Bloggers have a double standard when it comes to Google vs. Microsoft?

August 28, 2006 By

I was just looking at all the blog writing about Google’s new announcement. Hey, what an awesome PR machine Google has. They don’t talk to a single blogger and we all talk about them anyway. I think bloggers like the abuse!

Anyway, Dare Obasanjo, who works for Microsoft just wrote his reactions and in the middle of all that wrote this line: “As usual, the technology blogs are full of the Microsoft vs. Google double standard.”

Absolutely 100% true. Bloggers will hype up Google stuff over Microsoft’s stuff almost everytime. Why?

A few reasons:

1) Google isn’t yet on top of the mountain. They don’t own a monopoly. They are getting close, yes, but they certainly don’t have the market share even there that Microsoft has on the desktop.
2) Google’s offerings are focused 100% on the Web. Microsoft is only about 5% on the Web. Lest we forget the biggest parts of Microsoft are Windows, Office, and Xbox. We cheer companies that pour themselves into supporting what we like. Bloggers are VERY Web-centric.
3) Office Live didn’t have a position of strength to get us excited by. Google has Gmail. Nearly every blogger I know uses Gmail. When I asked a room of Pepperdine MBA students every hand went up when I said Gmail. Yeah, a few had Hotmail, but they said they liked Gmail better. So, until Microsoft completes its rollout of the new Hotmail, er Windows Live Mail (which is very nice) then Google will continue getting the hype for its office suite.
4) Google gives us a LOT of cool free stuff. That turns into hype later on. We cheer a company on that gives us free stuff without putting a bunch of ads in our face. Microsoft still hasn’t quite figured this one out yet.
5) Expectations. When you say “Microsoft Office” to us we have a certain image of what that means in our heads. But say “Google Office” and most of us aren’t sure what that really means. That means that Google, while it explains its story, will get more attention as we all flail around and try to figure out whether it’s better or worse than what we already know, which is Microsoft’s stuff. And, Microsoft’s “Office Live” fell flat because it didn’t match our expectations of what Microsoft should do in this space.
6) Branding. Microsoft doesn’t have a cool Web brand right now. In fact, the one that they had, MSN, is being thrown in the trash and they are switching over to Windows Live. That probably will turn out to be the right decision in the long term, but in the short term Google has the better naming team — by far. Calling Google Maps “Google Maps?” Sheer brilliance! Who came up with the name “Windows Live Local?” Blllleeeeccchhh.

Anyway, we don’t cut the guy on top any slack. That’s gonna be a problem for Microsoft to get its stuff noticed. On the other hand Microsoft can get our attention the old fashioned way: it can spend its $60 billion in cash. There are plenty of bloggers out there who’ll write about you if you send some cash into the system.

Filed Under: 1

http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

There’s no double standard if it doesn’t matter to anyone but a single company. When you’re talking about a race of peole or an age range, then it matters.
Pingback: Make You Go Hmm: » Sweaty fair GYM bag coverage here
http://brettgarvin.com/ Brett Garvin

Honestly, I think alot of the time other companies get blog press over Microsoft or extra hype simply boils down to “it ain’t Microsoft”. I think Microsoft still has lots of bad rap out there and anything that is against or competeing with Microsoft gets the hype and praise of the geeks. Microsoft is still viewed as Goliath and people are looking for a David to take it down. Google has been branded the company with the sling and stone in many ways and people want to see if they can throw hard enough to slay the giant.
http://brettgarvin.com Brett Garvin

Honestly, I think alot of the time other companies get blog press over Microsoft or extra hype simply boils down to “it ain’t Microsoft”. I think Microsoft still has lots of bad rap out there and anything that is against or competeing with Microsoft gets the hype and praise of the geeks. Microsoft is still viewed as Goliath and people are looking for a David to take it down. Google has been branded the company with the sling and stone in many ways and people want to see if they can throw hard enough to slay the giant.
TomB

“2. 100% Web, compliments the Blogger myopia navel-gazing…. Just say “ERP” to a Blogger and watch his/her eyes glaze over.”

Please explain what you think is exciting about ERP. To my eyes, ERP is an over-kill solution in search of a problem.

