Is Google the Microsoft of search engines?

> Linux is heroic, for instance. Using Windows is certainly
> unfortunate. For some people I'm sure using Windows is cowardly.

what about the pirate versions...?

On Saturday 20 August 2005 09:42, Total Brain Delete wrote:

>
>> Linux is heroic, for instance. Using Windows is certainly
>> unfortunate. For some people I'm sure using Windows is cowardly.
>
> what about the pirate versions...?

Piracy is said to be one of the factors that allowed Microsoft to grow
decades ago, thus disseminating their proprietary.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz "In hell, treason is the work of angels"
http://Schestowitz.com

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.infosystems.search and
alt.internet.search-engines]

begin quotation
from thatguy <a@b.c>
in message <3PudnfsbRM-4jTLfRVn-oQ@comcast.com>
> What I mean by that is, is Google trying to take over
> the search engine biz by using patents and buyouts and
> by trying to eliminate competition rather than respect
> the free market? Are they trying to gain ownership of
> patents for certain kinds of data mining techniques
> to prevent other companies using them?

I would expect so, but this is going to bite them in the ass one day.
Patents are available for the world to read, and expire after 20 years.

> I'm curious what you all think.
>
> And, I'm curious what you think are the long-term
> prospects of Google given the democratizing nature
> of the Internet.

I trust Google as much as I trust Microsoft, and to give you an idea
of just how much that is, I'm posting this from a Debian GNU/Linux
workstation behind an OpenBSD firewall. I usually use Scroogle (a Google
scraper set up by the guy that runs <http://www.google-watch.org>),
and for Usenet searches, Privoxy (<http://www.privoxy.org>) set up
to route all requests for the various Google domains through Tor
(<http://tor.eff.org>). Obviously, the cookies don't get accepted,
either.

--
___ _ _____ |*|
/ __| |/ / _ \ |*| Shawn K. Quinn
\__ \ ' < (_) | |*| skquinn@speakeasy.net
|___/_|\_\__\_\ |*| Houston, TX, USA

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.infosystems.search and
alt.internet.search-engines]

begin quotation
from Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com>
in message <de8pmq$22to$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>
posted at 2005-08-21T01:06
> On Saturday 20 August 2005 09:42, Total Brain Delete wrote:
>
>>
>>> Linux is heroic, for instance. Using Windows is certainly
>>> unfortunate. For some people I'm sure using Windows is cowardly.
>>
>> what about the pirate versions...?
>
> Piracy is said to be one of the factors that allowed Microsoft to grow
> decades ago, thus disseminating their proprietary.

Really? I had no idea that Microsoft was into the business of robbing
ships on the high seas.

If you mean to say unauthorized copying of Microsoft proucts, that's
not surprising, unfortunately; the desire to help one's neighbor
usually means that attempting to enforce fascist restrictions against
making copies is a losing battle. Even printing "Do Not Make Illegal
Copies Of This Disc" didn't really help.

I'll get closer to topic in a moment, but I should note here this is
the exact same reason that Microsoft (or any software company that
sells binaries only and prohibits copying) should not be allowed to
pay off a judgement against them for illegal activity in merchandise.

Getting back to the topic at hand, there are few parallels to be
drawn. I guess you could call Scroogle and/or routing Google queries
via Tor the rough equivalent of making unauthorized copies of Windows.
However, the business model is entirely different; Google does
not charge the end users per query, they make their money through
advertising (and possibly, by selling information about what their
users search for, but I won't open that can of worms). For a while, I
exclusively used other search engines, such as Alltheweb and Altavista
(which I think are now owned by the same company that owns Yahoo).

--
___ _ _____ |*|
/ __| |/ / _ \ |*| Shawn K. Quinn
\__ \ ' < (_) | |*| skquinn@speakeasy.net
|___/_|\_\__\_\ |*| Houston, TX, USA