Google Explorer.

[Weeks]

I was never impressed by google's email service, and deleted the account after a month. Now they seem to be diversifying even more by creating a browser. Firefox's lead developer has jumped ship to google.

There is no official word that google are developing a browser, they could be just hiring him because of his excellent coding skills, but it's still quite possible.

Google seem to be trying to take over the world.

I even read an article about the possibility of google entering the British telecom market via VoIP. Thus creating a telecom system that is directly linked to their search engine. So they control the telecom system and a yellow pages system as well, and will hence rake in the cash from companies (local and international) wanting their number first on the list.

I'm quite sure google are on top of the world at the moment. But, if they don't drown in all the new ideas they're having, and they become the next Microsoft, which i think is quite possible especially with the telecom idea, I can see us all creating threads on the evil of the almighty google.

Thoughts on google?

[djbass]

I did say it didn't I.

[Zar]

If google is ever able to rival microsoft it cant be a bad thing. A duopoly is better than a monopoly.

[djbass]

A duopoly will never stablise, eventually one of the two will consume the other.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Zar

If google is ever able to rival microsoft it cant be a bad thing. A duopoly is better than a monopoly.

Google's got email, a search engine and are building a browser (which seems remarkably pointless, if it doesn't do more than firefox or opera).

They're not making games consoles, other assorted hardware or operating systems just yet.

[Hicks]

A duopoly would just collude and behave like a monopoly.

[roadrunner_0]

the problem is, google (from my point of view anyway) is like an empire, and like any empire, it has to expand or die, thus the constant new ideas etc
misrosoft have already had this problem, hence now they are in litigation due to their empire building ways



EDIT: oh ps

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4205267.stm


<3 google

[Proteus]

Please, God, no more discussions on empires.

[Super]

Originally Posted by Hicks

A duopoly would just collude and behave like a monopoly.

What about Coke and Pepsi?

or did you mean specifically in that market?

[roadrunner_0]

sorry, i really wan't trying to make it into an empire discussion

[Hicks]

Originally Posted by Super

What about Coke and Pepsi?

or did you mean specifically in that market?

Coke and Pepsi is hardly hyper competition, neither wants to lower prices and start a price war so they hold the price higher than socially optimum and decide to compete in advertising instead. This is even more wasteful since all that happens is both advertise loads and only serves to nullify the others advertising.

[Hicks]

Pepsi is icky and sweet

[Leshy]

Although I'll happily drink either by the litres, I prefer Pepsi over Coke.

[Structural Integrity]

Originally Posted by Leshy

Although I'll happily drink either by the litres, I prefer Pepsi over Coke.

I don't mind drinking any of them either... I just rather have coke than pepsi.

[MrL_JaKiri]

I prefer coke to pepsi when it's at the default concentration, but if it's a restaurant where they make their own to a non-standard water content, I prefer Pepsi.

Diet for both.

[Phalon]

This thread is heading off topic rapidly but.......

Pepsi > Coke

[roadrunner_0]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

I prefer coke to pepsi when it's at the default concentration, but if it's a restaurant where they make their own to a non-standard water content, I prefer Pepsi.

Diet for both.

newarly all bars and restaurants in the country use pepsi and soda rather than coke of any variety

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

newarly all bars and restaurants in the country use pepsi and soda rather than coke of any variety

My liquid lunch made me confused as to what you meant by the first word, until a flash of brilliance struck me, and I realised I had a sandwich.

Then I released what you meant.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Hicks

A duopoly would just collude and behave like a monopoly.

Like sega and nintendo, or Nvida and ATI?

[Super]

Boeing and Airbus

[roadrunner_0]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Presumably that is largely due to licening agreements rather than distinct customer preference though.

yeah, not sure how pepsi managed to corner the licencing over here, but they have

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

yeah, not sure how pepsi managed to corner the licencing over here, but they have

a) there is no 'licencing' of cola based beverages
b) what are you on about 'most restaurants only have pepsi'???

[roadrunner_0]

you tend to find that pubs/restaraunts (licenced rather than otherwise) that buy from a brewery rather than being true free houses have pepsi rather than coke, i know that licencing was probably the wrong word, but had a mental block as to what to actually write

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

you tend to find that pubs/restaraunts (licenced rather than otherwise) that buy from a brewery rather than being true free houses have pepsi rather than coke, i know that licencing was probably the wrong word, but had a mental block as to what to actually write

ok if you're talking about pubs. they may get pressure from a brewery to buy one or the other but i see a pretty equal mix of coke and pepsi and there's also that stupid brewery that insists all the soft drinks are bought from that ye olde company.

restaurants don't buy from a brewery, neither do bars.

as i've found it the mix is pretty even except that claridges and the ritz both serve coke.

