7 ms·

There is a lot of good numbers in that release. Motorola down to be expected. PPC yields -15% is concerning but the soon to come monetization of Shopping is g

• chadzawistowski 14y ago
  They've already moved past the point that MS failed at. Can you elaborate? Are you referring to the late 90s trials and their aftermath?
  • mtkd 14y ago
    Microsoft tried to compete in every technology market simultaneously - spreading the inhouse talent too thin becoming nothing to anyone. The few really good products they had (SQL Server, OneNote etc.) got lost in the noise. Everything became unstable, clunky, complicated and inconsistent. Most kids leaving school now think Xbox when they hear 'Microsoft' - not really the legacy Microsoft deserved. (it could all have been solved by splitting the company up in to 4 - OS/tools, Gaming, Apps, Online Services and letting them compete in their own vertical spaces without having to do things the Microsoft way - SQL Server running on Linux, VS on OSX etc.) Google haven't fallen in to that trap - they are not competing in every single market - when they do compete in a new market they don't dilute their existing product quality - and there is a cohesion to the product strategy.
    • te_chris 14y ago
      Xbox may not be the legacy they deserved, but better them leaving school thinking of microsoft with something positive that they enjoy, than something which they mock and is easy to pirate (well was when I was at high school) like windows xp.
    • salemh 14y ago
      OneNote is a ridiculously good organizational tool if used properly, hell I think it should be a forked OS. Could solve the whole "bookmark org" problem, integrating with offline content, etc. But, its not the most user-friendly for its capabilities (re: not non-technical necessarily, but, it certainly requires investment of time).
• tlogan 14y ago
  Can you please quantify the "most consistently innovative large-cap around" comment? What Google did lately which was innovative? I'm not trying to be anti-Google, I'm just honestly asking. For example, can you compare innovations Google put forward in last couple of years and compare it with, lets say, MSFT?
  • zfran 14y ago
    Android?
    • tlogan 14y ago
      Android is more like fast-following Apple and not innovative. If Android makes Google innovative, then they are not really more innovative than MSFT because MSFT did Windows Phone, Surface, Online Office (really surprisingly good - but still not innovative because Google Docs was the first), Outlook.com, etc. I think Xbox Kinect is innovative.
      • hiddenstage 14y ago
        ? Android usually has features long before iOS.
      • tsycho 14y ago
        EDIT: Fixed formatting (was italicized by mistake). Just because something is not the first to market doesn't make it not innovative[1]. Android is not a feature-by-feature copy of the iPhone, and I think various Android features (Google Now for one) are quite innovative. Furthermore, Apple also "copied" various Android features (notifications for instance). Similarly, while the Kinect is universally considered as innovative, I think Microsoft's Metro UI + OS is also quite innovative in that they came up with a refreshingly different and clean interface. First to market may drive important metrics like adoption/success/profit, but doesn't define whether a product is innovative or not. [1] sorry for the multiple negatives in that sentence.
  • bvi 14y ago
    Google Glasses and the self-driving cars come to mind.
• loceng 14y ago
  The people that sold Google stock are probably the same ones who bought Facebook originally..
  • bduerst 14y ago
    Sounds about right - the stock market will always have irrational people :)