3 Reasons Why Google Will Be More Valuable Than Microsoft

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Think Computers has an editorial posted today that explains why they think Google will become more valuable than Microsoft. What do you think? Will Google surpass Microsoft?

However, some investment analysts are predicting Google will be bigger and more valuable than Microsoft, why is this? The answer lies in what can only be called the startup culture of Google, or as has been coined, the dynamic corporation. First, let’s take a quick look at the journey of the Google stock before looking at three reasons why Google could very well be more valuable in the near future.
Click to expand...
 
not sure, only reason I can think of why google is valuable is Big Data, literally they are Big Data :D , but when it comes to Enterprise productivity solutions, MS is still way ahead though, and that Enterprise key point is what makes Microsoft valuable
 
If Microsoft keeps making stupid decisions like Windows 8 then yes Google will beat them.
 
fdiaz78 said:
If Microsoft keeps making stupid decisions like Windows 8 then yes Google will beat them.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, because 1 OS that is not doing well in the consumer market will mean the end for all of their multitude of enterprise solutions which is all their value comes from. Yes, Windows 8 much like Microsofts other consumer flops will be the end for them....oh wait.
 
Without Bing I would have said yeah, Google wins in the end because of all the Big Data they have.

But *with* Bing, Microsoft now has access to the same massive datasets that they do to extrapolate whatever they want to out of it. No other companies besides Microsoft and Google can do this at this point.

On the side of OSes - I think Windows will eventually surpass Android as the "mass-market" touch OS - their direction and guidance, and developer support is just light years ahead of what Google is bringing with Android and people are noticing (I don't concern myself with Desktop use cases, and neither do most modern devs, because that is now a legacy industry serviced by Microsoft, Oracle, Red Hat, etc.).

iOS might still hold the high end as it does now, but we will see - rumors are that they already want to replace Tim Cook...wow already?

Disclaimer: troll my comment and you will burn
 
lot of microsoft profit is their account software licenses for different corporations. wonder will google later make one that fits better than microsoft.
 
8du8 said:
Oh yes, because 1 OS that is not doing well in the consumer market will mean the end for all of their multitude of enterprise solutions which is all their value comes from. Yes, Windows 8 much like Microsofts other consumer flops will be the end for them....oh wait.
Click to expand...

lrn2reed

he didn't say "Microsoft is now doomed because of Windows 8"....he said that if they KEEP making stupid decisions like Win8, they will be in trouble. in a corporation the size of MS with their diversification, no, 1 flop in one market will not mean the end....it's the accumulated effect of multiple bad decisions that will really hurt them. whether that actually happens or not remains to be seen.
 
heatlesssun said:
I was just pointing out that desktop Windows only accounts for roughly 25% of Microsoft's revenue.
Click to expand...
But the majority of it is from business licensing. If Microsoft keeps releasing half-ass operating systems like Windows 8, those of us who license thousands of desktops on a yearly basis may switch to Chromebooks and Google apps.

I really wanted to use Windows 8 across our network but I can't because of Microsoft's arrogance. For as great as 7 is, I'm stuck using a 4 year old OS.
 
This article is retarded. Share price and value have nothing to do with one another. Look at google, 800 dollars a share with a market cap of 264bln. Microsoft is 31 dollars a share with a market cap of 258 bln. Not much difference. Stock price is an indicator of growth. Eventually everyone turns into Microsoft, it is simply the way the business life cycle is.
 
Microsoft stills own the Enterprise. If you told any CPA accountant to use open source excel (openoffice or Google docs) they would laugh in your face. Plus Active Directory is there because it works and most enterprise products will play nice with AD. Why would an IT department give that up?
 
8du8 said:
Oh yes, because 1 OS that is not doing well in the consumer market will mean the end for all of their multitude of enterprise solutions which is all their value comes from. Yes, Windows 8 much like Microsofts other consumer flops will be the end for them....oh wait.
Click to expand...

Because chilling effect. They may continue to coast on inertia for the foreseeable future but if they don't reestablish the dialog with corporate and longtime desktop users that need choice back in Windows, the heart will be cut out of the co.
 
blinx said:
Microsoft stills own the Enterprise. If you told any CPA accountant to use open source excel (openoffice or Google docs) they would laugh in your face. Plus Active Directory is there because it works and most enterprise products will play nice with AD. Why would an IT department give that up?
Click to expand...

Exactly, nobody is even close to MS in the enterprise or even the SMB area.

Nothing on the market can do what Active Directory does and is as integrated into so many 3rd party products. Also like you said, nothing else can touch Microsoft Office.

Also, Metro Interface on Windows 8 sucks, but Metro Interface/Server Manager on Server 2012 is fucking amazing. Server 2012 is the best server OS in terms of ease of use and management bar none.
 
People seem to think lots of things are 'too big to fail'. Yet, here we are in a world littered with such companies on the wayside. Or paid for by taxpayers to keep running.

