Amazon Dumping Google for Microsoft? 126
theodp writes "How do you reward Google for letting your CEO buy stock for six cents a share? If you're Amazon, you dump Google for Windows Live Search to power subsidiary Alexa, who has not yet commented on the switch. Other Windows Live Search sightings are being observed at Amazon subsidiary a9.com." From the Search Engine Lowdown article: "The Alexa toolbar's gotten Alexa a bad rap from privacy advocates, though in function it's effect on search results is similar to click stream data that Google, Yahoo, MSN, Ask may or may not be using in their determinations of relevance. Wall points out that 'A9 is still powered by Google...' A9 is Amazon's primary search project. Wall wonders, however, if the change in Alexa indicates a larger coming change in Amazon's relationship to Google. I agree. In fact, I see the move as the first Google Dump in the post eBay's-seeking-partners-against-Google era."
Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:3, Insightful)
While that may (or may not) hold true, the key difference there involves how much we trust the company getting the data.
Google has proven itself, time and again, to act in the best interests of its users, even going up against the DoJ to fight for our privacy rights. Yahoo and MSN don't quite have the same good track record, but they at least don't have a reputation as outright spyware.
But Alexa? C'mon, Amazon, give us a frickin' break here!
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:4, Interesting)
Despite that, this sounds like a first class mindslip from amazon
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2, Insightful)
they were protecting themselves. you write as if you still believe in the tooth fairy. google has a great marketing strategy, and it's to let naive geeks like you spread misinformation about an angelic
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:5, Insightful)
"the most EVIL business ever... ADVERTISING"
Ok, now step back, and think about that statement. In a world full of people who build nuclear weapons (e.g. G.E.); research fragrances by injecting bunnies with toxic chemicals; patent genetic sequences; squeeze the third world for cash in exchange for patented, life-saving drugs; grind up tons of sea life per day; build systems to gather all Internet traffic for domestic spying; etc.
Think about that.
And why does he say this? Because it pains the average paranoid to have a large business that spends its time worrying about the impact of its actions.
Keep in mind, Google has:
* Moved the banner ad from Internet dominance to second-class status.
* Contributed substantially to open source development efforts.
* Countered the growing dominance of Microsoft on many fronts.
* Revealed government efforts at privacy invasion (did MSN or Yahoo!?)
Complaints about Google amount to: well, they could do MORE for me!
If Google bothers you, you need to serious look at your priorities. Sure, they're large and public which makes them more of a source of concern than your average convinience store, but there are companies that spend their time and effort trying to KILL PEOPLE. Google doesn't show up on the evil company radar because there's already too many companies fighting for the right to be there.
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
I wish it always worked like this.
Why people Google-bash (Score:5, Insightful)
* SEO people and website proprietors bitter that they don't have a higher ranking.
* People who are alarmed by the growing influence and power of Google and want to cap it.
The "China thing" was possibly the most absurd slam I've ever seen, where people were complaining that Google was horrible because it followed a country's laws within that country. Good lord. Google doesn't finance private armies to overthrow China's leadership, either. Darn them for not forcibly spreading democracy and promoting revolution. [rolls eyes] I'll take Google's approach over Bush's approach any day, and let the mass of the Chinese people decide whether to revolt or not on their own.
Google is making an incredibly useful set of products in a highly competitive market and still stomping the competition. While doing so, they are not using underhanded business tactics, they are providing funding to a number of highly-cost-effective open source efforts, and so forth. They have generally done a better job of advocating the privacy of their users than their competitors. They promote interesting CS development. They helped reverse the slide into unusable "media-rich" flashy, slow websites.
As you said -- they may not be perfect, but they're one of the best things you're going to run into. Maybe someday, when the growth slows and they hit a (real) scandal or two, there will be good reasons to dislike them. Until them, I'm going to sit back and enjoy.
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
Do we speak up only if Google's behavior directly and significantly impacts us? I suppose we should wai
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:3, Insightful)
Absolutely not! However, look at what Google did.
They have agreed to provide a limited version of their search service to China. They didn't agree to modify the information in any other way.
That's something that I would not be comfortable doing, but it's the only way they can be of any use in China, so it's one of those ugly sorts of situations that you just hope does more good than not.
