
Does anyone have concerns about Google quietly collecting and retaining your search data and potentially using it for behavioral targeting or turning it over for use in legal disputes? That may be an area where other search engines can gain a competitive edge.
Google for analytics and the top paid ad is for Google’s own product. The first 5 of 6 results point back to their product. Omniture - a competitor - is the 7th link, below the fold.
A search for webmail, web mail, web-based email and even just email return no results for gmail - paid or otherwise.
Now, this isn’t proof of abuse of market share (what triggers the M word in the US), but it does call for some discussion. What would happen if a search for office returned sponsored links to google docs? What about a search for microsoft office?
It’s that fuzzy line, like when your cable provider claims hulu is eating up all bandwidth, while offering a competing steaming service.
As for the it’s free argument - IE was free as well, didn’t seem to matter much. Company vs. Company is a bad way to look at things anyway, it should be the interests of the consumer and what effect a company will have for the long term good of the consumer.
To be honest, I’ve tried to use the other search engines, but the results suck. Unless that changes, I’m not changing.
I don’t care that Google is so dominant because its services are free (to me). Google has the best start page with their iGoogle. Other services like Google Reader, Gmail, and Gcalendar are amazing and well integrated. If they wanted to charge me money to search I would be up in arms and a fervent supporter of a tiny underdog like MSN Live search or something.
There’s a difference between the monopolies.
Back in the days, the Microsoft Monopoly provided software that were readily available on the OS, (sometimes it was the only product available) not necessarily good products.
Google just makes better products and they have earned it.
I think Google isn’t subjected to the same scrutiny as MS because its products usually work.
People whining about Microsoft do so because they use some evil techniques to squash down their competitors, as opposed to Google, which invests in research and nice working environment.
When you’ve only ever dealt with Google as a searcher, I agree, they seem very nice and most of the time return reasonable results. However, if you’ve ever actually published anything to the web and then done a search, you will see some things that will really scare you.
I’ve had a love-hate relationship with Google for a while now. I was an early adopter of Google for exactly the same reasons everyone else started using them – clean, quick interface with good results. I really do believe Google does abuse their position as a search provider. When I first Googled wireless broadband over a year ago, I got Google TiSP back as the first link. I had never heard of Google TiSP and was extremely surprised by this result. I wrote a blog post about this and when I checked again a few months later, Verizon was the first link (which is actually what prompted me to notice this start with).
I find that very scary.
I do think Google is definitely playing fast and loose with the page ranks. They try to tilt things their way when they can get away with it. I also have a friend that got Google-slapped. In his case, this was just some supplemental income he lost but I’m sure there were many people who’s main source of income was abruptly halted.
This is exactly the same kind of heavy-handed garbage that got MS in hot water and will get Google in the same pot if they keep it up.
I’m a little surprised all the people who were so up in arms about the Microsoft monopoly ten years ago aren’t out in the streets today lighting torches and sharpening their pitchforks to go after Google.
Jeff, It’s all due to bias and playa hatin’ ™, I’m afraid. These are the same folks who also say nothing about the extreme proprietary nature of a Mac environment but decry the much more open Microsoft alternatives.
Easy to switch? Yes, if you’re just searching. Not if you’re an advertiser. Try not advertising via Google and see where that gets you. Right now, because of its market share, Google has advertisers by the throat.
As Jeff said, if Google suddenly decides you don’t exist…
yahoo == altavista?
http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=odyq=michael+birenbachkgs=1kls=0
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=michael+birenbachfr=yfp-t-501toggle=1cop=mssei=UTF-8
Google does it different…
http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=michael+birenbachbtnG=Google+Searchaq=foq=
widipedia says:
In February 2003, AltaVista was bought by Overture Services, Inc.[12] In July 2003, Overture itself was taken over by Yahoo!.
I wonder what the search results for the other look like. Interesting…to me anyway.
I would be interested to know how many programmers and techies don’t have Google as their homepage. I imagine not many especially with iGoogle.
The reason people don’t complain about Google monopoly like they do Microsoft is Google aren’t charging you.