Microsoft hasn't made enough stupid decisions to kill themselves yet. They're just at the point where their stock has hit a brick wall and has stagnated. And, certainly part of that are the various losses in their markets. Windows Server has been chipped away at for decades and now the web is run almost entirely on *nix servers. Other local servers are also going that way, such as database, VM hosts, and such. Server 2012 is on the same boat as Windows 8 for the corporate world.

But, far more important is to admit that Windows 8 is not Microsoft's first blunder. In fact, they've made quite a few costly ones as of recent. Zune, anyone? Or, how about Vista? Financially, it dug them a big hole that Windows 7 paved the way out of it. Windows ME? Took XP and the massive costs associated with supporting moving their corporate users that remained on DOS-based systems to move to NT. That was not cheap to support, cost them tons of time and money. Xbox has also cost them a pretty hefty amount of money, partly from initial losses by undercutting the price at launch and then the costs of replacing so many systems. They can't afford to do that again. And I daresay they can't afford making it always online. If that particular rumor stays true, it will bite them no matter how nicely they try to spin it.

Office has been very important for Microsoft but they've been playing games with that too. Honestly, like Windows 8, there aren't many convincing reasons to get people (companies too) to switch from Office 2010 to 2013. There's the whole new 365 thing with Skydrive but that's iffy too. For students it's a brilliant deal, two PCs for 4 years for $80 and always up to date. But for everyone else? $100 a year for 5 PCs is good but a lot of people see that "per year" and get turned off. Big time. One other thing that bothered people with Office 2013 is Outlook and that they now have to get a business license to get it as it is no longer in the Home and Student version. Then there is the mess of Office on other platforms. They brag about Office 365 working on 'other platforms' than Mac and Windows and it turns out to be... Windows Phone. Which has sold well enough to retain Microsoft's token 2% market share.
 
blitzkommando said:
Microsoft hasn't made enough stupid decisions to kill themselves yet. They're just at the point where their stock has hit a brick wall and has stagnated. And, certainly part of that are the various losses in their markets. Windows Server has been chipped away at for decades and now the web is run almost entirely on *nix servers. Other local servers are also going that way, such as database, VM hosts, and such. Server 2012 is on the same boat as Windows 8 for the corporate world.
Click to expand...

Microsoft's servers and tools division has continued to grow.
 
leeleatherwood said:
Also, Metro Interface on Windows 8 sucks, but Metro Interface/Server Manager on Server 2012 is fucking amazing. Server 2012 is the best server OS in terms of ease of use and management bar none.
Click to expand...

Server 2012 would be alot easier to use without the Metro Interface.

The 2008 R2 desktop is much easier to use, especially when running under remote desktop.
 
heatlesssun said:
Microsoft's servers and tools division has continued to grow.
Click to expand...

Not that I necessarily disagree but what is your definition of growth? They may be more profitable now but the Windows server user base is nonexistent in the single most important growth sector of server's right now. The "cloud".

So yeah they might be holding there own in corporate email servers and the like, maybe even growing. They are getting massacred on the web though in every measurable way at this point though. As more and more business becomes web centric this doesn't bode well for them.
 
nutzo said:
Server 2012 would be alot easier to use without the Metro Interface.

The 2008 R2 desktop is much easier to use, especially when running under remote desktop.
Click to expand...

Negative, Server 2012 RDP is amazing. I did a test here at my work and none of the other system admins could immediately discern the difference between a local Server 2012 desktop and the RDP session.

People need to just learn to hit the Windows Key instead of trying to click on the start button, its that easy.

There is no way someone can honestly say they would rather use 2008 than 2012 for managing multiple servers.
 
bigdogchris said:
But the majority of it is from business licensing. If Microsoft keeps releasing half-ass operating systems like Windows 8, those of us who license thousands of desktops on a yearly basis may switch to Chromebooks and Google apps.
Click to expand...

Yea, that's not happening.
 
bigdogchris said:
those of us who license thousands of desktops on a yearly basis may switch to Chromebooks and Google apps.
Click to expand...

Throwing out Windows also throws out all the investments in software and training of said software that are on Windows, not just MS stuff. That's just not happening.
 
It'll be great for Google if companies do convert more heavily to Chromebooks. Since most information processed on a Chromebook has to travel through and gets stored on Google-owned server farms where it can be mined, it'll give Google a clear advantage. Microsoft is trailing at the exploitation of user data for additional revenue. Even Facebook takes better advantage of profiling, catgorizing, and just plain gawking at you while you take a rose-scented bubble bath than Microsoft.

Oh, and no one is buying conventional desktop or laptop computers these days thanks in part to Microsoft operating system user interface problems.
 
