Mozilla executive tells Firefox users to use Bing



we could burn the building down

milton1.jpg


Edit: btw... i found this pic using Bing
 
Lord B said:
Seriously, they make business schools for your kind. Get street smart enough to realize the truth of business rather than live in a fantasy world. Well lets just have time prove you wrong.
Click to expand...

Listen, arguing about this is fucking retarded because none of us know what is going to happen. For every business that has folded to competition there is ten that have held their ground.

I'm making a judgement based on the current market, what Google have to offer currently to their users and concepts they are developing.

Of course I could be wrong and maybe something will topple Google; but not only will it be extremely difficult - there will have to be some major enhancements in both user functionality and features.

The difference between AOL and Google is that AOL did nothing to evolve, sat on their arses and watched while the internet passed them by. Google are tuned into, and are evolving web technologies; I find it seriously hard to believe that they are going to stand still in a similar way to AOL etc.

And slickcooldude:
Yahoo AOL Ask Friendster Myspace are not Google you ass. The reason they became null and void is because something better came along.
 
Lord B said:
As were altavista and Yahoo! once... As was Standard Oil once... As was AOL once...
Click to expand...

Agreed. Google is going in too many directions at once: email, browsers, OS, phones, etc. etc... not good for a company's long term viability. That, and biting the hand that feeds it.
 
megatabbers said:
Agreed. Google is going in too many directions at once: email, browsers, OS, phones, etc. etc... not good for a company's long term viability. That, and biting the hand that feeds it.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that is total crap. Google have proven time and again that they are market leaders in developing new concepts in totally unrelated fields and making them work.

If it was bad for long term viability Google would be dust and ashes by now. It is their diversification that has made them the powerhouse they are today.
 
Maitiú said:
I'm sorry that is total crap. Google have proven time and again that they are market leaders in developing new concepts in totally unrelated fields and making them work.

If it was bad for long term viability Google would be dust and ashes by now. It is their diversification that has made them the powerhouse they are today.
Click to expand...

You need to get hip to the effect of line-extension and its detrimental effects (proven time and time again). Here's a good read for you:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Brands-Product-Evolution-Possibilities/dp/0060570156/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260551824&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: The Origin of Brands: How Product Evolution Creates Endless Possibilities for New Brands (9780060570156): Al Ries, Laura Ries: Books[/ame]
 
DanGlobalizer said:
I pretty much only use Chrome. It's so much faster than IE/Firefox, it has better tabbed browsing (IMO), and I like the fact that you can have icons of your favorite sites (instead of folders). Plus, you can move around the tabs, unlike IE/FF.
Click to expand...

Magic Hat said:
I don't know what version of FF you're using, but you can move the tabs in FF too... also, I find FF crashes much less than Chrome (and this was before Chrome extensions)
Click to expand...

Tabs can be moved in the current version of Internet Explorer also.
 
slickcooldude said:
Maitiu in 1997: Yahoo is going nowhere folks.

Maitiu in 1999: AOL is going nowhere folks.

Maitiu in 2001: Ask is going nowhere folks.

Maitiu in 2003: Friendster is going nowhere folks.

Maitiu in 2005: Myspace is going nowhere folks

go home.
Click to expand...

i lol'd

Maitiú said:
Yahoo AOL Ask Friendster Myspace are not Google you ass. The reason they became null and void is because something better came along.
Click to expand...

i rofl'd
 
megatabbers said:
You need to get hip to the effect of line-extension and its detrimental effects (proven time and time again). Here's a good read for you:

Amazon.com: The Origin of Brands: How Product Evolution Creates Endless Possibilities for New Brands (9780060570156): Al Ries, Laura Ries: Books
Click to expand...

Ordered the book looks interesting.

I have a fair idea what your talking about though, line-extensions beneficial elements far outweigh any detrimental factors due to the fact that its Google were talking about, not some run of the mill technology company.

Would you say the same for a company such as IBM? Their technology continues to grow and evolve and there is absolutely no sign of them being toppled by anyone.

I would judge their market position similar to Googles in their relative fields.
 
Magic Hat said:
This is why Google is diversifying their core competencies. Instead of just focusing on search, they have expanded to TV advertising, mobile (Android), etc. No offense, but I think it's a bit short-sighted to say that it will just take a better search engine to totally bring down Google (unless you just meant taking them down from the #1 search spot, of course).
Click to expand...

Perhaps I was a bit short sighted ... or perhaps I was spot on. I'm talking strictly revenue, which is the bottom line for any mega-corporation.

Android, gmail, wave, etc will all follow the exact same revenue paradigm it currently has. That's not diversity my friend. True, they can always change the way they monetize but since they've been biting the hand that feeds them (google ban anyone?) for so long, advertisers are fleeing from their platform.

Less competition = less click price = declining revenue.

The only thing google has expanded it's widget making ability, that will allow them to die a slow and painful death.

I stand behind my statement. If you take down search, you take down the beast.
 
Maitiú said:
Ordered the book looks interesting.

I have a fair idea what your talking about though, line-extensions beneficial elements far outweigh any detrimental factors due to the fact that its Google were talking about, not some run of the mill technology company.

Would you say the same for a company such as IBM? Their technology continues to grow and evolve and there is absolutely no sign of them being toppled by anyone.

I would judge their market position similar to Googles in their relative fields.
Click to expand...

Well... I'm no expert (other than reading most of Ries's book which I highly recommend to everyone) but it seems that line-extension benefits a company in the short-run due to increased sales/market-share while hurting it in the long run.

