4 ms·

But do you see how Google buying up significant percentages of web content and only allowing their own search engine to index it properly would make it impossib

But do you see how Google buying up significant percentages of web content and only allowing their own search engine to index it properly would make it impossible for other search engines to compete?

rbanffy 16y ago
I don't see this "buying up significant percentages of web content" thing happening. Is that the books thing where they scanned the books themselves? Is is YouTube, where they offered a good enough video platform? Is AdSense and AdWords, where they made monetizing a website simple and painless? And Microsoft's Brad Smith saying "It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google" is beyond hypocritical. He can't possibly be stupid enough to believe that himself. No. Microsoft is not complaining of unfair practices by Google. It's complaining because now they can't use the same practices they always relied on to squash a competitor that has grown too large for them to feel comfortable.
- rbarooah 16y ago
  You don't think YouTube contains a large percentage of web video, or you don't think Google bought YouTube?
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    Oh... But they don't own the content there - whoever put it there is free to port it to, say, Soapbox. Or Vimeo, or blip.tv or justin.tv or even S3. And even delete the instances in YouTube, leaving Google with nothing. The only problem with that is that Soapbox no longer exists. Because Microsoft didn't want to spend any more money on it.
    - rbarooah 16y ago
      What incentive would there be for everyone to remove their content from YouTube?
      - rbanffy 16y ago
        None. Does Google need to provide one too? But Microsoft, since it's so offended by what Google is doing, could resurrect Soapbox. They should have plenty of cash coming from those Android patents, BTW. They could also have bought YouTube (Google had their own Google Video, but that was going nowhere and credit goes to them for seeing YouTube first).
- kenjackson 16y ago
  You're saying this is not anti-competitive? One of the ways that search engines attract users is through distribution of search boxes through Web sites. Unfortunately, Google contractually blocks leading Web sites in Europe from distributing competing search boxes. It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google. Google's exclusivity terms have even blocked Microsoft from distributing its Windows Live services, such as email and online document storage, through European telecommunications companies because these services are monetized through Bing search boxes. How is Google contractually blocking other search boxes any different than MS telling Dell that if they ship Linux boxes then they can't ship Windows? The hypocrisy here is staggering.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    Can't Microsoft make their AdCenter better than the deals those sites have with Google? I would love to see the real complaint and not just Brad Smith's Technet post. "It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google" I loved that part. People around me in the office wondered why I laughed so loud.
    - rbarooah 16y ago
      No, they can't make it better if Google prevents them from indexing significant parts of the web. The point has been made, several times by more than one person, and yet you ignore it.
      - rbanffy 16y ago
        Is YouTube the significant part of the web you are referring to? Are you sure search boxes in sites really require you to find YouTube videos?
        kenjackson 16y ago
        There are multiple distinct issues. But they're all about Google specifically blocking MS to provide competition via their monopoly position. If Google wants to give up some of their marketshare, I'm sure no one will complain. But when you have monopoly status, you are required to play by different rules. MS knows something about that (for example almost everything MS did in the antitrust case would be legal of a company w/o the market influence they had).

But do you see how Google buying up significant percentages of web content and only allowing their own search engine to index it properly would make it impossible for other search engines to compete?

rbanffy 16y ago

I don't see this "buying up significant percentages of web content" thing happening. Is that the books thing where they scanned the books themselves? Is is YouTube, where they offered a good enough video platform? Is AdSense and AdWords, where they made monetizing a website simple and painless? And Microsoft's Brad Smith saying "It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google" is beyond hypocritical. He can't possibly be stupid enough to believe that himself. No. Microsoft is not complaining of unfair practices by Google. It's complaining because now they can't use the same practices they always relied on to squash a competitor that has grown too large for them to feel comfortable.

rbarooah 16y ago
You don't think YouTube contains a large percentage of web video, or you don't think Google bought YouTube?
- rbanffy 16y ago
  Oh... But they don't own the content there - whoever put it there is free to port it to, say, Soapbox. Or Vimeo, or blip.tv or justin.tv or even S3. And even delete the instances in YouTube, leaving Google with nothing. The only problem with that is that Soapbox no longer exists. Because Microsoft didn't want to spend any more money on it.
  - rbarooah 16y ago
    What incentive would there be for everyone to remove their content from YouTube?
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      None. Does Google need to provide one too? But Microsoft, since it's so offended by what Google is doing, could resurrect Soapbox. They should have plenty of cash coming from those Android patents, BTW. They could also have bought YouTube (Google had their own Google Video, but that was going nowhere and credit goes to them for seeing YouTube first).
kenjackson 16y ago
You're saying this is not anti-competitive? One of the ways that search engines attract users is through distribution of search boxes through Web sites. Unfortunately, Google contractually blocks leading Web sites in Europe from distributing competing search boxes. It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google. Google's exclusivity terms have even blocked Microsoft from distributing its Windows Live services, such as email and online document storage, through European telecommunications companies because these services are monetized through Bing search boxes. How is Google contractually blocking other search boxes any different than MS telling Dell that if they ship Linux boxes then they can't ship Windows? The hypocrisy here is staggering.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  Can't Microsoft make their AdCenter better than the deals those sites have with Google? I would love to see the real complaint and not just Brad Smith's Technet post. "It is obviously difficult for competing search engines to gain users when nearly every search box is powered by Google" I loved that part. People around me in the office wondered why I laughed so loud.
  - rbarooah 16y ago
    No, they can't make it better if Google prevents them from indexing significant parts of the web. The point has been made, several times by more than one person, and yet you ignore it.
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      Is YouTube the significant part of the web you are referring to? Are you sure search boxes in sites really require you to find YouTube videos?
      - kenjackson 16y ago
        There are multiple distinct issues. But they're all about Google specifically blocking MS to provide competition via their monopoly position. If Google wants to give up some of their marketshare, I'm sure no one will complain. But when you have monopoly status, you are required to play by different rules. MS knows something about that (for example almost everything MS did in the antitrust case would be legal of a company w/o the market influence they had).