What’s not microsoft about them.
They’re the name everybody thinks of when you think of the biggest mover in the sector for the past bunch
of years. They are a huge goliath of a company. They are trying to take over desktop office applications, they are trying to take over the browser, so they can do more stuff on your desktop (if they were truly not evil
they’d have helped an existing product).
They make more money than anybody else in their market.
I rather thought everybody figured they were already the next microsoft.
IBM is like britian, once on top and now happily living life as a very successful has been.
saying they’re trying to ‘take over’ desktop office applications is subjective. would you say that any company who offers a suite of products is trying to take over that market area?
and even if so, is that evil or just capitalistic? maybe you say that b/c of google’s size and limitless resources, that going into any market niche is inherently an attempt to take it over. but if you follow that logic, you’re basically saying google should not create any software at all. which then is saying google should just do search and sell ads and should be forbidden from pursuing any other endeavors.
but there is your contradiction, artificially forbidding an enterprise from free trade is in my opinion even more evil. especially since google is an innovator, they push new areas, they champion a switch from legacy desktop apps to thin client. i personally think that’s all positive.
if anything, they are fostering competition. if their online office apps ever get to the point that they rival desktop office apps, that will bring down the price of desktop apps, good news for consumers!
in closing, itseems to me google, while not pure as the driven snow, is one of the more conscientious and integrity-ious companies in the world. fostering fear of them b/c of their size is alarmist, they could just as easily do good with their power but that doesn’t seem to be factored into your message.