“When Microsoft entered the game console market against the dominant brand (Sony PS2), they got a lot of buzz and attention. As Microsoft prepares to enter the portable media player market against the dominant brand (iPod), they’re getting huge buzz and attention”

If (unlikely) they managed to accomplish anything in either of those markets, they would surely get plenty of media/blogger attention.

Google has been able to deliver actual interesting products. What has MSFT done lately? You can’t get buzz in absence of pollen (to use a bumblebee metaphor).
TomB

“2. 100% Web, compliments the Blogger myopia navel-gazing…. Just say “ERP” to a Blogger and watch his/her eyes glaze over.”

Please explain what you think is exciting about ERP. To my eyes, ERP is an over-kill solution in search of a problem.

“When Microsoft entered the game console market against the dominant brand (Sony PS2), they got a lot of buzz and attention. As Microsoft prepares to enter the portable media player market against the dominant brand (iPod), they’re getting huge buzz and attention”

If (unlikely) they managed to accomplish anything in either of those markets, they would surely get plenty of media/blogger attention.

Google has been able to deliver actual interesting products. What has MSFT done lately? You can’t get buzz in absence of pollen (to use a bumblebee metaphor).
Kamal Jain

Robert, consider your point number 4. Google gives everything for free must be one of the reason people should not lock themselves into Google product. This is plain common sense economics.

Suppose you go to a new city. You take a cab. Why do you trust the drivers driving skill? Do you check his driving license? No. You trust because if he is in an accident then he has as much chance of getting hurt as you. You basically have tied your safety with his.

A lot of Google’s free stuff is a loss leader for them. They have not yet figured out a profit strategy for everything or at least not yet have conveyed to us. Remember Google is a public company. If their profit strategy, which is still a unknown to us, fails then wall street will force them to drop the loss leaders. Or else their stock will be punished which makes all the googlers unhappy. (Note: their cash reserves is made from selling goog, they did not need that cash except they may be expecting a rainy day).

What happens if goog app turn out to be one of the loss leaders they drop? Do you want to tie your company’s profit with another companies loss? I would not. Basic game theory says, you should tie your company’s profit to another company’s profit and not their loss.

Following is a reasonable possibility: Suppose Yahoo’s panama turns out to be a success. They increase the ROI for their advertisers. That implies that advertisers bid on adwords may fall. Decrease growth, no matter how much current profit, invariably punishes the stock. In that case Wall street expect companies to stop putting money in loss leaders. See what happened when Microsoft announced a meagre, by microsoft standards, 2 billion extra expense. Google has not faced such a day and no body knows what Google’s reaction would be. Microsoft announced buy back to bring wall street into confidence again. Google won’t be able to do that either.

So think twice if you want to lock in your company’s infrastructure to an unproven, uncommitted and unprofitable product.

Disclaimer: The commentator is a Microsoft employee but the analysis in the comment is his own.
Kamal Jain

Robert, consider your point number 4. Google gives everything for free must be one of the reason people should not lock themselves into Google product. This is plain common sense economics.

Suppose you go to a new city. You take a cab. Why do you trust the drivers driving skill? Do you check his driving license? No. You trust because if he is in an accident then he has as much chance of getting hurt as you. You basically have tied your safety with his.

A lot of Google’s free stuff is a loss leader for them. They have not yet figured out a profit strategy for everything or at least not yet have conveyed to us. Remember Google is a public company. If their profit strategy, which is still a unknown to us, fails then wall street will force them to drop the loss leaders. Or else their stock will be punished which makes all the googlers unhappy. (Note: their cash reserves is made from selling goog, they did not need that cash except they may be expecting a rainy day).

What happens if goog app turn out to be one of the loss leaders they drop? Do you want to tie your company’s profit with another companies loss? I would not. Basic game theory says, you should tie your company’s profit to another company’s profit and not their loss.

Following is a reasonable possibility: Suppose Yahoo’s panama turns out to be a success. They increase the ROI for their advertisers. That implies that advertisers bid on adwords may fall. Decrease growth, no matter how much current profit, invariably punishes the stock. In that case Wall street expect companies to stop putting money in loss leaders. See what happened when Microsoft announced a meagre, by microsoft standards, 2 billion extra expense. Google has not faced such a day and no body knows what Google’s reaction would be. Microsoft announced buy back to bring wall street into confidence again. Google won’t be able to do that either.