Ghettobox said:
So yeah they might be holding there own in corporate email servers and the like, maybe even growing. They are getting massacred on the web though in every measurable way at this point though. As more and more business becomes web centric this doesn't bode well for them.
Click to expand...

I think massacred isn't really the right term. Sure, there's lots of people running FOSS on servers these days. That stuff isn't raking in billions a quarter for the Linux distro providers generally.
 
Google will win in the end because of their diversity. Self driving cars, google glass, fiber, android, machine learning, etc all show that they are willing to go full bore into new territory (for them or for anyone). In just 5 years they will already be in so many more places than they are now, and in large ways like with android, that I doubt MS could catch up. It is just not their corporate culture. I like MS/windows and can't see myself moving to a chromebook anytime soon, but the speed at which android turned from worthless into the dominant mobile platform (number wise) shows how fast google adapts, so who knows.
 
Google's going to get competitors in whole new fields if they get much more diverse. Google vs GE soon?
 
heatlesssun said:
I think massacred isn't really the right term. Sure, there's lots of people running FOSS on servers these days. That stuff isn't raking in billions a quarter for the Linux distro providers generally.
Click to expand...

Tell that to amazon and google just to name a few.
 
leeleatherwood said:
Negative, Server 2012 RDP is amazing. I did a test here at my work and none of the other system admins could immediately discern the difference between a local Server 2012 desktop and the RDP session.

People need to just learn to hit the Windows Key instead of trying to click on the start button, its that easy.

There is no way someone can honestly say they would rather use 2008 than 2012 for managing multiple servers.
Click to expand...

Actually I disagree tested Server 2012 and its not any better. Maybe with Lan link its better but on a slow wan link is really not that good. Windows 8 is just complete shit on a slow wan link.
 
This very same article was posted some years ago.. and then Windows 7 came out. And desktop is just one aspect of Microsoft. Windows Server / AD, Exchange, SQL Server, IIS, SharePoint, Lync, Xbox, etc.

Google does one thing well.. search. Ok, two things.. they buy companies and then close them down.
 
Wrench00 said:
Actually I disagree tested Server 2012 and its not any better. Maybe with Lan link its better but on a slow wan link is really not that good. Windows 8 is just complete shit on a slow wan link.
Click to expand...

I do not excuse your ignorance and incompetence.

Every RDP protocol version is complete shit on a slow WAN line. You think a newer RDP protocol is going to make your shitty WAN line any faster? :rolleyes:

Test Server 2012 RDP over a LAN verses 2008, its much better.
 
Will Google expand to the toiletries market? When can I expect my toilet to make Google search inquiries when I drop a load?
 
hellokeith said:
This very same article was posted some years ago.. and then Windows 7 came out. And desktop is just one aspect of Microsoft. Windows Server / AD, Exchange, SQL Server, IIS, SharePoint, Lync, Xbox, etc.

Google does one thing well.. search. Ok, two things.. they buy companies and then close them down.
Click to expand...

*ding* I bolded their big killers. Lync is actually a great UC platform. Nobody actually matches SQL Server. or AD/Exchange. and I hear awful and amazing things about Sharepoint, just like you do about Exchange.



google does alot, sure, and alot of it is half assed and shitty.

I was so happy to leave my last job 6 months after they went google.



gmail is great for about the first 300 messages, and the web aps arent as good as office 365, let alone actual office.

hotmail before the outlook.com changeover was far superior for actual usage with filters and real goddamn folders, and it was linked to skydrive years ago.

The core things people(consumers) love about google services, gmail, drive, apps, microsoft does better with hotmail/outlook, skydrive, office web apps

Hyper-V 2.0 Rivals many of ESXi's best features at a much lowre price point. With Azure and cloud services they have gone 'to the cloud' as well as anybody

MS just doesnt market this stuff to consumers as much like google does, they market it to actual IT Pros, constantly.

you think MS wants you to get nerf'd to tablets and smartphones? thats googles game. then you have to rely on their services because they shoe horned you into hardware that cant do anything real.

not that google doesnt do some cool shit btw. I am on my 3rd android phone. I use sketchup a TON

but if I had to actually rely on them for day to day computing (google apps, gmail, chrome book) I would slit my wrists
 
leeleatherwood said:
I do not excuse your ignorance and incompetence.

Every RDP protocol version is complete shit on a slow WAN line. You think a newer RDP protocol is going to make your shitty WAN line any faster? :rolleyes:

Test Server 2012 RDP over a LAN verses 2008, its much better.
Click to expand...

Actually I have no problems with WAN link when I connect to any other server of a predecessor of 8. Metro is the problem it doesn't scale down like 7 or even xp. I've have been using TS since NT 4.0 and Citrix ICA and guess what the WAN links were even slower then and I had no issues RDPing into machines.

You might have a RDP 2012 Server in Test Environment guess what I have them in production. Luckily I don't run any VDI with 8 with MS so I don't have a problem what so ever everything works fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top