On the other h
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
Maybe I'm taking to fine a point. I'm not suggesting that Goo
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:4, Insightful)
From an ethical perspective, companies, like governments and individuals, must consider which actions result in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In the case of China, most governments and companies have decided that engaging the Chinese government and its people helps more Chinese people than leaving China "to its own devices" would. Many people believe they are acting ethically when engaging in commerce with repressive regimes because they believe the exchange of goods and ideas will lead to more openness and less repression over time. Sure, you can question these beliefs -- and you may choose to believe that disengagement and isolation helps more people than engagement does. The point is, if you can on your beliefs as to what will cause the greatest good, and Google acts on their beliefs (though different from your own,) you are both acting ethically.
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
It still bugs me when Slashdot people say that Google is being unethical and evil. Who are you to decide what is unethical and evil? I think it would be unethical of Google to remove their services from China, as many people seem to want. Why do you get to decide what is ethical, and not me?
BTW, when I say
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
When you commit fraud (false advertising), support fraud or try to deny other people democracy for your own profit, it does make you immoral and hiding behind the mask of a corporation does not you any less immoral, it just demostr
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:3, Informative)
Let's say Google withdrew from China and left people in China with a barely access
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
Having profit or greed as a motive might be the excuse de rigueur of corporations but by no stretch of the imagination does it make it acceptable and customers are fully enitled to express their disapproval and withdraw their support.
With Google becoming a portal, their image is their life, when they damage it for short term profit don't be surpised when it leads to me
Re:Why people Google-bash (Score:2)
2. Your first sentence makes so little sense that simply trying to understand it is giving me a migraine.
3. I never said anything about Google being involved in politics, or whether or not I thought their involvement in politics was acceptable. i'm not sure where you are going with that to be perfectly hon
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
I feel like I should have Prof. Farnsworth's voice when I say, "Oh my, yes!" Though they claim to have moved out of that business in recent years (keep in mind that their involvement was always considered a national secret), they continue to be one of the major U.S. military contractors. On the public record, the only hardware they supply is aircraft engines today, though they still manufacture nuclear power plants.
"In 1987, GE was the United States' second largest
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
The poster you call a loonie has a great point and that's that Google has become an advertising company first and foremost.
That's why I'll bet you'll see them move banner ads back to first-class status if that's what'll increase growth for them.
Take a look at this: Not only is Google bringing Flash Ads to their AdSense network; now also video ads [searchenginejournal.com] has been spotted on AdSense sites. Also take a look at yesterday's
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
I'll bet you that you're wrong.
That's not because I'm a Google cheerleader, but because they made a very interesting play when they went public. They wrote their famous line into their S-1 (AKA "red herring"): "don't be evil".
Now, I know that any company CAN decide to be evil, even if they've written down their intention to do otherwise, but if that were the goal, Google would have written it dow
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Yes, quite.
"What does don't be evil mean? It doesn't mean anything, least of all to investors. What is evil?"
I think you're looking at this upside down. You are essentially saying that they are not compelled to comply with their statement.
Well, you're correct of course, but that has nothing to do with what I was saying. It's a bit like the GPL. You are not compelled to obey the terms of the GPL. You can ignore it, and that's fine.
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:4, Informative)
Actually - the terms Marketing, Advertising, and Public Relations are all switched in and out as if they were the same - they're not. These are the definitions as they function in how I use them in my business. Your mileage may vary.
Advertising - The art/science of building/designing media that best leverages the media vehicle's strengths and weaknesses to deliver a message developed by marketing.
Marketing - Analyzing the current business/economic/social/cultural landscape to create/discover/define a target for a product or service. This target is in turn analyzed for the purpose of creating the most effective message to motivate the target to take a desired action.
Public Relations - The art/science of using Marketing and Advertising as applied methods for influencing public opinion, injecting a designed piece of "common knowldge" into a population, or damage control to make the consumer/revenue generating Marketing and Advertising initiatives of a company easier over the long run.
Inherently there is nothing evil about any of these things - the way companies use them is where the evil begins. Just as the wedge itself isn't evil. Its also not evil when you sharpen the edge and strap it to a stick. It still isn't evil when you cleave someones head with it - the weilder of it is. AND - the weilder is only evil if the cleaving was done out of malice or spite. Somehow I don't see self defense as evil.
Quit blaming disciplines as being inherently evil/good. Not only is it inaccurate, but it takes soe of the blame away from the companies who do evil things with these tools and distributes it amongst everyone using them - regardless of their use is ethical/moral or not.
