Why is Microsoft Afraid of Google?
This is a really bad article. The article asserts two falsehoods: one, that Microsoft is afraid of Google; and two, that Microsoft will win by being a relentless tortoise and copying features.
Let’s talk about the “copying” theory first. Five years ago, Bill Gates shook up the industry by announcing a dual-pronged strategy — all productivity apps seamlessly integrated into the universal canvas of the web, and the “web as a platform”. This wasn’t vapor, this was what I used every day. Five years ago, I did not have Office installed on my machine. I used an app that combined word processing, IM, telephony, and e-mail in a single universal canvas (with cool contextual side-menu), all running in my web browser. We decided not to ship it at that time, but it had nothing to do with product quality or feasibility.
Now fast forward to 2005. A bunch of people who worked on that project are now at Google, and rumors fly around about “bricking over” MSFT by shipping productivity apps on the web. At the same time, pundits run around talking about “web as a platform”, ripping off Bill’s 2000 vision wholesale without giving credit. Give me a break. Clearly what is happening is a bit different than Bill laid out in 2000, but the amount that is exactly the same is stunning (almost depressing; where is the originality and creativity?)
Another example is Google Earth vs. Virtual Earth. VE shipped slightly after Google Earth, but do people really think MSFT saw Google Earth and then “real quick like” copied the whole thing in a month or two? The company must really be invincible. Or take Messenger, which has been shipping new releases three times a year. Google just shipped their first version. Please don’t say we pre-emptively copied Google.
Now, this is not to disrespect Google. Both companies innovate, both copy, and both acquire innovators. I just think it’s crazy to say that any part of Microsoft’s strategy will involve copying Google. At best, it might involve resurrecting ideas that we had little incentive to ship in the past, but which are now relevant as Google tries to ship them.
Which gets to the point about “fear”. My argument is that Microsoft needs Google, to make competition fun again. Does the word lassitude mean anything? Picture a scene of a bunch of generals sitting around having no battles to fight, then the 99 red baloons floating by. “This is what we waited for, this is it boys, this is war!” Maybe even Beavis gripped by ADD, squealing with anticipation at some mayhem about to erupt.
It’s just an image that captures a mood, something that gets lost on the observers who fret about mere words like “winning” or “beating”. This is not a zero-sum game, and the most rational perspective is that both companies (and consumers) will be strengthened by the competition. When a basketball team talks about “stomping” their opponents, and pores over videos of past games, is that fear?And of course, it’s silly to focus on Google; Yahoo is schooling the web on shipping right now, and there are plenty of other strong competitors. If they all use “beat the other guy” rhetoric to galvanize their teams, I call that fun, not fear.
Seriously, look at the fruits of this newly-galvanized competition. The software world is exciting again. Which do you think is more threatening to a large company like Microsoft; being bored to death by lack of worthy competitors, or having major incentive to do new and cool things that get product teams excited and energized about coming to work?