So think twice if you want to lock in your company’s infrastructure to an unproven, uncommitted and unprofitable product.

Disclaimer: The commentator is a Microsoft employee but the analysis in the comment is his own.
http://vegblog.veggiedude.com/ veggiedude

Steve Jobs said it best earlier this month: “Microsoft spends $5 Billion a year in reseach and development, and what do they come up with? All they can do is copy Apple and Google.”

Its true. Google innovates, and MS copies.
http://vegblog.veggiedude.com/ veggiedude

Steve Jobs said it best earlier this month: “Microsoft spends $5 Billion a year in reseach and development, and what do they come up with? All they can do is copy Apple and Google.”

Its true. Google innovates, and MS copies.
http://plexusity.wordpress.com/ Marie Germain

“YOUR POST:Branding. Microsoft doesn’t have a cool Web brand right now. In fact, the one that they had, MSN, is being thrown …”

Robert, brands can have an expiration date but I assure you among its users MSN is a brand they won’t soon part with–it is more than its technology. The constant pinging of multiple incoming instant messages in the ajoining room is testament! If they are rebranding or rolling up the brand, they better be careful lest they lose that immmense equity. My 17 year old just told me. “it’s [the name] cold and unfriendly”. Yikes.
About brand extensions:
When one brand is extremely successful their caretakers tend to stretch that brand to the point of snapping. Japanese corporations have put the same name on everything from cars to photocopiers and have effectively diluted and commoditized their brands. This can be very destructive because there is an emotional resonance with a brand–it is complex and deep. And stretching its meaning (key element) can dilute its strength. Google things are good. But too much Google will hurt. This I stake my experience on. It’s not about techonology and functionality–it’s about personal resonance. How you identify with a social network. I am so glad you brought up branding. Tech folks needs to pay close attention to the deepest human element. Good post Robert.

YOUR POST: “That probably will turn out to be the right decision in the long term, but in the short term Google has the better naming team — by far. Calling Google Maps “Google Maps?” Sheer brilliance! Who came up with the name “Windows Live Local?” Blllleeeeccchhh.”

I think you’ve got here. Naming is very important. The use of public or common use language again commoditizes a brand. But Google Maps is effectively a product feature of its search engine. They search many a thing, text, maps–images on their way with both Microsoft and Google. Did you know Larry Zitnick at the Microsoft lab is developing an image search engine yet unnamed? Hopefully it will be called something new and fresh–perhaps another onomatapoeia like Yahoo or Google. How about Swissh or Swoosh or zippitydodade. Hey, Blllleeeeccchhh might even work in this world of counter cultures. Kudos for your 360 approach to a new launch.
http://plexusity.wordpress.com Marie Germain

“YOUR POST:Branding. Microsoft doesn’t have a cool Web brand right now. In fact, the one that they had, MSN, is being thrown …”

Robert, brands can have an expiration date but I assure you among its users MSN is a brand they won’t soon part with–it is more than its technology. The constant pinging of multiple incoming instant messages in the ajoining room is testament! If they are rebranding or rolling up the brand, they better be careful lest they lose that immmense equity. My 17 year old just told me. “it’s [the name] cold and unfriendly”. Yikes.
About brand extensions:
When one brand is extremely successful their caretakers tend to stretch that brand to the point of snapping. Japanese corporations have put the same name on everything from cars to photocopiers and have effectively diluted and commoditized their brands. This can be very destructive because there is an emotional resonance with a brand–it is complex and deep. And stretching its meaning (key element) can dilute its strength. Google things are good. But too much Google will hurt. This I stake my experience on. It’s not about techonology and functionality–it’s about personal resonance. How you identify with a social network. I am so glad you brought up branding. Tech folks needs to pay close attention to the deepest human element. Good post Robert.

YOUR POST: “That probably will turn out to be the right decision in the long term, but in the short term Google has the better naming team — by far. Calling Google Maps “Google Maps?” Sheer brilliance! Who came up with the name “Windows Live Local?” Blllleeeeccchhh.”