Interesting how you mentioned IBM. There's plenty of info in that book about how IBM has screwed up and what it should have done. Again, I'm no expert but Ries points out the situation in such a logical order that it makes sense. You'll see what I mean when you read the book.

Another example he mentions is Porsche. They own the category of luxury sports car but they're messing it up with the Cayenne and the Panamera trying to get larger market share. On the other hand, Toyota puts out the Lexus - massive success because they omitted Toyota's brand on it.

I guess the biggest take-away is this: when you attempt to stand for everything you end up standing for nothing. So, according to Ries a company shouldn't use it's brand to enter new markets, but rather create a new brand (e.g. like Toyota/Lexus).

Google owns the category of search in the consumer's mind: "Google it!" but they're watering down their brand by using it on so many other things.
 
erect said:
Perhaps I was a bit short sighted ... or perhaps I was spot on. I'm talking strictly revenue, which is the bottom line for any mega-corporation.

Android, gmail, wave, etc will all follow the exact same revenue paradigm it currently has. That's not diversity my friend. True, they can always change the way they monetize but since they've been biting the hand that feeds them (google ban anyone?) for so long, advertisers are fleeing from their platform.

Less competition = less click price = declining revenue.

The only thing google has expanded it's widget making ability, that will allow them to die a slow and painful death.

I stand behind my statement. If you take down search, you take down the beast.
Click to expand...

And being replaced with the equivalent inside Google. Affiliate/Sales cash will go straight into Googles pocket, which will more than replace revenue garnered from advertising.

I think we all have come to the conclusion that Google wants in on the affiliate action, and why wouldn't they, it would be an endless cash cow.
 
JoshTodd said:
Maitiu = Matt Cutts?
Click to expand...

Hah, Listen I want the fuckers to crash and burn as much as anyone else here, it's in my interests for it to do so.

That does not mean I'm going to sit back and wait for Google to be trounced on search, because it's no sure thing.

We should all be adjusting to the changes Google has made and using them to our advantage, standing idly by and hoping for some Bing revolution is pointless.
 
Maitiú said:
Listen, arguing about this is fucking retarded because none of us know what is going to happen. For every business that has folded to competition there is ten that have held their ground.

I'm making a judgement based on the current market, what Google have to offer currently to their users and concepts they are developing.

Of course I could be wrong and maybe something will topple Google; but not only will it be extremely difficult - there will have to be some major enhancements in both user functionality and features.

The difference between AOL and Google is that AOL did nothing to evolve, sat on their arses and watched while the internet passed them by. Google are tuned into, and are evolving web technologies; I find it seriously hard to believe that they are going to stand still in a similar way to AOL etc.

And slickcooldude:
Yahoo AOL Ask Friendster Myspace are not Google you ass. The reason they became null and void is because something better came along.
Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen such drool coming off of Eric Schmidt's cock. Seriously, do you have 6000 posts on digg? How can you seriously think that an internet business is different from any other? We've seen that's not true. And how do you know Google is doing everything to evolve? All they're doing is spitting out "web 2.0" products and spreading themselves thin. How do you know what the next wave is?
 
erect said:
Perhaps I was a bit short sighted ... or perhaps I was spot on. I'm talking strictly revenue, which is the bottom line for any mega-corporation.

Android, gmail, wave, etc will all follow the exact same revenue paradigm it currently has. That's not diversity my friend. True, they can always change the way they monetize but since they've been biting the hand that feeds them (google ban anyone?) for so long, advertisers are fleeing from their platform.

Less competition = less click price = declining revenue.

The only thing google has expanded it's widget making ability, that will allow them to die a slow and painful death.

I stand behind my statement. If you take down search, you take down the beast.
Click to expand...

Do you have any metrics or proof of advertisiers fleeing from their platform? How many advertisers are affiliates and how many are businesses or ad agencies doing business on behalf of a client? I think more and more local businesses are using Google Adwords as they become more savvy, and natural search becomes tougher to rank in. I can see how affiliates might be fleeing, but most regular Adwords users aren't getting banned for their ads.

EDIT: I also think as real-time search takes over, we will see an influx of new Adwords users as their site used to show up at the top of the SERPs but has been overtaken by some stupid fucking Twitter feed or other real-time bullshit blog post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erect
papajohn56 said:
Wow, I don't think I've ever seen such drool coming off of Eric Schmidt's cock. Seriously, do you have 6000 posts on digg? How can you seriously think that an internet business is different from any other? We've seen that's not true. And how do you know Google is doing everything to evolve? All they're doing is spitting out "web 2.0" products and spreading themselves thin. How do you know what the next wave is?
Click to expand...

I don't pretend to know what the next wave is, but the Bing army in here is ridiculous, its like - "Lets all tell each other Bing will overtake Google and then it'll happen. We will be back to promoting Acai and Grants on search in no time."

I'm just being realistic. Although as I said, I hope Google crash and burn.
 
Maitiú said:
I don't pretend to know what the next wave is, but the Bing army in here is ridiculous, its like - "Lets all tell each other Bing will overtake Google and then it'll happen. We will be back to promoting Acai and Grants on search in no time."

I'm just being realistic. Although as I said, I hope Google crash and burn.
Click to expand...

Something is going to take over Google one day. It's delusional to think otherwise. All it takes is one wrong move, or one real PR gaffe (this one may have pissed off nerds, but not the public) - or just a better product.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/09...-set-to-surpass-mcdonalds-in-number-of-resta/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom