Baidu Turns Browser Vendor

8

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Blues22475

This shouldn't really come as a surprise. In general, I've seen the Chinese actually create "knock offs" of what we see here in the states and in other places (I recall seeing a knock off of a Wii console with lame games and such. I also did see a knock off of the IPAD that we have here in the states.

avatar

d3v

The original wii and ipad are also made in china so you are accusing them of copying themselves.

avatar

Blues22475

Sources? Don't tell me to google it because I want to see where you get your info from.

Edit: by "made" i hope you're not referring to "manufactured" in China. The concepts did not originate from them therefore they are not copying themselves.

avatar

TerribleToaster

Another Chinese (fortune) cookie-cutter company riding on the curtails of its western counterpart? Would have never guessed.

It worries me, that with the century of China having begun over 11 years ago, they still haven't shown any signs of pioneering any socio-economical or technological field themselves but are still relying on reverse engineering and paying others to come up with "their" innovations for the majority of things. China is most certianly capable of being a global superpower, it's about time they started to act like it and start forging their own trail instead of following in the US's wake. You can't get ahead if you always walk behind.

avatar

d3v

Rubbish. You obviously don't know what your talking about. Baidu is miles ahead of google in chinese language search. They dominate the Chinese market and they do so because they are better at it. Even google has acknowledged that they lack the expertise in Chinese to challenge Baidu. Just because they decided to copy one good idea doesn't mean anything. Google is not even the first company to acknowledge the importance of browsers.

avatar

TerribleToaster

 

"Baidu is miles ahead of google in chinese language search." 

Google isn't nearly as involved in Chinese search anymore. But that really is non sequester.  

"They dominate the Chinese market and they do so because they are better at it. " 

 They "dominate" the market because Google pulled out of mainland China. Check for yourself, before the Google pull out Google was eating up Baidu's market share every quarter (Seeing as Baidu had a 5 year lead over Google.cn, Google was playing catch up). After the pull out Baidu's market share eat up Google's. But once again, non sequester to my point, which was they don't innovate. You don't need innovation when you you can copy someone else that aren't allowed to penetrate your market.

" Even google has acknowledged that they lack the expertise in Chinese to challenge Baidu."

Non sequester again, but I'd love to see a link to Google acknowledging that they can't challenge Baidu. Especially because they were tearing away at Baidu faster than Chrome was eating up IE and Firefox market shares until the pull out.

"Just because they decided to copy one good idea doesn't mean anything. "

Maybe if it was only one, you'd have a point. But Baidu has yet to have an original thought. Every "new" service they offer is a carbon copy of some other preexisting one. Hell, even their original search indexing code wasn't theirs, it was developed at IDD Information Services in New Jersey,

"Google is not even the first company to acknowledge the importance of browsers."

The problem isn't that they made a browser, it's that they made a Google Chrome clone. They didn't even bother to try and come up with something original.

 

It's clear I hit a chord with you (for whatever reason, for there are many possible) since you denied my points out of hand (or at least, that is what your writing style portrays) but I'll recommend you take time to cool your head and do some research before you type a response. Otherwise this conversation will go nowhere.

 

avatar

d3v

Eh Baidu was ahead even when Google was involved with China. In fact Google couldn't crack the Chinese search market which is why they left. All that jazz about Chinese govt. hacking was just a face saving measure.

Well Chromium is an open source project. Its not like Oracle made its own Linux distro. They copied Red hat's version. This doesn't sound any different. Microsoft's IE, BTW, was originally based on Mosaic code as was Netscape. This happens all the time. Why pick on Baidu in particular? Do you want them to reinvent the wheel just to please you?

avatar

TerribleToaster

 

"Eh Baidu was ahead even when Google was involved with China. In fact Google couldn't crack the Chinese search market which is why they left." 

If you read my post I already pointed out that A. Google.cn started 5 years after Baidu, and B.) Google was gaining on them around the end at about 3% of market share per a quarter and gaining. Baidu was in the same position that Microsoft is in now with IE. 

"All that jazz about Chinese govt. hacking was just a face saving measure."

Wonderful conspiracy theory.

Google refused to comply with all the government censorship and dropped out. 

But once again this literally has nothing to do with my original post (hence Non Sequester).

"Well Chromium is an open source project. Its not like Oracle made its own Linux distro. They copied Red hat's version. This doesn't sound any different. Microsoft's IE, BTW, was originally based on Mosaic code as was Netscape. This happens all the time."

There is a difference between "based on" and "is a copy of". All those examples of yours are companies that took something, made changes and improvements, and released something new.

"Why pick on Baidu in particular?"

I didn't pick on Baidu in particular as I mentioned the generic term "Chinese Cookie-cutter company in my original post. But seeing as this article is about Baidu that is why they are being talked about. Obliviously.

"Do you want them to reinvent the wheel just to please you?"

I'd like for them to make a product. Their "browser" isn't based on Chrome; it’s a copy of it. Even the Graphical UI is copied. They didn't even attempt to innovate, or make even a attempt to make it look like they are innovative. 

So do I expect them to reinvent the browser to please me? Yes I do. Even if it was based on Chrome, I expect them to see something and think, "I bet we could improve this function." or "You know what? People would want a function like this and it's not there yet, let's make it."

 

So, to sum up your post, you:

1. Ignored factual evidence previously stated.

2. Proposed an outlandish theory without even pretending you had a basis.

3. Tried to use the Texas sharpshooter approach to prove your argument.

4. Tried to justify your argument with a Tu quoque statement.

5. Threw out a poorly constructed straw man.

6. And asked loaded questions.

 

If you bother to respond to this, remember to state facts, actually address all the points directed at you and not cherry pick what you think you can attack, and don't bother with any red herrings. If you can't do those things I see no reason in responding as it shows you have no intention of having a discussion.

 

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.