Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Jun 2007 09:36 UTC, submitted by Deron
Windows Microsoft agreed Tuesday to make changes to the desktop search feature in Windows Vista in an effort to assuage Google and head off a further antitrust battle with U.S. regulators. Under the agreement, Microsoft will create a mechanism whereby both computer makers and individuals will be able to choose a default desktop search program, much as they can choose a rival browser or media player, even though those technologies are built into Windows.
Thread beginning with comment 249274
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Like I've said
by Nelson on Wed 20th Jun 2007 15:02 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

I think this is a stupid idea.

First off, you can turn off Vista's search using APIs, there are some articles that show how to do this.

You can also simply stop the Indexer service.

Since when did Microsoft have to bend over backwards and allow Google to plug things in and out of the Operating System? What problem is there with the two coexisting if one is able to be turned off?

It's not really a bigger issue now that Microsoft has complied to their stupid demands, but it's the principal of the matter.

They can complain about silly things like this, and generate an insane amount of FUD while doing it.

Windows Vista's search was in no way hurting your product, and the changes they've made are marginal. All they did was made what you could of previously done work even more integrated.

Personally, I don't want this extra crap clogging up my Vista PC because Google couldn't run a few simple API calls from an Installer to turn off Window's Indexer and then rebuild their own.

Like a poster before said, they both have their ups and down. Previous Windows OSes don't have this issue, so Google still has a WIDE OPEN MARKET.

People complained when Microsoft didn't include instant search, now people complain when they do? I just don't get it.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Like I've said
by Matzon on Wed 20th Jun 2007 15:20 in reply to "Like I've said"
Matzon Member since:
2005-07-06

"Since when did Microsoft have to bend over backwards"
They're a monopoly, different rules apply.

" and allow Google to plug things in and out of the Operating System? What problem is there with the two coexisting if one is able to be turned off? "
Since they did it with their email, browser and Java - why shouldn't they do it with their search index?

Face it, they made their desktop search tool. They failed to get market dominance, then they build it into their OS - tada, classic strategy. They do it all the time. Messenger, Internet Explorer, .NET etc etc.
They could choose to license and use others, but instead they choose to make their own and TIE it to Windows (this is the important bit). Microsoft hates when people make crossplatform stuff, because then they lose licenses.

Of course people will argue that its their OS, they can do what they want. And thats true, but since they're a monopoly they cant. SkyOS can, BeOS can, Mac OS X. If one of those OS'es ever becomes a monopoly, then they too would get other rules to play by. Competition and a fair playing field.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Like I've said
by Bit_Rapist on Wed 20th Jun 2007 15:21 in reply to "Like I've said"
Bit_Rapist Member since:
2005-11-13

Windows Vista's search was in no way hurting your product, and the changes they've made are marginal. All they did was made what you could of previously done work even more integrated.

The argument they are putting forth is that MS has the ability to tie into the OS in ways that google cannot, such as the search bar on the start menu for instance. This creates an unfair advantage in google's eyes.

Personally, I don't want this extra crap clogging up my Vista PC because Google couldn't run a few simple API calls from an Installer to turn off Window's Indexer and then rebuild their own.

So they should have to resort to window hooking and other *hacks* just to have a chance at competing in desktop search?

Windows is more than just some product, its a software platform.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Like I've said
by Nelson on Wed 20th Jun 2007 21:18 in reply to "RE: Like I've said"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You classify Hacks as a public API? Get a grip.

Reply Parent Score: 1