Google, Apple, and Microsoft Struggle for Your Internet Experience

             The three Internet titans—Google, Microsoft, and Apple—are in an epic struggle to dominate your Internet experience. Two of the firms—Google and Apple—are determined to prevent Microsoft from expanding its dominance beyond the PC desktop. So Google and Apple are friends. But when it comes to mobile phones and apps, Goggle and Apple are enemies: each want to dominate the mobile market. Apple and Microsoft are determined to prevent Google from extending beyond its dominance in search and advertising. So Apple and Microsoft are friends. But when it comes to the mobile marketplace for devices and apps, Apple and Microsoft are enemies. Google and Microsoft are just plain enemies in a variety of battles. Google is trying to weaken Microsoft’s PC software dominance, and Microsoft is trying to break into the search advertising market with Bing. Apple, Google, and Microsoft already compete in an assortment of fields. Google has a huge edge in advertising, thanks to its dominance in Internet search. Microsoft’s offering, Bing, has grown to about 10 percent of the search market, and the rest essentially belongs to Google. Apple is the leader in mobile software applications, thanks to the popularity of the App Store for its iPhones. Google and Microsoft have less popular app offerings on the Web. Microsoft is still the leader in PC operating systems and desktop productivity software, but has failed miserably with smartphone hardware and software, mobile computing, cloud-based software apps, its Internet portal, and even its game machines and software. Google’s original goal was to counter Microsoft’s attempts to enter the mobile device market, but Microsoft was largely unsuccessful. Instead, Apple and Research In Motion, makers of the popular BlackBerry series of smartphones, filled the void. Google continued to develop Android, adding features that Apple’s offerings lacked, such as the ability to run multiple apps at once. After an initial series of blocky, unappealing prototypes, there are now Android-equipped phones that are functionally and aesthetically competitive with the iPhone. Apple believes devices such as smartphones and tablets should have proprietary standards and be tightly controlled, with customers using applications on these devices that have been downloaded from the its App Store. Thus Apple retains the final say over whether or not its mobile users can access various services on the Web, and that includes services provided by Google. Google doesn’t want Apple to be able to block it from providing its services on iPhones, or any other smartphone. Many analysts speculate that Apple may take a shot at Google by teaming up with a partner that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago: Microsoft. News reports suggest that Apple is considering striking a deal with Microsoft to make Bing its default search engine on both the iPhone and Apple’s Web browser. This would be a blow to Google, and a boon to Microsoft, which would receive a much needed boost to its fledgling search service. The struggle between Apple and Google wouldn’t matter much if there wasn’t so much potential money at stake.

CASE STUDY QUESTIONS

1. Compare the business models and areas of strength of Apple, Google, and Microsoft.

           

            The Apple has the basis of creating a very strong hardware base for the internet future and thus logically they play their role in this battle by laying emphasis on the hardware that facilitates mobile computing., the Google also a believer in the concept that in the future the devices used to run the applications and other internet options should be a fraction of what they are being charged now and instead the revenues generated should be from the in-app advertisements and lastly, The Microsoft has laid its bet on the operating system on which the mobile computing devices shall run. Microsoft also has announced plans to develop the hardware for mobile computing, something it has not done so far, and thus has entered into the field of both Google and Apple.

2. Why is mobile computing so important to these three firms? Evaluate the mobile platform offerings of each firm.

            The importance of mobile computing for all the three mentioned firms which is Apple , Google and Microsoft as it is the future of the internet technology and for these firms to  flourish and expand they need to be very effective with mobile computing.

            The mobile platform that Apple provides with its products is “iOS” this mobile platform is the closed platform that is it is applicable for apple products and only apple apps could work on this.

            The mobile platform that Google provides is “Android”. This mobile platform is a universal platform or you can say it’s an open platform when compared to the mobile platform offered by Apple.

            Microsoft is entering this market recently by launching the tablet named “Surface tablet”. The mobile platform that Microsoft is offering is the Windows Phone 8 its operating system will be compatible with the laptops and the desktops.

 3. What is the significance of applications and app stores to the success or failure of mobile computing?

            Apps greatly enrich the experience of using a mobile device, and without them. They can range from large business computer programs for processing large accounting problems to a simple program that can be used up to something. Mobile applications have such a great scope of growth in the future that they can one day eclipse the sales of the hardware part of mobile computing and form a major market themselves here players like Google and apple shall have tough competition even from small fray players if a common platform for application usage is formed, the very same reason why Apple is resisting Google’s repeated efforts for a common mobile platform. Lastly it can be said that although all three firms have great opportunity in the market which is still young and in its infancy, the first mover shall have very definitive advantage to take control of this veritable goldmine.

4. Which company and business model do you think will prevail in this epic struggle? Explain your answer.

            The company and business model that will prevail in this epic struggles for me will be the Google. The search engine giant of it has a lot of positives going for it rather than the negatives. The clear positives that can make it a winner are: A well-established name is something which not a lot of players can boast of but Google is one of them, although Apple and Microsoft have chartered territories of their own but Google can fight them out both as an equal if not better. Google has also bet on of the most time relevant feature of the mobile computing market, the App store, and this is the biggest advantage which the Google business model gives it and makes it the prime contender for the number one position.

