Microsoft To Pay People To Search 203
kolicha writes "After the failed Yahoo bid, Microsoft is going to try a new approach to gain market share on their rivals Google. Sponsored links will be pay per purchase rather than pay per click, and search users will be offered 'cash back' on their purchases."
Nope, sorry. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nope, sorry. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nope, sorry. (Score:4, Insightful)
Just a slight correction to what you are saying. www.msn.com looks like Yahoo! but they also run www.live.com which is meant to mimic the google style. Microsoft marketing is confusing and uses the term "live" for their search engine and for their online endeavors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course all they were really doing is the the whole bullshit baffles brains thing and convincing management of why they are worth the bloated salaries. Now of course, you have to wonder which
Re: (Score:2)
Still, I would count it in the category of "search engine and online endeavors."
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nope, sorry. (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, I don't think that'd even do it anymore, unless it was somehow ridiculously better.
Google's been dominant for so long that its cultural inertia value would carry it a long, long way even if someone else came up with a better search tomorrow -- not that I expect Microsoft to do that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is no such thing as an insurmountable lead, especially on the internet. MSN's offering something compelling with money back for consumers and sales-based cost for advertisers. Advertisers have wanted this for a long time, it eliminates click fraud at the expense of putting the control into the hands of adve
Re:Nope, sorry. (Score:5, Insightful)
It really was worlds away from the competition, and I don't think they would have taken over like they did without a huge edge.
Re:Nope, sorry. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Altavista, hotmail, infoseek were not saved by it, they died very quickly as soon as better services appeared. And these better services weren't that ridiculously better. While cultural intertia can carry social site far, this is not true for utility sites. Sites which provide tangible or measurable services.
I won't leave myspace for facebook, cause I have a lot of friends on myspace, but I will be quick to change sea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I want to be paid for posting this (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I want to be paid for posting this (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I want to be paid for posting this (Score:4, Informative)
An example would be the "Switch" Campaign, which was awhile ago involving a fabricated story presented as fact about a Mac user that switched to a Windows PC, which also included blantant falsehoods about software availability on Macs. (It was even covered here: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02%2F10%2F14%2F1232229&mode=nested&tid=109 [slashdot.org])
An more recent example one could use would be the whole Vista Ready/Capable disaster.
Re:I want to be paid for posting this (Score:5, Funny)
An industry who's sole purpose is to trick people into buying things they don't need or want has standards? You're funny.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
An industry who's sole purpose is to trick people into buying things they don't need or want has standards? You're funny.
It's true though. There is even an advertising standards authority here in the UK. An ad can not be deliberately misleading, so saying "Coke is a cure for baldness" is not allowed. Or implying that a computer with wireless capabilities is all you need to get on the net, as PC World found out to their cost, is also not acceptable. It is even possible to complain about a specific ad, and have it removed if it is misleading, offensive etc. And it has been done many times. The advertising industry certainly do
Money trumps morality in marketing (Score:2)
To quote a senior marketing researcher from the biggest player in the US:
Is teaching kids to be better naggers ethical? Well I don't know about that, but if we push more product then we've done our job
Re: (Score:2)
As early as 6 months of age persistant nagging manifests in the physical form, followed shortly thereafter by the verbal form.
But I get your point - marketers will go to the limit to sell something, thankfully that's why the standards exist. So when they pass the threshold they can be nailed against the wall. Some times it costs them a little, some times it costs them $58 million dollars.*
*Merck 2
Heres your answer : (Score:2)
that should give you a doctorate thesis's worth material.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I want to be paid for posting this (Score:5, Informative)
- SCO
- "Vista Capable"
- Get the Facts.
- Windows Genuine "Advantage"
- Fake ROI/TCO models
- Misleading security stats (multiple)
- 235 Patents
- Zune astroturf sites
- XBox sales figures
- XBox failure rates
- OOOXML and ISO corruption
- Subverting OLPC (multiple lies)
There's plenty more. Feel free to add some yourselves - this could be fun.Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I want to be paid for posting this (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time.
We at Microsoft disagreed. We knew that even 16-bit computers, which had 640K of available address space, would be adequate for only four or five years.
Bill Gates interview with the Smithsonian three years prior:
It [640K] was ten times what we had before. But to my surprise, we ran out of that address base for applications within - oh five or six years people were complaining.