I think you’ve got here. Naming is very important. The use of public or common use language again commoditizes a brand. But Google Maps is effectively a product feature of its search engine. They search many a thing, text, maps–images on their way with both Microsoft and Google. Did you know Larry Zitnick at the Microsoft lab is developing an image search engine yet unnamed? Hopefully it will be called something new and fresh–perhaps another onomatapoeia like Yahoo or Google. How about Swissh or Swoosh or zippitydodade. Hey, Blllleeeeccchhh might even work in this world of counter cultures. Kudos for your 360 approach to a new launch.
http://glasshouse.waggeneredstrom.com/ Frank Shaw

Couple of points.

1. Google is doing a heck of a lot of client side work for a company 100 percent focused on the web.
2. Market share on Gmail does not bear out your point — you could have said the same thing 10 years ago about mac use, or five years ago about Palm use, or 2 years ago about RIM use.

Bottom line, the press love the competition, they love the insurgent. Google, despite its success, is still seen as the insurgent fighting against an industry leader.
http://glasshouse.waggeneredstrom.com Frank Shaw

Couple of points.

1. Google is doing a heck of a lot of client side work for a company 100 percent focused on the web.
2. Market share on Gmail does not bear out your point — you could have said the same thing 10 years ago about mac use, or five years ago about Palm use, or 2 years ago about RIM use.

Bottom line, the press love the competition, they love the insurgent. Google, despite its success, is still seen as the insurgent fighting against an industry leader.
http://www.geise.com/ PXLated

“what an awesome PR machine Google has. They don’t talk to a single blogger and we all talk about them anyway.”
———-
Same with Apple. Seems when you have the juice, blogging/bloggers are irrelevant, the traditional PR/marketing methods work just fine and everyone picks it up. When you don’t have juice, or are a small tech/web-2.0 company you have to rely on, include, Arrington and the rest of the blogsphere.
http://www.geise.com PXLated

“what an awesome PR machine Google has. They don’t talk to a single blogger and we all talk about them anyway.”
———-
Same with Apple. Seems when you have the juice, blogging/bloggers are irrelevant, the traditional PR/marketing methods work just fine and everyone picks it up. When you don’t have juice, or are a small tech/web-2.0 company you have to rely on, include, Arrington and the rest of the blogsphere.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Kamal: you’re thinking like a Microsoft employee.

Truth is you gotta think like a mall owner in this new world. As long as one store in the mall makes a crapload of money, you’ll do just fine, thank you very much.

This is why we all go to Valley Fair instead of Vallco. Valley Fair has a lot better selection of small stores that don’t make them much money. But, while I’m there I’m very likely to head into Macy’s too.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Kamal: you’re thinking like a Microsoft employee.

Truth is you gotta think like a mall owner in this new world. As long as one store in the mall makes a crapload of money, you’ll do just fine, thank you very much.

This is why we all go to Valley Fair instead of Vallco. Valley Fair has a lot better selection of small stores that don’t make them much money. But, while I’m there I’m very likely to head into Macy’s too.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Frank, be careful about your market share numbers. I think a far more important number is the growth number. How fast is Gmail doubling in share vs. Hotmail? That’ll end up being the far more important number to watch. It’s certainly what Wall Street looks at.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Frank, be careful about your market share numbers. I think a far more important number is the growth number. How fast is Gmail doubling in share vs. Hotmail? That’ll end up being the far more important number to watch. It’s certainly what Wall Street looks at.
http://keithhill.spaces.live.com/ Keith Hill

Whoever came up with “Windows Live Local” should be moved to another job! I agree that “Live Local” and the corresponding URL are about the dumbest anybody could have come up with. They used to have a recognizable name “VirtualEarth” and they torched it. Why???
http://keithhill.spaces.live.com Keith Hill

Whoever came up with “Windows Live Local” should be moved to another job! I agree that “Live Local” and the corresponding URL are about the dumbest anybody could have come up with. They used to have a recognizable name “VirtualEarth” and they torched it. Why???
scott

I want to be able to create my own mall and not be stuck with only two choices, the MSMall and the GMall. If Microsoft or Google provides me with the best store in a certain category of goods then I will want to sign a lease with them. For the same reason I don’t want WalMart to come into my neighborhood and drive out all the innovative shop owners that can do a better job of serving my needs. I think the battle for real estate will shift once open identity systems catch on.
scott