            Thus, it can be said that Google does have a lot of positives that can help it in the market and if it can take care of the negatives and maybe tweak the one platform stance, it can just pull ahead of Apple and Microsoft in this battle of the behemoths.

 5. What difference would it make to you as a manager or individual consumer if Apple, Google, or Microsoft dominated the Internet experience? Explain your answer.

            Consumers would be forced to buy only one product and use only one service and create a monopoly and the positive would be they would create a standard. This would affect quality; prices would be as high as possible because they would have no competition. No competition means nobody could force a monopolist from the outside to improve products, diversify rang or products and lower price. Right now it is too early to tell who would dominate the internet experience but it is good to have competition than just one market leader. Business managers must try to forecast which platform will provide the right choices for employees. Consumers must choose which platform will best fulfill their personal needs. Switching costs play into both scenarios, not just in terms of phone purchases but the price of apps. Once a user purchases and adjusts to using a certain platform it’s difficult and expensive to switch to a whole different system.

The Terror Watch List Database’s Troubles Continue

            The case study was all about the creation of the database of suspected terrorists known as the terrorist watch list when the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks and established the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center, or TSC, to consolidate information about suspected terrorists from multiple government agencies into a single list to enhance inter-agency communication. Records for the watch list database are provided by two sources: The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) managed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence provides identifying information on individuals with ties to international terrorism and the FBI which provides identifying information on individuals with ties to purely domestic terrorism. There is still more work to be done to optimize the list’s usefulness there has also been public outcry resulting from the size of the list and well-publicized incidents of obvious non-terrorists finding that they are included on the list. Information about the process for inclusion on the list must necessarily be carefully protected if the list is to be effective against terrorists. However, the government agencies populate their watch lists by performing wide sweeps of information gathered on travelers, using many misspellings and alternate variations of the names of suspected terrorists. This often leads to the inclusion of people who do not belong on watch lists, known as “false positives.” Notable examples of ‘false positives’ include Michael Hicks, an 8-year-old New Jersey Cub Scout who is continually stopped at the airport for additional screening and the late senator Ted Kennedy, who had been repeatedly delayed in the past because his name resembles an alias once used by a suspected terrorist. Like Kennedy, Hicks may have been added because his name is the same or similar to a different suspected terrorist. In order to improve screening and help reduce the number of people erroneously marked for additional investigation would be to use a more sophisticated system involving more personal data about individuals on the list. The TSA is developing just such a system, called “Secure Flight,” but it has been continually delayed due to privacy concerns regarding the sensitivity and safety of the data it would collect. Other similar surveillance programs and watch lists, such as the NSA’s attempts to gather information about suspected terrorists, have drawn criticism for potential privacy violations.

CASE STUDY QUESTIONS

1. What concepts in this chapter are illustrated in this case?

           The concept illustrated was the creation of a database of suspected terrorists also known as terrorists watch list or watch list database and the collaboration of the use of different technologies to access individual’s information.

 2. Why was the consolidated terror watch list created? What are the benefits of the list?

            The consolidated terror watch list created in order to have an access to identify information of any individuals if it ties to purely domestic terrorism and/or international terrorism. The benefits will be acquired of the list is productivity, up to-date information, Quick -decision making,

a standard license and registration check was carried out.

 3. Describe some of the weaknesses of the watch list. What management, organization, and technology factors are responsible for these weaknesses?

           When the computerized name-matching system generates a “hit” against a watch list record such as a wide sweeps of information, various policies for nominations, misspelling and alternate variations of the names of terrorist’s suspects, the airline or agency will review each potential match. This often leads to the inclusion of people who do not belong on watch lists, known as “false positives.” It also results in some people being listed multiple times under different spellings of their names. Matches that are clearly positive or exact matches that are inconclusive are referred to the applicable screening agency’s intelligence or operations center and to the TSC for closer examination. In turn, TSC checks its databases and other sources, including classified databases maintained by the NCTC and FBI to confirm whether the individual is a positive, negative, or inconclusive match to the watch list record.

4. How effective is the system of watch lists described in this case study? Explain your answer.

           The process of consolidating information from disparate agencies was slow and painstaking one because there is still more work to be done to optimize the list’s usefulness and to avoid list inaccuracies.

5. If you were responsible for the management of the TSC watch list database, what steps would you take to correct some of these weaknesses?

            I would like to do first research the data that has been included on the list and gathering facts why an individual has been included in the list and what suspicious behavior consulted their inclusion on the list and then establish a protocol to ensure that a person is clearly False positive will should be removed from the list to avoid additional variations of examinations.

             Lastly, changing the details that are recorded for a suspect to included detailed descriptions of that individual as there are so many people travelling in today society, I would so look at developing a group that would screen passengers rather than on an airline level.

 6. Do you believe that the terror watch list represents a significant threat to individuals’ privacy or Constitutional rights? Why or why not?

           The terror watch list represented a significant threat to individuals privacy or constitutional rights accurately especially to those victim of inclusion in a list that tracks every potential terrorist at the cost of unnecessarily tracking some innocents, and a list that fails to track many terrorists in an effort to avoid tracking innocents make matters worse for those already inconvenienced by wrongful inclusion on the list it is because  currently there is no simple and quick redress process for innocents that hope to remove themselves from it.