Search wars – Past, Present and future – Bing, Google or new entrant?

My favourite quote of the year, interestingly, was about Bing. In June 2009, The Onion asked the question, “Microsoft has announced the launch of a new search engine it calls “Bing.” What do you think?” George Wade replied, “Bing? Interesting. I’ll have to Google that when I get home.” 

As the year, 2009, draws to a close and I write my last blog of the year (I will return, Insha’Allah, in the New Year). I wanted to write about, ‘Search’ that will have the greatest impact on our Internet lives, not only now but well into the future.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, as we have all realised as life progresses. Why am I mentioning this? Internet and indeed Web Search Engine history is fascinating as the pace of IT continues akin to a Ferrari in the fast lane, as a branch of IT, the web’s pace has been analogous to that. Even before, Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web, searches were conducted using Archie (Inspired by Archie comics), Veronica etc. This was eventually followed up by the acceptance of Netscape Navigator as the world’s first leader of web browsing software. In the early 90s, Microsoft (MS), did not think that the Internet would really take off, and even their boss said, “The Internet? We are not interested in it”- Bill Gates, 1993. That soon changed when they went head to head with Netscape and launched Internet Explorer, in the first browser war that MS eventually won. At the time, even I thought that MS could not win and that Netscape would retain its title and the majority of its market share.

As I was becoming comfortable with Yahoo, along came Google and swept us all away. The ever evolving pace of technology seems to catch most of us off guard. Who could have known, even a few years ago, that the iPhone would give established players like Nokia a run for their money.

So, we arrive in the present, just before Christmas 2009 and are left to wander whether the razzmatazz with which MS launched, its new search engine, Bing, has actually made a dent to Google’s popularity or not. After all, inspite of being in denial in June that it was not competing with Google, we all knew that MS was after Google’s crown. 

If we take into account, the first browser wars, the battle was simple as it was just between two browsers. Forward to the future, today and it is a completely new and different arena and era. It is a complicated affair as it is not simply a battle between Google and Microsoft for the, ‘search’, crown anymore. Both MS and Google thrive on innovation. Technological history has taught us that innovative businesses do not always get things right, as witnessed by Nokia losing to Apples’s iPhone, MS Zune to iPod/iPhone and Google’s failed products.

So, anyone sense where I am going with all of this? Well, firstly, in the true sense of innovation, Google acknowledges and accepts when it has brought a product to market that fails to capture the imagination of that market and withdraws such products, whereas, others haven’t done that. What is the secret to Google’s success? It’s simple, no, really it is. The secret to Apple’s and Google’s success is that they listen to us, the customer. They are finely attuned to what, we, the consumer want and need, just as my previous article, has alluded to. Secondly, this battle is not just about the search functionality anymore, as Google is now providing Cloud Computing - MS has Azure now, the Chrome browser, Android mobile phone Operating System (OS) – MS has Windows Mobile, Chrome Desktop OS, YouTube , Google Wave - MS has no equivalent as far as I know, Google Docs  (MS equivalent version in Office 2010, free for home/students) and many more. Microsoft is still innovating, albeit, not so successfully. It is therefore clear that wherever Google/MS innovate, the other is forced to follow. This is the problem as it is becoming increasingly blurry on whether Google is a search engine or whether MS is a OS/Apps provider.

2010 will be very interesting as the search arena witnesses some significant changes, such as, news channels paying for inclusion within searches, Yahoo using Bing as its engine to take on Google and perhaps even the search for the holy grail of corporate data mining using search engine technology, as let’s face it, Google has been in the business intelligence business for many years now! MS is getting serious and judging by its recent release of Bing’s iPhone app, as always, will take the fight to Google. 

In terms of current market share, where are these two behemoths, well, again, it depends who you talk to. This article puts MS Bing with 10%, while this article reckons that the previous article is all baloney and that MS Bing has 3.49%. Will we have a completely new entrant? Who knows? 

For those, who want to use Google side by side, click here. 

Let the wars begin! 

Let me finish by wishing everyone a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Leveraging IT for Competitive Advantage – Myth or Reality?

I have recently been researching the realm of competitive advantage and whether IT can still assist in creating or sustaining it. During my research, I came across an article published in 2003 by Nicholas Carr in the Harvard Business Review entitled “IT Doesn’t Matter“. This was subsequently printed as a book as, “Does IT Matter?”. This book sparked quite a debate as even Bill Gates, at Microsoft’s CEO Summit on May 21 2003, said, “And so when somebody says, to take the extreme quote from the Harvard Business Review article, they say IT doesn’t matter, they must be saying that with all this information flow, we’ve either achieved a limit where it’s just perfect, everybody sees exactly what they want, or we’ve gotten to a point where it simply can’t be improved – and that’s where we’d object very strenuously.“

As this article and book has made so many think about whether IT can create competitive advantage or not, it seemed apt that I take the main argument of his book and add to it. The main point of the book is that IT is now a commodity, akin to energy —a commonly available infrastructure at the end of the S-curve of adoption. All firms have access to IT and any system can be instantly replicated. Therefore companies should treat IT like electrical power—make sure it works, but spend as little as possible on it. I then came across, two articles by Don Tapscott that took this debate further. To read, these articles, please click on the links – Rethinking Information Technology in Competitive Advantage – Part I: The Debate and Rethinking Information Technology and Competitive Advantage – Part II: Strategy in the Age of Collaboration

I am firmly in the camp that believes that IT can, currently, provide competitive advantage. Organisations just need to know/learn how to do it. I believe that competitive advantage through IT can be applied by utilising the following approach:

1. Leadership and its structure
2. Know your business
3. Create a culture of innovation
4. Leverage existing systems
5. Create a tipping point for your product (Non IT)
6. Utilising business partnerships
7. Ubiquitous acceptance of technology

1. Leadership and its structure

To create competitive advantage, requires two leaders within an organisation to believe in the transformational capability of IT. Firstly, it requires a visionary CEO and board. This board MUST already have or appoint a board level Chief Information Officer (CIO). This is a pre-requisite as without direct board level representation, firstly, IT is not taken seriously enough and secondly, the Head of IT only receives information from the board, second hand. Secondly, a visionary CIO is required who believes that IT can create competitive advantage and is encouraged and supported by the board to make that happen.