[roadrunner_0]

? nearly all pubs i have ever been in have served pepsi? i have actually talked to bar staff about this before and its all they get offered from the brewery?

i would assume that its possible that some breweries use pepsi and some coke, but the majority of the major ones seem to use pepsi

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Well if you go to a pub or restaurant they will often say "Is Pepsi OK". Not always but often. Would it not be conceivable that Pepsi offer a greater rate of return/more incentives for selling their product, and even have some sort of exclusivity clause?

If you consider that MacDonalds and Burger King both only serve Coke and must one assumes represent a large slice of revenue for Coke, presumably there is some sort of deal there.

Are you claiming to have information which contradicts this?

the proposition was that all bars and restaurants in england only serve pepsi.

as you yourself point out fast food emporiums serve coke.

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

? nearly all pubs i have ever been in have served pepsi? i have actually talked to bar staff about this before and its all they get offered from the brewery?

i would assume that its possible that some breweries use pepsi and some coke, but the majority of the major ones seem to use pepsi

you just spend too much time in weatherspoons because its cheap

[roadrunner_0]

fast food 'emporiums' aren't licenced premises

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

fast food 'emporiums' aren't licenced premises

a licence to sell alcohol is granted by the local magistrates' court.

i promise you that nobody stands up in court and says "i apply for a coke licence your worships"

[roadrunner_0]

yes, but i was talking about licenced premises, those that can and do sell alcohol rather that food shops such as BK or McD etc
(also, i haven't been in a wetherspoons in about 6 months so ) hehehe

[Structural Integrity]

This thread went from a Google browser to licensing beverages in pubs. Congratulations GD.

[roadrunner_0]

well, what can we say... it was a long hard road, but we managed it, i would like to thank my co-conspiritors yahwe and T&F for aiding me in this endeavour

[roadrunner_0]

damn it if only i could read minds

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Shh I wanted to see if we could get on to the Nazis.

Himmler drank Pepsi.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

"Coke Under the Third Reich
It has been said that Coca-Cola's success was partly due to their co-operation with Nazi Germany. Sometimes, as the Nazis conquered new territory, Coca-Cola opened bottling plants there. This included places such as Austria and Sudetenland.

Max Keith, the leading bottler for Coca-Cola under Nazi Germany, actually joined the Nazi Party. Ostensibly, this was in order to lobby against prohibitions on the syrup used in manufacture of Coca-Cola.

Throughout the Nazi Party's reign, from 1933 to 1945, Coca-Cola sold millions of bottles to Germany, having 43 bottling plants and 639 local distributors under the Third Reich by 1939. Coca-cola was not the only American company to co-operate with the Nazis, of course. Standard Oil for instance, had much more direct involvement with the Nazis."

http://www.indexlistus.de/keyword/Coca-Cola.php

Wicked lies spread by Pepsi (or "Pepsi von Cola", as it was formerly known) in a desperate and futile attempt to conceal their complicity with the evil Nazi oppressors.

[Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

Like sega and nintendo, or Nvida and ATI?

What exactly do ATI and Nvida do that's so competitive ? Fine there's two companies which compete with one another but it's hardly vigorous, they both release similar cards, at similar prices, at similar intervals and I'm sure both earn monopoly profits, there’s no sense in them forcing vast amounts of competition by slashing prices or what not as it will lead to lower profits. Even back in the day Nintendo and Sega always faced competition from a number of different platforms, their dominance was short lived due to the ease of entry into the market, it’s far easier to erect barriers to entry with things like Internet browsers because of distribution, would Sony (Or whoever ?) find it anywhere near as easy to distribute a browser as Microsoft or Google ?

[Leshy]

Originally Posted by Hicks

What exactly do ATI and Nvida do that's so competitive?

The two companies are competitive up to the point where nVidia altered their drivers to cheat on 3DMark, in order to beat ATi. Additionally, you'll find that video cards get released at high rates, and that quite powerful cards are available in all ranges of the market. New technologies are constantly being introduced and adapted by both nVidia and ATi in order to win the performance crown.

If you want to point to any market where there is no innovation, and the producers are just doing their thing, the graphics card market isn't the one to point at. I'd say that the current CPU market is far more representative with both Intel and AMD seemingly having taken a break from their little speed war.

[Zar]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Do you never tire of these sort of unthinking broad statements?

Its a generalized way of thinking. As an economist this is the only way i can think

[mist]

Originally Posted by Leshy

The two companies are competitive up to the point where nVidia altered their drivers to cheat on 3DMark, in order to beat ATi. Additionally, you'll find that video cards get released at high rates, and that quite powerful cards are available in all ranges of the market. New technologies are constantly being introduced and adapted by both nVidia and ATi in order to win the performance crown.