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
I think advertising, by itself, is a necessity in most businesses. It's hard to sell stuff to people if they don't know about you. So when I google for something and a small text ad comes up showing a website where I can buy it, that's actually fairly useful. Advertising has been around for ages, ever since business has been around I would guess.
Marketing, however, I think,
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
While that is often the perception - your marketing department also works closely with product managers to make sure that no one is creating anything that there is no market for.
Lets take cars for example. Nissan makes really efficient and trustworthy vehicles (for the most part.) There were alot of people who wanted that reliability with a little more luxury. Nissan wants to sell these cars to the American public, but
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Huh? If I google for "sewing machine" and I get some text ads on the right directing me to places that sell sewing machines on the web, that's a Marketer that did that? You're telling me that someone needs to get a col
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Yep, because people don't just type in sewing machines. They type in Singer, Electric sewing machines, computerized sewing machines, ect...
The thing that the marketer does is analyzes the cost of bidding on a keyword, keeps track of the conversion rates, and makes sure each keyword maintains an acceptable cost of conversion and conversion rat
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
<sarcasm>
Huh? If I google for "sewing machine" and I get some text ads on the right directing me to places that se
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Truly, that is the oddest metaphor I've read this year.
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
Nope, the fact that they make a lot more lightbulbs then nukes... and I don't really have any issue with companies making nukes...
Nope... again, I would rather animal testin
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:1)
But, hey, we're all right jack, so the Chinese can whistle.
Re:Alexa, Google... Hmm, no difference *there*! (Score:2)
yeah right. let's just see what they do so they can operate in china. maybe with all the new ridiculous laws about data retention nowadays, it won't be long before the government will be getting their data without our knowledge (like at&t)
Google or MS (Score:2, Insightful)
Sony or Toshiba
Reps or Dems
Is it me or does pretty much any "choice" we have look like choosing between hanging and shooting?
Re:Google or MS (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Google or MS (Score:2)
It's you (Score:2)
Re:It's you (Score:2)
Re:Google or MS (Score:3, Insightful)
Bright or Dark
Sane or Insane
There are always two extremes to any choice but that doesn't limit the gamut of your decisions.
Re:Google or MS (Score:2)
Re:Google or MS (Score:2)
Actually, it does, because of its winner-takes-all scheme, and the fact that it doesn't have any type of proportional representation, run-off voting, etc. The Constitution was a fine document in its day, but the whole voting scheme needs to be completely re-engineered (as an Amendment would be fine). The problem is the two parties in power like things as they are.
You can vote for a 3rd party if you want, but unless half the pop
It's even worse than that (Score:2)
The voting system was all right in the 1800s, but it is by no means a true way of representing the opinion of the population. And that's what the idea behind it was.
Re:It's even worse than that (Score:2)
Other democratic governments in the world haven't been around as long as us, but since they don't have the legacy baggage we have, they have better systems of electing their g
Re:It's even worse than that (Score:2)
Just don't go overboard like it's been for a long time in Italy. There, the "bar" to overcome to get into the parlament was SO low that they had like 20 parties in the parlament. No wonder that no government survived the legislative period 'til recently. You had to find coalitions with 4, 5 or even more parties.
Here, as far as I know, it's 5%. You got 5% of the voters, y
Re:Google or MS (Score:2)
For the rest, I don't see an alternative. More and more "choice" gets redefined as "choosing the lesser of two evils".
a9 is now also powered by windows live search (Score:4, Informative)
Jeff Bezos shouldn't be criticised for buying class a stock at 6 cents. it wasn't a gift from Google, at the time it was Google needing his money.
Re:a9 is now also powered by windows live search (Score:1)
A9 [a9.com]
Google [google.com]
Re:a9 is now also powered by windows live search (Score:2)
I actually used A9 until this (Score:2, Interesting)
In case its relevant I'm in Australia.
I saw this change straight away... The "powered by Windows live" left a sick feeling in my stomach. So I switched immediately to the visible option for "powered by Google".
Today the Google option is no longer available. Even in the more choices section. I'm considering buying my books el
Re:I actually used A9 until this (Score:5, Interesting)
I tried to live with Windows Live search, although it's results weren't so great. But the loss of image results as well was a deal-breaker.
A9 has lost it's edge in some bizarre powerplay. They should have been shouting about their service, and instead you got there by accident from IMDb or Amazon. Now I have to go back to Google, and it's oh-so-bland results.