2. Know your business

Once appointed, the CIO has to learn how the business operates and MUST proceed to spend a reasonable amount of time working within the various functions that will allow the CIO to formulate a complete understanding of the business. This MUST entail a period of working in the field and interacting with customers.

3. Create a culture of Innovation

Once an understanding of the business has been achieved, ideally the board will go about creating a culture of Innovation within the business or at least the CIO can create a culture of innovation within the IT team. Tesco and 3M have done this very successfully and have created competitive advantage not just through technology but its people as well.

4. Leverage existing systems

Sometimes, existing systems are overlooked because they have never been tapped fully for their potential. It pays dividends to look at your existing investments to ascertain whether there is something of value that could be tapped for competitive advantage. Argos, within the UK has continued to leverage existing systems for competitive advantage and in 2008 done it again. The gambling industry continues to look at their existing systems for competitive advantage, as this interview with Dr Martin Smith of GameAccount Global proves.

5.         Create a tipping point for your product (Non IT)

The tipping point for a product is that moment when an idea or social behaviour has reached a level where it “tips” and spreads like crazy. In 2004, after 18 months of loyal service, the battery in Casey Neistat’s first generation iPod died for good. At the time Apple did not have a battery replacement program, so its customer service representative explained the disappointing news that Casey’s only recourse was to purchase a new iPod. Casey and his older brother Van chose to respond in guerilla fashion to Apple’s non-solution to this obvious problem. The rest, as they say is history. Apple was eventually forced to issue replacement batteries. Another example is that of hush puppies. They became very successful selling items as a result of young people using them as fashion items and the word of mouth then spread the rest and tipped the balance in their favour. Many successful companies now employ scouts to see how they can leverage any potential, “tipping points”.

6.         Utilising business partnerships

Successful businesses leverage their IT systems through effective business partnerships with its suppliers. Both Tesco and Argos are prime examples of utilising these business partnerships that have been cultivated into very successful relationships

7.         Ubiquitous acceptance of technology

Leveraging IT for competitive advantage also requires universal acceptance by its users to succeed. Very often, users are not engaged in product development that often leads to products that are not what users want. Typical of that in recent years are products by Nokia and their telephones. Nokia have lost huge market to share to iphones, not because iphones are technically superior but because the iphones are what consumers want and need. The Nintendo Wii is another example of being in touch with people and ubiquitous acceptance of a product. Businesses need to make their technology easy to use by their end users, so acceptance happens. If we look back at all of my examples used in this article, all of them made technology easy to use for their intended markets from Tesco’s self serve tills to Argos online reservation systems allowing customers to collect at their nearest store.

Microsoft and Apple Tablets, pens and swords

It doesn’t really matter whether I take a look at Microsoft’s (MS) Courier dual screen booklet/tablet or Apple’s itablet; I quickly arrive at the same conclusion. I will explain as I go through this article. Obviously, an official statement has not been made by either camp and nor have the names for both products been released as yet.

It was in 2001 when I enthusiastically unwrapped my Windows tablet complete with stylus. I was enthused as I had imagined my world to be free of paper and totally digital. The price I paid for the tablet was probably equivalent to 2500 paper notebooks but I didn’t really care as I was too tunnel visioned by the allure of the future promised by this technology and the MS marketing hype.

I spent some time mastering the stylus functionality and went to my first board meeting. This was the first time I felt a misfit. It suddenly dawned on me that I was the only one in the room with a tablet. The meeting started while I was being scanned by all these eyes that seemed to be under a trance by the tablet. It was just great, I was writing notes and didn’t have to retype them either as the handwriting to type function would quickly create a document for me when I needed it. Then it happened. The tablet crashed. The meeting continued and as I started taking notes on my paper notebook, I realised the trance had been broken, replaced by bewilderment. The tablet rebooted but it was too late, I decided to continue to write on paper.

Well, why am I sharing this with you? I am not at all convinced that these new technologies will be as successful as the iphone or can convince people to part with our love for writing on paper. That said, I would love to be proven wrong as there is a big part of me that wants to use a digital equivalent, if it is indeed practical enough.

Here is my list of reasons why I think these technologies can’t replace our love for paper and why the pen will remain mightier than the tablet and sword: 

1. I don’t need to start the pen and paper.
2. If I drop the pen/paper, it doesn’t break or stop working.
3. Paper does not need to be rebooted.
4. It is considerably cheaper.
5. The next version of paper is always the same.
6. The next version of paper does not require retraining.
7. Nobody wants to steal my paper notebook.
8. I know how to locate my information contained within my paper notebook.
9. I don’t need to migrate my entries in the paper notebook to the next version.
10. My paper notebook seems at home in any boardroom (for now, anyway).

I could probably go on but you get the picture.

Would you like to add to my list or defend the new technology? Feel free to add your comments; I do look forward to reading them.