I want to be able to create my own mall and not be stuck with only two choices, the MSMall and the GMall. If Microsoft or Google provides me with the best store in a certain category of goods then I will want to sign a lease with them. For the same reason I don’t want WalMart to come into my neighborhood and drive out all the innovative shop owners that can do a better job of serving my needs. I think the battle for real estate will shift once open identity systems catch on.
http://randymorin.wordpress.com/ randymorin

It’s all about cash in the system. Google sends me a monthly cheque (AdSense). Microsoft doesn’t.
http://randymorin.wordpress.com/ randymorin

It’s all about cash in the system. Google sends me a monthly cheque (AdSense). Microsoft doesn’t.
Chris P

“They used to have a recognizable name “VirtualEarth” and they torched it. Why???”

Because they are f**king dumb! Yes that was a resonably good name…before this whole “Live” mania started and I don’t see why “Windows” had to be attached to it….this was an opportunity to drop that “Windows” legacy behind….granted it (Windows) keeps bringing home the bacon….but there was absolutely no reason to carry that baggage into the web world.

Oh well….there is enough hate spewing around…that I don’t necessarily see MS going in the right direction in the long term (but hey, I am just a simple guy – what do I know…I am no Ballmer).
Chris P

“They used to have a recognizable name “VirtualEarth” and they torched it. Why???”

Because they are f**king dumb! Yes that was a resonably good name…before this whole “Live” mania started and I don’t see why “Windows” had to be attached to it….this was an opportunity to drop that “Windows” legacy behind….granted it (Windows) keeps bringing home the bacon….but there was absolutely no reason to carry that baggage into the web world.

Oh well….there is enough hate spewing around…that I don’t necessarily see MS going in the right direction in the long term (but hey, I am just a simple guy – what do I know…I am no Ballmer).
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Chris: Microsoft’s theory is that they have hundreds of millions of people who recognize the name “Windows” and who use Microsoft Windows and so they’ll be more likely to also use “Windows Live.”

I personally would rather invest in building a new brand, but that’s just me. I’m from the Trout and Reis school, though, (they wrote that a brand should stand for one thing, not two) and that school of branding thought isn’t well respected at Microsoft.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Chris: Microsoft’s theory is that they have hundreds of millions of people who recognize the name “Windows” and who use Microsoft Windows and so they’ll be more likely to also use “Windows Live.”

I personally would rather invest in building a new brand, but that’s just me. I’m from the Trout and Reis school, though, (they wrote that a brand should stand for one thing, not two) and that school of branding thought isn’t well respected at Microsoft.
http://direwolff.wordpress.com/ direwolff

Sadly, by the time people wake up to the amount of information and subsequent control Google will have over their users, it will be too late to complain and too hard to get out from the grips of all of their free apps. These free apps of course only help solidify their hold on aggregating more valuable data about us. When that day comes, we will sit around pining for the days where Microsoft was the lord of the manor
http://direwolff.wordpress.com direwolff

Sadly, by the time people wake up to the amount of information and subsequent control Google will have over their users, it will be too late to complain and too hard to get out from the grips of all of their free apps. These free apps of course only help solidify their hold on aggregating more valuable data about us. When that day comes, we will sit around pining for the days where Microsoft was the lord of the manor
Kermit

Wasn’t there a Business Week article last month saying that Google has basically FAILED in everything it’s tried except search and ads? GMail uptake is flat, Google Maps is played with for a few minutes but rarelly actually used, their other stuff is far behind the market leaders (instant messaging, voice messaging, video sharing, etc).

Apple gets tons of blogger press, yet Mac’s usershare is still 4%. Linux’s is 0.4% despite years and years of hype.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox46-operating-systems-market-share.html
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/April/os.php
http://www.artlebedev.com/tools/browsers/

There’s a HUGE difference between the tech-hype media/bloggers and the real world.
Kermit

Wasn’t there a Business Week article last month saying that Google has basically FAILED in everything it’s tried except search and ads? GMail uptake is flat, Google Maps is played with for a few minutes but rarelly actually used, their other stuff is far behind the market leaders (instant messaging, voice messaging, video sharing, etc).