*sigh*
Re:I actually used A9 until this (Score:2, Interesting)
I think that means you're right. It's a powerplay. Bill has rung Jeff and said "Hey Google is bad for us both".
Buying books (Score:2)
Google vs. Amazon (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Google vs. Amazon (Score:2)
Re:Google vs. Amazon (Score:3, Interesting)
eBay Looking for Allies Against Google
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/21/185120 6 [slashdot.org]
Amazon to Take on Google?
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/26/199222 [slashdot.org]
and especially:
Google Base Retail Rumours Confirmed
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/16/153425 2 [slashdot.org]
Disgusting. (Score:3, Insightful)
My guess is that this is (the first of) a heavy-handed backlash at Google, orchestrated more by Microsoft and others trying to regain their momentum versus any actual competence for a change on Microsoft's part.
With the exception of Google Calendar, almost everything Google's done has been high-quality, search-related, plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face applications, and to dump Google for their core product (indexing the internet and keeping track of data, something that Google should PERSONALLY be in the best position to execute, is at best a misguided executive decision to get a kickback from Microsoft and at worse a direct pimp-slap to Google for pure spite.
Rotten tomatoes (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh - they do have one thing that reminds me of google - the small "Beta" in their logo
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:2)
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:1)
You know, what I actually hate most about it is the fact that the image buttons (Web, News, Images, etc.) are not links. Only the text is a link.
What image buttons? All I get is the Beta logo, an entry field, and a magnifying glass icon next to it. Otherwise, a blank page. Which is incidentally also what I get if I enter some search terms and hit ENTER. The last time I tried I also got this very mac-boot-spinner kind of small graphic, so I'm not even sure if this is an improvement or not.
I can't possi
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:2)
Seems broken to me.
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:2)
For example. After getting Live to work I asked it this question.
"Which is better windows or linux?"
The first result is
"Linux sucks..." - Written in 2001.
http://aplawrence.com/Bofcusm/873.html [aplawrence.com]
I tried the same on google.
"Windows vs Linux comparison" - Last updated 2006.
http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/Linux.vs.Windows.ht ml [michaelhorowitz.com]
Swapping Windows + Linux gets different results however Google appeared to understand what I was searching for and more up to date
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:1)
The article itself is a little out of date in that Linux has improved since 2001, but Windows has not (at least for the points I made there about being able to do difficult tasks), so the article still has validity.
But.. like you, I prefer Google sear
Re:Rotten tomatoes (Score:2)
> comments as recent as April of this year,
> so it is "up to date" in that sense.
Ahh ok sorry bout that. Most blog'ish type sites have the latest information at the top. Having "Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2001 08:35:04 -0400" at the top of the page makes it look just out of date and most wouldn't bother reading further if they are given more up to date information.
i thought you were kidding.. (Score:3, Informative)
Alexa is spyware? (Score:3, Informative)
You can read this page [imilly.com] to figure out how to configure it, or if you can just remove it altogether which was much easier to do.
Bezos leads Amazon, he is not Amazon (Score:5, Insightful)
Jeff Bezos is not the sole proprietor of Amazon. It would be unethical for Bezos to award business to Google in exchange for a personal favor that made him more wealthy. As head of Amazon, Bezos has a responsibility to the other shareholders of Amazon. If dumping Google for Windows Live Search to power Alexa is going to maximize shareholder value, then so be it.
Just because Halliburton gets no bid sweetheart contracts from friends in the government doesn't mean that this is how business should be run.
Re:Bezos leads Amazon, he is not Amazon (Score:2)
shareholder ROI ?
Just because this quarters revenue is up 50% doesnt mean 3 years down you will be even around!!
Look at altavista!!! tiny pie
Re:Bezos leads Amazon, he is not Amazon (Score:2)
I was discussing the impropriety of the quid pro quo that the summary suggests should occur. Which search engine a publicly traded company uses should be based on what is best for the company, not based on favors and material rewards given to the leader of that company by one of the search engine competitors.
typical liberal spin (Score:2)
Typical Republican spin (Score:2)
The Democrats really suck. They just don't suck quite as bad as the Republicans. Wonderful two-party system we have: we can choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.
