If you have $5000 would you invest in shares of Google or Microsoft ?

I just read about the deal between Microsoft and Yahoo agreeing to combine their search engines as competition to Google. Started wondering what would be the long term outlook for both Microsoft and Google.

Microsoft is really getting soft with not many useful innovations or upgrades coming out. Their presence on the internet market is practically zero. Now their Operating System Windows is also under threat of rival Google which is going to introduce Chrome OS soon. Google has already introduced Chrome browser which has received critical acclaim by techies. Chrome does not crash as often as Windows and successive upgrades in Windows have not stabilized it and have in fact confused users.

Microsoft wanted to get in the Search Engine market dominated by Google (I understand Google has more than 80% market internationally and more than 65% in US) and its child Bing is too young to pose a threat to Google. So the move to acquire some bling by getting Yahoo engine so Bing can be marketed as a robust version. May work , but will take time.

Google has become a generic product and it will be difficult to wean away customers from that.

To add to its luster, Google is going after Apple’s share in the smart phone market with its Magic handset, which I understand integrates well several applications.

It is not a stretch to think that Google’s next project (or may be it already has a secret one under development) is in the music scene to compete with I Pod.

So Google seems to be looking to several innovations/applications whereas Microsoft is kind of floundering in the wild and does not know what to do with Windows and where to go next.

And remember Bill Gates has effectively moved away from Microsoft, pursuing his philanthropy. He is out to make a gentler image for himself in the world. So it seems the hunger to do business may be dimming at Microsoft.

Google on the other hand is readying its weapons on several fronts and it seems that it could expand its presence in several fields. The old adage that nothing succeeds like success may work for Google as it succeeds in new products/services.

Granted Google has an image problem, being the giant it is, just like Walmart, I would guess.

Still it is working smartly and it looks like the choice for investment would be Google.

Am I right ? Can Microsoft be dismissed too quickly and easily ?

Mighty interesting to watch.

PS: I just stumbled upon a website which allows one to simultaneously use Bing and Google SEs

http://www.bing-vs-google.com

Clever but at this rate we may have to increase the monitor size to accommodate everything. May be we can buy a 50'' LCD TV, put it up on the living room and play 'Search Game' for parties.

Time to make India a Permanent Member of UN Security Council

The UN Security Council has only 5 permanent members since inception.

Which is not really reflective of present day geo-political situation of the World. The world has moved on from the war years. Economic expansion and population increase in other countires dictates that the present 5 permanent members, viz, US, UK, France, Russia and China do not adequately reflect or represent the World in UN. This can no more be the very exclusive club it has been so far.

Economically UK, France and even US have had major crises/collapses in the recent past and their currencies do not command the value they have done in the past. Russia is a broken state after the disintegration of USSR and the Russian economy is not robust or healthy. Only China has improved its economic and political clout in the last several decades.

There are other countries which have now come to the fore-front in world affairs. India being the principal of these newly emerged countries. With the large population, stable democracy, improved economic situation and the expected role India is likely to play in world affairs in the next few years, it is the right time to expand the permanent membership to include India. India and China have to be co-opted into the Global Environmental Scene and what better way than to give India the importance it deserves in the world affairs.

Granted in the past India has not taken any sides and has gone the non-aligned way, but things are changing. India and Us are co-operating in the energy (nuclear) field and US is considering India as very important for security and anti-terrorism matters. Indian economy has grown to commanding heights and the market in India cannot be ignored either. In fact they say India is a better bet than China in the economic field. And technolgy absorption and development is increasing in India. The Silicon Valley is said to be powered by ICs (Indians and Chinese).

While that is being considered and done there are a few other countries which qualify as well, notably Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Australia and even South Africa and Nigeria.

It would be a better world and a better UN if proper and just representation is given to all geographical areas and more members are included from a resurgent Asia and Africa.

It might be even a good idea to merge the permanent and elected members into one single group with say 12 important members from all continents.

My choice for such a revampled uber-council would be US, UK, Germany, France, Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, India, China, Nigeria, South Africa and Australia.

