2 ms·

Google did a great job of putting the user first. You never felt like you were being sold something, a refreshing change from the MSN 'homepage' at the time. Y

Google did a great job of putting the user first. You never felt like you were being sold something, a refreshing change from the MSN 'homepage' at the time. You also did not feel that you were being given something for free that had a catch to it - see HN story today about prisons getting 'free' tablets. Make no mistake, Microsoft can do free very nicely too - Internet Explorer in the Netscape days was partly ascendant for doing 'free' very well at a time when Netscape was emerging from 'shareware'. But with Microsoft 'free' you always felt that you were a pawn in their plans for global domination, to blot out the rivals. I think that Google came along with a great series of products and services that put the user first with an ethos that Microsoft, Apple and others just did not 'get'. Although Chrome was marketed with billboards and a link in the search results, the real work on adoption was done by the users recommending the superior, user centric product to their workmates, friends and family.

sseth 8y ago
This is a great point. And i think Microsoft could have done this too. But perhaps the conflict between improving the open web vs pushing their own operating system was a conflict they never resolved internally, giving Google the time and space it needed to outflank them. And Google moved fast enough, and as you have said, created a great enough user experience, that it could quickly establish a strong foothold. I think if Microsoft had truly been focused on keeping IE as the best browser in the world, it would have been difficult to displace given its dominance.