Typical Fox viewer knee jerk reaction (Score:2)
For the record, I'm a registered Republican. I oppose Bush. He's doing such a crappy job that he's vastly increasing Senator Clinton's chances in 2008.
Doesnt microsoft part-own Amazon? (Score:2)
More piss poor speculation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:More piss poor speculation (Score:2)
Re:More piss poor speculation (Score:2)
Partners... (Score:4, Informative)
If anyone hasn't read the Google interview in Linux Format (Chris DiBona) I highly recommend it. It really does a good job of conveying Google's position on many issues. Regardless I can't see how most people on this forum would consider Google <= M$.
In a nutshell:
LXF: In what ways would you say that Google is sponsoring open source?
CD: Actually I don't like the word 'sponsoring'. I don't like sponsoring, I don't like 'subsidising', I don't like 'giving back'. The words I like are 'working with' them. We see them as our peers in computer science...
Maybe you don't believe this is 100% true, you can at least agree that Microsoft's position are opposite of this. Not only they not our peers in computer science, but they seem arrogant enough to think they can dictate computer science.
Re:Partners... (Score:2)
"Letting him buy stock"?!? (Score:5, Informative)
Either this is an intentional troll, or you have no clue about financial matters.
Bezos was an early investor in Google, when they were just getting off the ground. He gave them money ('angel funding') to allow them to expand. The agreement in that situation is that Mr. Bezos then owns a percentage of the company, giving him stock at a low price after an IPO.
Google didn't "let him buy" stock. Bezos invested in Google very early on, and he got big $$ when Google's stock went through the roof.
Re:"Letting him buy stock"?!? (Score:2)
Well, there are non-capitalist economic systems. But, yeah.
Not only that -- even more impressive, look at the date on the top of the news article.
it's true (Score:1)
Wow (Score:1)
Look Out Amazon (Score:1)
2 1/2 billion dollars at work (Score:3, Interesting)
Kylix (Score:2, Interesting)
This move, however, will not hurt the community as much as the 'kylix'. Borland has dropped support/development of this wonderful product for Linux due to the pressure from Microsoft.
Read This [freebyte.com]
From TFA:
It has been claimed that this was the result of a non-public agreement with Mi
Google Is the Competition (Score:2)
Re:Google Is the Competition (Score:1)
You make an excellent point, but Google won't mind shifting its ad revenue from partner sites (EBay, A9, etc) to Content sites ( davidsouther.com [davidsouther.com], euclideanspace.com [euclideanspace.com]), eg. the little man that has a blog/personal website with some content, and advertises with adsense.
If Google does this well, they will have their own little "Google Base" that includes a bunch of smaller websites, some buying and some selling ads, all through Google. Their brand loyalty will ensure that Google always has enough money to cont
I for one welcome our new Google overlords! (Score:2)
Note I sent to Amazon customer service (Score:1, Interesting)
A9 is powered by Windows Live (Score:2)
Microsoft ..... Google (Score:1, Informative)
Google's search is less relevant than Microsoft's (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not hoping for a shift for anyone to Microsoft's search technology but if Google continues to lose the battle to PageRank chasers, they'll find themselves slipping as users automatically attach Google to spam sites rather than relevant sites.
My home page is still Google (due to the customized interface), but I am more often using other search engines to combat the spammers. Is Amazon seeing a similar problem?
Powered by Google? No.. (Score:4, Informative)
Wall points out that 'A9 is still powered by Google...' A9 is Amazon's primary search project
Doesn't look like it to me [a9.com]
Top right corner - "Powered by Windows Live"
There isn't even the ability to add Google anymore. And their news search is now MSN News rather than Google News.
Google Still the Best (Score:4, Interesting)
The other 9 searches were similar. On google, I never go past the first 10 results to find the answer I'm looking for, regardless of language, technology, whatever Google always has the answer. On windows live, the first page is stuff with people who are paying for their links, or just by MS's bias they list "commercial" sites first in an effort to hold open source down. I never have used A9 but I never will now.
MSFT buying out Google contracts, ala Netscape? (Score:2)
Google is vulnerable. (Score:2)
Re:woo? (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:woo? (Score:2)
Re:So this is what it's come to? (Score:2)
Screw it. I'm making news today: Microsoft dumping MSN in favor of
Re:Google is competing with every web developer. (Score:2)
Re:Google is competing with every web developer. (Score:2)
Re:Google is competing with every web developer. (Score:2)
Moron.