Google vs. Microsoft

THE Information Technology industry is all about wars between companies and individuals. These tech wars have become boring to some people and just the mention of a tech war will cause others to take up arms.

Mentioning Google vs Microsoft is one of those topics that make some people think of withdrawing their savings and sticking under the mattress. But hang-on; don't withdraw your precious savings just yet; even though Google and Microsoft are at war, it is more of a "Cold War", and this type of war is not necessarily bad.

If not for the Cold War between the USA and USSR, Yuri Gagarin wouldn't have been the first human in space, and Neil Armstrong would never have walked on the moon.

The future of computer software

Google has broadened its focus. It is not just an internet search engine anymore, the company now provide users with free e-mail, desktop applications and online text and spreadsheet editing.

The text and spreadsheet editing is probably one of Google's boldest moves to date. They have wandered into the domain that Microsoft controlled for the best part of the last 10 years and what promises to be the future of computing.

As Internet accessibility increased so did the amount of applications available. Software companies have shifted their focus to provide more applications and services on the internet.

To draft a letter a decade ago we were forced to buy software like Word (or even WordPerfect at that time). This is no longer the case, with faster broadband speeds making it possible for Google to provide applications like online text editors, and other online services.

How does it affect Microsoft?

Microsoft is being driven to move away from their main business and provide consumers with online tools and services. As with everything from Microsoft they are doing it with a bang.

Bill Gates announced in the end of 2005 that Microsoft is undertaking a major strategic shift towards providing more internet-based services.

Microsoft moved away from their MSN network across to Windows Live! And with the launch of Windows Vista they are increasing the support for Windows Live. Every online tool and service within Vista is closely linked to Windows Live and Office Live.

Microsoft didn't stand a chance competing against Google when it came to search engines, but when it comes to online services it has the advantage. We have to remember that Microsoft has Windows, and with Vista closely integrated with Windows Live, Google is bound to suffer some casualties and stands to lose a large share of the market.

There are tech wars that are worth looking into, and as with the Cold War where two nations pushed one another to become more advanced, the same will happen between Google and Microsoft.

We will have a loser in the end, but we can always remember that the one that did win the war would not have been pushed to the top, if it was not for the other.

Written by Johan Brink and published on www.fin24.co.za on 26.01.2007

Property in Observatory, Cape Town, South Africa on http://www.hotpropertyincapetown.com

World's 20 richest people

New York - The world's 20 richest people, according to the annual Forbes magazine ranking (tabulate under ranking, name, age, nationality, net worth in billions of dollars, business and change from 2005 position):

1. Bill Gates, 50, US, 50.0 (Microsoft), (-)
2. Warren Buffett, 75, US, 42.0 (investments), (-)
3. Carlos Slim, 66, Mexico, 30.0 (telecom), (+1)
4. Ingvar Kamprad, 79, Sweden, 28.0 (Ikea), (+2)
5. Lakshmi Mittal, 55, India, 23.5 (steel), (-2)
6. Paul Allen, 53, US, 22.0 (Microsoft), (+1)
7. Bernard Arnault, 57, France, 21.5 (LVMH), (+10)
8. Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, 49, Saudi Arabia, 20.0 (investments), (-3)
9. Kenneth Thomson and family, 82, Canada, 19.6 (publishing), (+6)
10. Li Ka-Shing, 77, Hong Kong, 18.8 (diversified), (+12)
11. Roman Abramovich, 39, Russia, 18.2 (oil), (+10)
12. Michael Dell, 41, US, 17.1 (Dell), (+6)
13. Karl Albrecht, 86, Germany, 17.0 (supermarkets), (-5)
14. Sheldon Adelson, 72, US, 16.1 (hotels), (+5)
15. Liliane Bettencourt, 83, France, 16.0 (L'Oreal), (+1)
16. Larry Ellison, 61, US, 16.0 (Oracle), (-6)
17. Christy Walton, 51, US, 15.9 (Wal-Mart), (new)
18. Jim Walton, 58, US, 15.9 (Wal-Mart), (-6)
19. S. Robson Walton, 62, US, 15.8 (Wal-Mart), (-9)
20. Alice Walton, 56, US, 15.7 (Wal-Mart), (-7)

Property in Observatory, Cape Town, South Africa on http://www.hotpropertyincapetown.com

'Haves' have most of it

'Haves' have most of it

05/12/2006 19:10

London - The richest 2% of adults still own more than half of the world's household wealth, perpetuating a yawning global gap between rich and poor, according to research published on Tuesday. The report from the Helsinki-based World Institute for Development Economics Research shows that in 2000 the richest 1% of adults - most of whom live in Europe and the US - owned 40% of global assets. The richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of assets, the report said. By contrast, the bottom 50% of the world's adult population owned barely 1% of the world's wealth. "Income inequality has been rising for the past 20-25 years and we think that is true for inequality in the distribution of wealth," said James Davies, a professor of economics at the University of Western Ontario, one of the report's authors. "There is a whole group of problems in developing countries that make it difficult for people to build up assets, which are important, since life is so precarious." Politicians 'very concerned' The gulf between rich and poor nations has long concerned politicians and economists, who say it is one of the biggest obstacles to development. But Davies said there are some hopeful signs: China and India, which are developing rapidly, are gaining wealth and in countries like Bangladesh, the spread of micro-credit institutions is helping people to increase their personal wealth, he said. In other countries, land registration programs allow the poor to own land for the first time, he said. According to the report, individual assets of US$2 200 (R15 680.87) placed an adult in the top half of the world's wealth distribution in 2000. Those in the richest 10% of adults had assets of US$61 000 or more while those in the top 1% - who now number 37 million - had at least US$500 000. Researchers defined wealth as the value of physical and financial assets minus debts. Household wealth in 2000 was valued at US$125trillion, equivalent to roughly three times the value of total global production, or to US$20 500 per person, the report said. What's the difference? Average wealth in the US amounted to US$144 000 per person in the year 2000, and US$181 000 in Japan, it said. In India, the figure was just US$1 100 and in Indonesia, per capita wealth was US$1 400. Even among high-income nations, the amounts vary, from US$37 000 per person for New Zealand and US$70 000 for Denmark to US$127 000 for Britain. The world's wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and the high-income Asia-Pacific countries, which hold nearly 90% of the total world wealth, and where almost all the world's richest individuals live, the report said. Although North America has only 6% of the world's adult population, it accounts for 34% of household wealth. China occupies much of the middle third of global wealth distribution, while India, Africa and the low-income Asian companies dominate the bottom third. Anthony Shorrocks, another of the report's authors, said despite its rapid growth, China does not yet feature among the super-rich because average wealth is modest and evenly spread by international standards. "However, China is already likely to have more wealthy residents than our data reveals for the year 2000, and membership of the super-rich seems set to rise fast in the next decade," he said. This article was published by fin24.co.za on 5 December 2006

Property in Observatory, Cape Town, South Africa on http://www.hotpropertyincapetown.com