http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html en-gb 30 Mon 21 Dec 2009 17:01:28 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=18#comment9 Google can rule the roost if they did just one thing....Created a Internet Operating system. Essentially a dummy terminal but ofcourse some people would like to keep their data private and in their homes and so a Hard Drive can still be handy. BIOS is capable of network card booting, whether it is PXE or whatever.It won't replace Windows, Mac or Linux anytime soon but it is the start of what will happen in the future! Cloud computing? No thanks, this is Cloud super-computing about to be born!Other things would be needed such as the ability to play games like Doom 3 or Crysis etc (probably a running service that would already exist on a dedicated server somewhere... you just pay your £35 one-off payment and you can always access the game).Now I truly believe this is being developed in Google's labs.... but everyone thinks I am crazy! Is it really so crazy to think the Internet will become our Operating System in the future? Regardless of it being 5, 10, 20 years away? Wed 07 Jan 2009 17:02:22 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=16#comment8 What I've been hearing from rival mafia is that Eric Schmitdt owes his success largely to a global network of mobster friends. They also say that he was directly responsible for the 'obscene amounts of money' made by promoting child pornography produced by some of these people. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] Wed 07 Jan 2009 12:29:16 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=14#comment7 "The cost of pay-per-click, (for example), on Google has gone through the roof in the past couple of years. Businesses are now paying two, three and sometimes five times as much for the exact same results.This artificially pushes up prices, as companies try to recoup some of the their advertising increases by charging more for their products."The cost of advertising on Google has actually gone up from what was a very cheap source of advertising to something more comparable with press, TV, direct mail and so on. The difference is search allows such a depth of understanding and Google have made the most of this. Then consider they have not made such inroads in other services they have been developing - openoffice still vastly outranks the Google office pack whilst Microsoft is by far a leader, desktop search is a mess and what about all those promises from the labs???Yes they have got a good search package, but as mentioned in the blog - it's one small part of a very big world. Tue 20 May 2008 19:09:29 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=12#comment6 Come on: Google ARE too powerful in advertising.They 'own' the vast majority of online search traffic and search related ads. It's a fact! If you don't believe me GOOGLE IT! :)They currently offer the most powerful and accurate search product available and this, on merit, is why they have become a near monopoly for search and search advertising.Why should this bother us?Because, with the largest and smallest businesses on the planet now advertising on Google, advertising on Google is becoming increasing important for businesses and increasingly expensive.The cost of pay-per-click, (for example), on Google has gone through the roof in the past couple of years. Businesses are now paying two, three and sometimes five times as much for the exact same results.This artificially pushes up prices, as companies try to recoup some of the their advertising increases by charging more for their products.I am NOT a Microsoft fan, but I hope that they and Yahoo can combine to make the online search advertising marketplace a bit more competitive.Google search is excellent and they offer some fantastic products; but I cannot believe they are still claiming that they are not too powerful in online advertising - They SOOOOOOO are!Jim Connollywww.thetechnewsblog.com Tue 20 May 2008 12:29:10 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=10#comment5 I never quite get Google - I have used all their services for free since 2006 and have never clicked on sponsored advertising, or given them any revenue in anyway. Yet someone sits there maintaining my calender, email, reader and all the services for free. I have seen in business many times where a technical brilliant person is just not good as a "front ender" and brings in a businessman with the skills to sell the company and what it does. Tue 20 May 2008 11:11:33 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=8#comment4 Google "our success isn't down to the strong-arm tactics" What would you call their recent stance on trademarking?Not giving companies and brands sufficient time to budget for or protect their trademark on googles paid search in my view is a "strong arm tactic". Despite this personal view, I do believe Google adds a lot to the online world and is probably the reason why so many businesses are doing well online. Tue 20 May 2008 10:55:31 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=6#comment3 Rather disappointingly, rembrandt22 appears to be a server robot pushing the same message wherever a blog mentions google or MSN...do a quick search online and you'll see EXACTLY the same message popping up all over the place. Hardly the ethical guru apparent at first glance!However, despite the cyborg reality, the principle of technology-for-ecology is robust! Tue 20 May 2008 10:03:39 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=4#comment2 aboylearningDon't blame the messenger for the message!It's not that the "BBC try to present Google as a very noble company" - if you read this blog and there other coverage it's quite balanced.The problem is that Google are good at presenting themselves in a favourable light and Microsoft are hopeless at it, despite all their billions. And MS commercial policies are often difficult to defend whereas Google clearly provide a service people want, free at the point of use.I'm nonetheless a fan of MS - they have done a huge amount for technical and commercial progress in the world. But I'm realistic about their abilitity to continue to do that in the future, or ever to be loved.They need to more altruistic stuff like offering XP very cheap on laptops for the third world if they want people to love them.And nothing will persuade me that we need Vista. Tue 20 May 2008 09:37:55 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=2#comment1 What i actually have not understand why BBC try to present Google as a very noble company and Microsoft was some kind EVIL company. Tue 20 May 2008 08:31:04 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/05/meeting_googles_threesome.html?page=0#comment0 Well, don´t know about you, but personally I surf with treehoo.com the web that plants trees for most of its profit. What a simple and genious way to help our planet. Can any other webportal beat that? Mon 19 May 2008 21:47:22 GMT+1