I'd take his denial with a grain of salt.
Soooo--- they are copying Fat Wallet? (Score:5, Informative)
"FatWallet also features a Cash Back rebate shopping section, where users can receive a percentage of purchases back from purchases made through referral links to hundreds of online retailers. Originally known as FatCash, this feature is where FatWallet got its start."
Re:Soooo--- they are copying Fat Wallet? (Score:5, Informative)
Rather, Microsoft is finally bringing Jellyfish.com [wikipedia.org] under the Windows Live branding, after having purchased them last fall.
Sounds familiar... (Score:3, Interesting)
Following a trend (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Following a trend (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, a few years ago this was only a joke.
"Open Source software doesn't cost anything -- how can you beat that price?"
"Well, we could pay people to use it."
"But then how do you make any money?"
"We make it up in volume!"
Re:Following a trend (Score:5, Interesting)
And yes still they make billions (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really like the implications, but it's an unavoidable fact with so
Product Search (Score:2, Insightful)
On top of that, everyone thinks of themselves as "the type of person who doesn't click on ads (well except for that one time)"
This feature is marketed at a group of people who are going to plan at looking at the ads when searching to find out if they can get a deal. I don't think that group of people really exists.
Great (Score:5, Funny)
Things are different than this (Score:5, Interesting)
So, assuming that the story is true - how, exactly, does Microsoft propose to pay people for searching / purchasing. Is this "pay" going to come in the mail as a check, or is it going to be a discount on purchases - or is it going to be a promise to pay you somehow sometime in the future?
I'm tempted to say something about "trust" and "Microsoft" here, but am wary of the Microsoft lovers out there just waiting to down-mod this post.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
nobel prize here i come.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Things are different than this (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's the "Y!" Google and Microsoft both have more money than God.
How much MSFT cash will I get for... (Score:4, Funny)
A linux distribution / service contract?
A copy of OSX on a shiny new MacBookAir?
A throwproof chair?
It's worked so well in the past (Score:5, Funny)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most of you aren't really getting the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
The important searches are things like "Best Digital Camera," "Kelly Blue Book BMW 325i," "The Da Vinci Code," and so on. These are searches that are very likely to result in a sale.
What MSFT is doing doesn't seem that innovative because it's so obvious - but no one is doing it.
Think of club promotors on sidewalks in NYC or Vegas or whatever. Typical entry is let's say cover of $10. But if you take a stupid little card from someone advertising the club, maybe that gets you free entry. Why? No reason, you aren't special, just you happened to pick up the advertisement. The club is paying the promotor to offer you a discount, so that you eventually buy the real product (drinks at the club, or whatnot).
So if the marginal profit on a $400 digital camera is about (total guess) $150 bucks, and MSFT only demands the advertiser pay a cost per action, then that's $150 dollars of value that can be shared by a) Sony/Canon/whoever, b) Microsoft, and c) the USER!
The point here is that it doesn't even matter if Google offers better search now! Going forward, I'll probably product search/research on Google, but go over to Microsoft to make the all-important final decision (because it's plainly the rational decision - my product WILL be cheaper)!
If people pay attention, instead of throwing it out the window, this could be a gamechanger - it isn't the same as BigWallet, which essentially just shared the already offered referral deals with you (half a percent of the sale, usually). This could be a significant deal for everyone involved. Cost per action payment is the key.
Re: (Score:2)
no poster isnt right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google is not an Open Source project. You should save the $5 and then donate to one additional Open Source project.
Re:Most of you aren't really getting the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
The point here is that it doesn't even matter if Google offers better search now! Going forward, I'll probably product search/research on Google, but go over to Microsoft to make the all-important final decision (because it's plainly the rational decision - my product WILL be cheaper)!
You are confusing search results and advertisments near the search results; microsoft is saying it will offer better advertisments; but no one chooses where to shop, or what newspaper to read, for the advertisments! In that case you would just head to a discount hunting website.
No, you choose your search engine based on the better results, and then, you don't mind that the website profit from the 1% of attention you have to spare to look at an ad. Ads make money when you don't mind to shop without really comparing anything.
Re:Most of you aren't really getting the point. (Score:4, Informative)
You're not getting a discount. You're getting a rebate. So you're still paying the full price, it's just that you'll get some money back at some point in the future--60 days [wired.com], to be precise.
