In
my previous post, I noted how the new Gmail/Google Docs & Spreadsheet integration
feature threatens Microsoft. There's also some high level discussion going on in the tech
sphere about how Microsoft's continued loss of search market share and
confusion over the Live branding means they are losing the "web war". Infamous Dot
Com analyst Henry Blodget goes as far as to
say that Microsoft is sliding into "Web Irrelevance". I very much disagree with that
prognosis. Like John Battelle,
I think there is a lot more Web innovation to happen yet. Google certainly won the battle
(with search and online advertising), but they have not won the war.
Let's look at the threats to Google. As Greg Linden pointed out, Microsoft has a prime opportunity to "control the search experience in Windows". So desktop/web search may be Microsoft's best hope to challenge Google in search. Also as the Read/WriteWeb crew has written about many times on this blog, there are a lot of very innovative search solutions being worked on by startups - any one of which might rise up and surprise Google. Check out Charles Knight's list of top 100 alternative search engines, for a taste of the amazing innovation happening right now in search.
Also I think Microsoft is in a strong position with multimedia across devices and potentially they could end up controlling the living room and TV/entertainment with Media Center and Xbox - all tied into Vista of course. Apple is also a strong contender in this media/devices/tv domain. These are things that Google is relatively weak in right now. So Google doesn't have it all going their way in the Web world, even though they appear to be dominant at this point.
Note: I'm not sure of the relevance of the stormtrooper pic, I just thought it was very funny!
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Web War Not Won Yet.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1925
TITLE: Thursday, February 1, 2007 Research Helpline URL: http://www.halperninfoservices.com/News/tabid/312/ctl/ArticleView/mid/679/articleId/6/Thursday-February-1-2007-Research-Helpline.aspx IP: 216.128.16.6 BLOG NAME: Halpern Info Services DATE: 01/31/2007 11:57:30 AM Read More
It's a bit late, sorry, but here is a summary of last week's action on Read/WriteWeb.... Faking it Lastweek's poll was an eye-opener. We asked: in your current Web activities where an identity is required (i.e. you can't be anonymous)... Read More
An interesting tidbit came out of the recent Foo Camp New Zealand (which unfortunately I wasn't able to attend). Robert O’Callahan from Mozilla, who is based in NZ but drives the rendering engine of Mozilla/FireFox, spoke about how Firefox 3... Read More
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
It is funny ... :)
Posted by: hombrelobo | January 31, 2007 3:30 AMYou make some good points. The problem is Google is not yet a mature company...that's frightening. They are not just sitting back and waiting for the next guy to catch up. They have cash and they are developing and acquiring all the time.
To me it is almost like unfair competition. Even if the next guy catches...so much is the power of Google that they can close the gap in a blink...that is the power of cash.
Posted by: Adrian keys | January 31, 2007 5:17 AMOne powerful asset that Google has that will keep them on top is the world's largest database of intentions. Google know what people are searching for, what they are not finding successfully, and what new websites are gaining in popularity.
This gives them strong information to know which sectors to build or acquire in.
Posted by: Hashim | January 31, 2007 6:21 AMAdrian's same argument can be used for Microsoft as well. They have billions of cash in the bank.
I agree with Richard on this one, do not count Microsoft out.
Posted by: Scott Watermasysk | January 31, 2007 6:23 AMWhere is MS relevant on the web? Their search volume and relevancy is awful.
I know that MSN is the #2 site according to Alexa and you can knock Alexa all you want but this is telling:
Where do people go on msn.com?
hotmail.msn.com - 84%
search.msn.com - 2%
msn.com - 2%
msnbc.msn.com - 1%
So I ask again, where is MSFT relevant on the web? Search, Social Media? Zune? Content?
...and yes XBox rocks but MMOG is an online experience that doesn't transfer attention to higher revenue generating platforms easily...and if I hear one more time about convergence I might just puke.
Posted by: Jonathan Mendez | January 31, 2007 6:44 AMI'm wondering none's questioning googles no1 ressource: online advertising, the very source of google's strong momentum (and the very reason for web2.0 boom). No doubts - online advertising is important and will always be a great profit engine for the major search engines. But my guess is that the internet "audience" is getting mature, is learning what makes sense and what not. Context sensitive ads might be more efficient than classic ads but that doesnt mean that its magic. I wonder: How many of you clicked on adsense suggestions, and how much did it really help. Be honest...
(adsense never worked for me, so I stopped clicking it. If this is a trend - lets see where it goes)
Posted by: Eray | January 31, 2007 7:43 AMFirst of all: Great pic!
Posted by: Ron C | January 31, 2007 9:20 AMSecondly, Google has some great offerings, but MS is doing a few things right that Google hasn't done yet. Frinstance, the integration in the Live Mail Beta of the email and calendar apps is MUCH better than Googles. As I search for a way to be more productive, I have to seriously consider switching to hotmail as my main mail account, due to the fact that I can use their calendar MUCH more easily than I can with my GMail. I think once (IF) MS decides how to push Live, that it could go a long way...it's a pretty good suite. And, unlike Googles, it isn't cobbled together from the latest aquisitions. It is (mostly) homegrown/written, BY MS, FOR MS.
i think one point is missing: microsoft is releasing web-developer technology, like asp.net and now ajax.asp.net. if microsoft is not able to create cool integrated web apps - give this task to strong partners.
Posted by: rolf | January 31, 2007 9:21 AMa good example is netvibes, of course not a big player yet, but built on microsoft technology.
Microsoft's web search has been a joke for a while now, so if they are going to integrate that functionality into the OS they need to totally outsource the engine. That being said, I've noticed an ever increasing number of "irrelevant" results in my Google queries. Perhaps more people are gaming the system, I don't know. I do know that being #1 means you’re also the #1 target. Nothing protects Google from the next web search upstart; though chances are it won't be anything from Microsoft.
Posted by: Brian A. | January 31, 2007 9:39 AMGreat points, Richard. The thing most folks miss about Google is that the cost of switching for their customers is, essentially, zero. Those of us heavily invested in Gmail, Docs & Spreadsheets, or Reader might have a little hesitancy, but that was also true for Hotmail or (oddly enough), Blogger before WordPress gained so much traction.
To be frank, I'm not sure that Microsoft has the culture at this point to change the game. At the same time, I don't think Google's supremacy is guaranteed, either. Once upon a time everyone knew Microsoft couldn't fall. Before that, everyone knew IBM couldn't fall. And so on. None of these companies fell to a resurgent player, though. The folks you and Mike Arrington keep track of have a better shot than Microsoft of sneaking up on Google. If it's a war, I'd keep my eyes on the commandos, not the major armies.
Posted by: Tim Peter | January 31, 2007 6:58 PMOh. And the picture is a pisser. Pun very much intended.
Posted by: Tim Peter | January 31, 2007 6:59 PM