If you want to point to any market where there is no innovation, and the producers are just doing their thing, the graphics card market isn't the one to point at. I'd say that the current CPU market is far more representative with both Intel and AMD seemingly having taken a break from their little speed war.

64 bit and two processors on a die have taken over. you can only make chips so fast with a given fab size, and 65nm hasn't come in yet - tho i believe both are working on it.

[Leshy]

Originally Posted by mist

64 bit and two processors on a die have taken over. you can only make chips so fast with a given fab size, and 65nm hasn't come in yet - tho i believe both are working on it.

The move to a 64-bit CPU is one that has been coming for quite some time, I don't think the dual CPU thing will become mainstream pretty quickly, although of course there is still innovation going on.

It's just that the performance increases have dramatically dropped in comparison with the race towards 3GHz that we've seen in previous years.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

"Coke Under the Third Reich
It has been said that Coca-Cola's success was partly due to their co-operation with Nazi Germany. Sometimes, as the Nazis conquered new territory, Coca-Cola opened bottling plants there. This included places such as Austria and Sudetenland.

Max Keith, the leading bottler for Coca-Cola under Nazi Germany, actually joined the Nazi Party. Ostensibly, this was in order to lobby against prohibitions on the syrup used in manufacture of Coca-Cola.

Throughout the Nazi Party's reign, from 1933 to 1945, Coca-Cola sold millions of bottles to Germany, having 43 bottling plants and 639 local distributors under the Third Reich by 1939. Coca-cola was not the only American company to co-operate with the Nazis, of course. Standard Oil for instance, had much more direct involvement with the Nazis."

http://www.indexlistus.de/keyword/Coca-Cola.php

I saw a documentary at Sunday's house that said that, when america entered the war, selling things to Germany becamse taboo, cutting the German division off from the whole. This prompted the invention of Fanta, from what was available at the time. Which turned out to be rotten apples.

[Zar]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

As an economist of sorts I would challenge that remark.

pigs can fly

[mist]

Originally Posted by Leshy

The move to a 64-bit CPU is one that has been coming for quite some time, I don't think the dual CPU thing will become mainstream pretty quickly, although of course there is still innovation going on.

i suspect it'll be adopted fairly quickly. one cpu to run the os/one to run the game, or possibly one to deal with the physics and one to deal with the ai makes a lot of sense.

[JetLinus]

Originally Posted by Leshy

It's just that the performance increases have dramatically dropped in comparison with the race towards 3GHz that we've seen in previous years.

While this is right (I agree with you), one must consider that nowadays the GHz (i.e. frequency) is not everything.
You know, what exactly can a Pentium Mobile do with only 1.4GHz?
Or why did the N64 only have 100Mhz (or something low like that)?

Especially with new cpu architectures and more "bits", it's difficult to really rate a processor's speed. I'd say the old "I've got more Ghz than you" really doesn't do it anymore.


And I personally found HyperThreading working really great for example. I'd rather have -- let's say 300 Mhz less -- but HT with my cpu (like MMX back then).

[Leshy]

Originally Posted by JetLinus

While this is right (I agree with you), one must consider that nowadays the GHz (i.e. frequency) is not everything.

It hasn't been that since AMD introduced the Athlon, that's nothing new. HyperThreading was also introduced more than a year ago.

The overall speed of CPU's is currently not increasing nearly as fast as it has done in previous years.

[LHC]

Originally Posted by Leshy

It's just that the performance increases have dramatically dropped in comparison with the race towards 3GHz that we've seen in previous years.

AMD have reached 4000+ levels now, with Intel at 3.8Ghz. It's a possibility that the stuggle for greater power has restarted.

edit: In fact, according to Overclockers, the AMD Athlon FX55 has a 50% performance advantage over the Barton 3200+.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by JetLinus

You know, what exactly can a Pentium Mobile do with only 1.4GHz?

The Athlon 64 in my laptop only does 1.8GHz.

[Leshy]

Originally Posted by LHC

AMD have reached 4000+ levels now, with Intel at 3.8Ghz. It's a possibility that the stuggle for greater power has restarted.

Yeah, but when did we reach 3GHz? A good while ago.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Leshy

Yeah, but when did we reach 3GHz? A good while ago.

It's not really arguable that processor speed increase has slowed, and that's probably down to either the quantum trouble they've been having around 70nm, or heat dissipation problems (probably the latter).

[JetLinus]

So this law of some person, that "processing power" will double all x years in a while, is not true anymore? Or could you measure the speed in MIPS or something?
Ah well, I'm quite lucky it has slowed down right now, as I'm fairly ok with a Pentium IV 3Ghz HT.