Update on 27/9/09

Or as an alternative how about the following

The G20 countries have agreed at Pittsburgh that this forum (with following members) would become the main economic forum to manage the world economy.

The G20 countries are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, U.S., U.K.

Why not integrate these countries into an expanded UN Security Council which could be renamed UN Supreme Council with no veto rights but 75% majority requiring to pass resolutions.

Iran better watch out for an attack.

The drum rolls are beating strong.

Joe Biden has stated that Isreal is best capable of deciding its threat and taking action.

Though Obama has played the Good guy to Biden's Bad guy, he is under pressure to get results from Iran for his soft approach.

And Israel has to do something to get back the US support.

So what better way than to do the hard job for US and take out Iran's nuclear facilities and get US in its debt for the next few decades.

Obama is painting himself into a corner, the latest being the September deadline for Iran to dial back on its nuclear development.

Clinton has sent the message that time is running out for Iran and military options are not ruled out.

And the US is drumming up support from Europe and Russia for some sort of action.

Sanctions have not worked in the past and will not be effective again.

All this with no clear sign that Iran is pursuing nuclear weaponry.

With Afganistan turning into another Iraq (what with troop surge, getting UK deeper in, increasing casualties), the US may soon need some victory on another front.

The recent elections in Iran did not go the way the West expected and now they are stuck with the hardliners Ahmedinijad and the Ayotollahs for some more years.

Could be that Israel is being encouraged to up the ante slowly for a final assault.

Will this strategy of intimidation fly ?

Not sure. US and Israel may have to deliver on their threats soon.

Where is the UN ? Sleepy and silent as always.

And the Arabs ? They don't really have a clue and are not able to exert any influence, notwithstanding the Oil they own.

Public right to comment on a Murder trial

There is a case going on in New Zealand about a murder of an University student by her Tutor, who stabbed her several times to death, then mutilated her body. His main defence is that she provoked him with her tirade and angry words and he is claiming 'manslaughter' instead of 'murder'.

There is a Facebook group against him, where comments are being posted which is disturbing the judiciary here.

The link is

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10583896

It is rather interesting to see the postings on the Facebook which question the defence for taking any available means under the law to get the sentence they want and at the same time to see the judiciary trying to suppress free speech.

I think both sides are entitled to their actions. It is foolish and impractical to expect the public to keep quite when a trial is going on and the proceedings are detailed in the media daily. People will have their reactions and in Facebook they have found an immediate way to describe their reactions. If the judiciary is alarmed about the effect of reading this may have on the jurors and their final decision, then the only way that can be avoided in this technological age is the sequester any jury (at least in capital crime trials) without any access to media reporting or the net. If the authorities move to shut down such discussions either directly or indirectly, then what is the difference between New Zealand and Iran or China which regularly try to control the contents on the net. The Public voice should not be suppressed. That is what Democracy is all about.

As for the defence, they should have the freedom to wriggle out using whatever legal means are possible, because that is what a 'Defence' is all about. Otherwise the Defence Attorney is not doing his job. That is also why cross-examinations and defence presentations are allowed in a trial. Even with an overwhelming evidence and sometimes even with an admission of guilt, the defence is allowed to proceed, so they can atleast argue for a lenient sentence. If in any case the Defence gets away with something which is not acceptable to the Public, then the only course is to close the loophole in future by legislative action. This defence has also called for such action in New Zealand, that is to remove the defence of provocation. But how that will pan out is another story. For the latest on that, follow the link below :

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news/article.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=10583823

Democracy and Fair Judiciary have to work for everyone, even the accused.

In the meantime it is interesting reading for people like me.

Update on 22/7/09

The jury has returned a verdict of Guilty. The provocation and temporary insanity pleas did not succeed. Jury proved they are wise. Otherwise it would have established a precedent that if you kill with one stab or bullet it is murder, but if you kill with multiple stabs or bullets then it is temporary insanity. Murderers would have taken to more stabbings or more bullets. Sanity prevails with the jury verdict.