PaysForSure (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let me take a stab at this.... (Score:3, Funny)
MicroSoft PayYou! Search Service?
Re: (Score:2)
You can't trust this.... (Score:5, Funny)
-Mike
Man..... (Score:5, Funny)
why not make a good product and sell it? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, corporations exist to make money. But they don't have to go so far from their core competency (spare us the snarky comments) to do it. My heating oil provider doesn't have an internet search engine. My insurance company isn't creating web 2.0 video applications. Stick with what you're good at.
Re:why not make a good product and sell it? (Score:5, Funny)
There's not much money in chair-throwing these days.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if Google became the Internet itself, it would be easier for them to "organize the world's information", and that's where their argument ultim
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I, for one, do not welcome my new Google overlord.
When you have $30 billion in the bank (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously though -- Microsoft is close to saturation of their two big moneymakers, Windows and Office, throughout the Western world. They can continue milking them for years via the upgrade cycle and expanding the share elsewhere, and they will, but just doing that doesn't put up the big numbers. So they're going to constantly try going after new markets and, eventually they think, they're going to succeed big in one. Like, "What do you mean Apple Computers makes MP3 players?! They're a computer company!" big.
And then they're going to take that success and do exactly what Apple did with the iPod -- tie it straight back into The Empire, and make megabucks. iTunes is already just a marketing expense to sell iPods and iPods are eventually going to be just a PR campaign to sell Macs which happens to generate a few dollars on the side.
And if this idea, or the XBox, or MSN, or the Zune, or that new touch screen table, or a thousand ideas fail -- so what? They've got $30 billion in the bank, patience, and a certain bit of maniacal efficiency in their favor. Sooner or later, they'll find their iPod.
Re: (Score:2)
They have never been good at it, though, the only game they are good at, is milking their monopoly.
But what happens when the monopoly eventually disappears?
We've seen a lot of strange moves from Microsof
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I think you are right. That's why they are trying to switch to some other business.
I'm reminded of something Amazon did... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
microsoft's real solution to its search blues: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:microsoft's real solution to its search blues: (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox plugin on the way... (Score:5, Funny)
Jellyfish (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So, yes, that's exactly what this is - MS buying a company, using their process to their own ends, then never mentioning that the Live "cashback" will most likely be p
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Objective (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft is not thinking about income in any sort of immediate sense. Microsoft, from the very beginning, has made sure to have a central presence in whatever the center of PC technology is at any given time. This is a continuation of what Microsoft has done/been since it's origin, not a case of looking for immediate revenue.
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing wrong with doing this, except when Microsoft leverages their monopoly in certain IT areas to help them in other areas, which is what they do, and what they will always do. They don't offer much, u
Living outside USA (Score:3, Interesting)
If I (in New Zealand) wanted to buy say, an iPod, I could be convinced to click on a Microsoft-affiliated retailer if I thought I would get a decent discount, considering they cost roughly the same everywhere.
But how would Microsoft know I am living overseas, if I just use a Paypal account? Can anyone think of how I could circumvent this ban?
Re: (Score:2)
Also note that MS has a lot less incentive to pay out than all the other cashback sites, because cashback is not their core product and reputation will matter much less too.
Click monkeys (Score:2)
There is one thing MS can never have (Score:2)
Also the biggest thing is I am loyal to Google because of the good they have done for OSS, being a (fairly) good net citizen, and trying on the whole to do the right thing.
That to me is worth way more than a few $ off a book, that in real
desperate (Score:2)
to get a date for the prom.
MSFT stole this idea too (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:DO IT! DO IT! Do It 'til You're SATISFIED... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:DO IT! DO IT! Do It 'til You're SATISFIED... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you new here? (Score:2)
"the idiot who used wasted his/her mod points on fanboi-modding down parent post,..."
By your UID, I would expect that you already know the answer to your question, but that the answer is still bothering you.
Search inside yourself for the answer, there, you will find all of the questions you want answers for...*head a splodes* WTF?!?!? Uhmm...never mind!
'And in a hundred years from now, who will care?' also comes to mind...just thinking...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, come to think of it, it's not. In fact, it's not even particularly offensive, outside of being so mindless and cliched.
Congratulations on not even grossing anybody out with your shitty ascii art. Now go drink bleach.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)