Apple gets tons of blogger press, yet Mac’s usershare is still 4%. Linux’s is 0.4% despite years and years of hype.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox46-operating-systems-market-share.html
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/April/os.php
http://www.artlebedev.com/tools/browsers/

There’s a HUGE difference between the tech-hype media/bloggers and the real world.
http://plexusity.wordpress.com/ Marie Germain

Robert, Trout and Ries were wrong. The mind is extremely complex–associating a brand if one thing is associating with little or nothing. You understood Trout and Ries well and they made a good buck with their theory. But they were wrong. The neuro-scientific fact is the reverse. Consumers have memories, a collection of interconnected thoughts called mental models( thoughts are themselves a collection of neurons)and many consumers share similar models. This is where the gold is. You must identify these thoughts/models and know the cues that elicit the right emotions and the right behavior–and its not a word. People are not simpletons–not stupid, they are very very complex. that’s a beautiful thing. I’ll bet MS and Google have yet to do this work–but it is the most reliable course to take. The rest is a crapshoot that lines the pockets of promoters and lazy marketers. I spend my time (when I am not immersed in conferencing in web 2.0) undoing their doings in executive seminars by explaining how the mind works and reacts. Everything changes after day. Aaarrrrgh! to those who still have not flamed their marshmellows over this useful fire-starter.
http://plexusity.wordpress.com Marie Germain

Robert, Trout and Ries were wrong. The mind is extremely complex–associating a brand if one thing is associating with little or nothing. You understood Trout and Ries well and they made a good buck with their theory. But they were wrong. The neuro-scientific fact is the reverse. Consumers have memories, a collection of interconnected thoughts called mental models( thoughts are themselves a collection of neurons)and many consumers share similar models. This is where the gold is. You must identify these thoughts/models and know the cues that elicit the right emotions and the right behavior–and its not a word. People are not simpletons–not stupid, they are very very complex. that’s a beautiful thing. I’ll bet MS and Google have yet to do this work–but it is the most reliable course to take. The rest is a crapshoot that lines the pockets of promoters and lazy marketers. I spend my time (when I am not immersed in conferencing in web 2.0) undoing their doings in executive seminars by explaining how the mind works and reacts. Everything changes after day. Aaarrrrgh! to those who still have not flamed their marshmellows over this useful fire-starter.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Marie: heheh, bringing up Reis and Trout sure does get passions going, doesn’t it?

Kermit: I thought I read that Apple’s market share has gone up a lot lately. If I remember right someone said it was up to 12% in the latest quarter.

You’ve described how hard it is to get people to change their usage, right. Google talk usage is heading up, by the way. Watch for that number to change at next report.

Google Maps has 17% of the market and is going up. The trick is to watch its rate of growth. That’ll tell you more than the current market share.
http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/ Robert Scoble

Marie: heheh, bringing up Reis and Trout sure does get passions going, doesn’t it?

Kermit: I thought I read that Apple’s market share has gone up a lot lately. If I remember right someone said it was up to 12% in the latest quarter.

You’ve described how hard it is to get people to change their usage, right. Google talk usage is heading up, by the way. Watch for that number to change at next report.

Google Maps has 17% of the market and is going up. The trick is to watch its rate of growth. That’ll tell you more than the current market share.
Kermit

“Steve Jobs said it best earlier this month: “Microsoft spends $5 Billion a year in reseach and development, and what do they come up with? All they can do is copy Apple and Google.””

It’s that kind of childishness that contributed that recent WWDC keynote to being the worst WWDC keynote ever.

See what GarageGames’ Jeff Tunnell said regarding it:
http://makeitbigingames.com/blog/?p=32

“Lately, I have been having second thoughts about OS-X games and committing to “cross platform” development in the sense of PC and OS-X. After spending 1 1/2 hours watching Apple’s Steve Jobs give the worst WWDC keynote in history, I decided to air my concerns on this blog. …
…
…
Somehow, between this initial elation and the audience raving about pricing of X-Serve, the famed “reality distortion” field wore off. It was as if a bubble popped. Maybe it was because Steve had multiple people giving the presentation, maybe it was the continued jabs at Microsoft, or maybe it was just that Apple had so little to talk about.”

Oh, and Jeff Tunnell used to be a rabid Microsoft hater; see his 2001 blogs.
Kermit

“Steve Jobs said it best earlier this month: “Microsoft spends $5 Billion a year in reseach and development, and what do they come up with? All they can do is copy Apple and Google.””

It’s that kind of childishness that contributed that recent WWDC keynote to being the worst WWDC keynote ever.

See what GarageGames’ Jeff Tunnell said regarding it:
http://makeitbigingames.com/blog/?p=32

“Lately, I have been having second thoughts about OS-X games and committing to “cross platform” development in the sense of PC and OS-X. After spending 1 1/2 hours watching Apple’s Steve Jobs give the worst WWDC keynote in history, I decided to air my concerns on this blog. …
…
…
Somehow, between this initial elation and the audience raving about pricing of X-Serve, the famed “reality distortion” field wore off. It was as if a bubble popped. Maybe it was because Steve had multiple people giving the presentation, maybe it was the continued jabs at Microsoft, or maybe it was just that Apple had so little to talk about.”

Oh, and Jeff Tunnell used to be a rabid Microsoft hater; see his 2001 blogs.
LayZ

I’m convinced MS hires marketing MBA’s that failed branding classes.
LayZ

I’m convinced MS hires marketing MBA’s that failed branding classes.
Chris P

“I thought I read that Apple’s market share has gone up a lot lately. If I remember right someone said it was up to 12% in the latest quarter.”

Note quite Robert…check this out:

Apple’s Macintosh market share soars 16 percent…to 4.8%. Still pretty low…

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/20/marketshare/index.php
Chris P

“I thought I read that Apple’s market share has gone up a lot lately. If I remember right someone said it was up to 12% in the latest quarter.”

Note quite Robert…check this out:

Apple’s Macintosh market share soars 16 percent…to 4.8%. Still pretty low…

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/20/marketshare/index.php
http://www.dead20.com/ Skeptic

Two things I like to keep in mind…

1 – one of the first, and best, uses of real-time web pages (aka ajax) is Microsoft Outlook Web Access. Nothing beats it.

2 – google, via adsense, has screwed up the Web MUCH more than microsoft ever has…
http://www.dead20.com Skeptic

Two things I like to keep in mind…

1 – one of the first, and best, uses of real-time web pages (aka ajax) is Microsoft Outlook Web Access. Nothing beats it.

2 – google, via adsense, has screwed up the Web MUCH more than microsoft ever has…
http://www.dealarchitect.typepad.com/ vinnie mirchandani

Scoble, pardon me while I go get a big violin and play it for MS. Every body’s out to get them – the Feds, the EEC, now bloggers. Consumers give them $ 40 billion a year. They give their R&D teams $ 6 billion a year. Results – late products, poor quality, then turn around and give massive payouts to investors rather than lower prices, improve product output. Google may get these bad habits some day but to date it has been an innvoator in a lot of areas…Even Larry Ellison has commented he cannot believe MS has Google envy. MS needs to quit looking backwards at Google and more towards much bigger players like IBM, Verizon, Oracle…ad revenue is puny compared to the $ 500 billion MS can get from markets of the top 20 IT and telecom vendors
http://www.dealarchitect.typepad.com vinnie mirchandani

Scoble, pardon me while I go get a big violin and play it for MS. Every body’s out to get them – the Feds, the EEC, now bloggers. Consumers give them $ 40 billion a year. They give their R&D teams $ 6 billion a year. Results – late products, poor quality, then turn around and give massive payouts to investors rather than lower prices, improve product output. Google may get these bad habits some day but to date it has been an innvoator in a lot of areas…Even Larry Ellison has commented he cannot believe MS has Google envy. MS needs to quit looking backwards at Google and more towards much bigger players like IBM, Verizon, Oracle…ad revenue is puny compared to the $ 500 billion MS can get from markets of the top 20 IT and telecom vendors
Pingback: Venture Chronicles
http://www.roboburp.com/search-blog/ Robert Oschler

What the heck?

I feel like I just crashed a party for the Web’s blogging luminaries. Is this truly the comment thread for the IlumiBloggerati? I’ll go hide my hyundai behind this ferrari over here.

Bloggers have a double standard when it comes to Google vs. Microsoft?

Archives

About Robert