拉里•佩奇吐槽甲骨文为何无力

    谷歌（Google）首席执行官拉里•佩奇对科技行业的负面情绪很不满。同样令他不满的，是喜欢炒作每个细节，把科技企业间的竞争描述得像殊死搏斗一样的新闻媒体。

    上周三，佩奇在谷歌的年度开发者大会上说道：“我在媒体上读到的每篇关于谷歌的报道，都是‘我们对决某家公司’或者其他蠢话，我觉得太没意思了。我们应该把精力放在创造全新的伟大产品上。负面情绪并不能让我们进步。”

    这话才说了几分钟，佩奇就开始“开炮”了，刚才关于“负面态度”的话也被忘在脑后。他先是批评了微软（Microsoft）的电子邮件服务对谷歌产品的兼容问题。佩奇对听众说，微软是在“压榨”谷歌的创新。然后他又批评了甲骨文（Oracle），因为甲骨文前不久状告谷歌专利侵权而未果。他说：“钱对他们来说比任何合作都重要。”

    谷歌的高管们可能认为自己在竞争中处于一个超然的地位，但是在现实中，他们其实和科技行业的许多凡夫俗子一样非常具有攻击性，当众抨击竞争对手的事屡见不鲜。他们也会贬低竞争企业的产品和业务策略，以此抬高自家的服务和移动设备。虽然有些批评之辞是即兴说出来的，但是也有很多是事先设计好的，甚至是事先经过了审查——以便不被别人抓住小辫子，说他们公司嘴上缺个把门儿的。

    微软是谷歌最经常嘲讽的对象。在谷歌早期的日子里，谷歌高管经常出言讽刺微软的垄断行为以及谷歌认为已经过时了的微软软件服务。随着双方竞争的加剧，谷歌在很多场合对微软进行公开嘲讽。比如谷歌董事长埃里克•施密特去年在接受新闻网站AllThingsD的编辑采访时，就把微软在网络服务和硬件方面的努力贬得一钱不值。然后施密特列举出了四家他认为最有影响力的科技公司，微软显然被排除在这个名单以外。

    上周三，佩奇对微软的批评主要围绕在缺乏合作的问题上。佩奇认为微软的合作诚意不够，给互联网的发展拖了后腿。微软把谷歌的邮件服务整合到了自家的Outlook电子邮件服务里，但却不让谷歌用户获得使用微软服务的权限。这还不是上周三导致两家公司发生龃龉的唯一导火线。据科技新闻网站The Verge报道，早些时候谷歌向微软发出一份禁止令，要求微软从Windows Phone系统上卸载YouTube应用，原因是WP版的YouTube应用里去掉了广告。

    苹果（Apple）是谷歌的另一个“沙袋”。不过谷歌高管对苹果是时而灌迷魂汤，时而挥大棒。比如谷歌的工程高级副总裁维克•古多塔在2010年的谷歌开发者大会上不点名地攻击了苹果，但他传递出的消息却是很明显的——苹果和iPhone正在成为对自由竞争的威胁，而谷歌和它的安卓（Android）系统则是挽救自由竞争的救世主。

    Larry Page, Google's chief executive, is fed up with the negativity in the technology industry and the news media that covers its every detail like a prizefight.

    "Every story I read about Google is 'us versus some other company' or some stupid thing, and I just don't find that very interesting," he said Wednesday at his company's annual developersconference. "We should be building great things that don't exist. Being negative isn't how we make progress."

    A few minutes later, Page went on the attack -- negativity be damned. He criticized Microsoft (MSFT) over compatibility issues between its email service and Google's (GOOG) products. Microsoft was "milking off" of Google's innovation," Page told the crowd. He then lashed out at Oracle (ORCL), which unsuccessfully sued Google for patent infringement. "Money is more important to them than any kind of collaboration," Page said.

    Google executives may consider themselves to be above the fray, but, in reality, they are as aggressive as many of their technology industry counterparts. Public sniping at rivals is common. They trash competing products and business strategies, often in obvious attempts to lift the fortunes of their own services and mobile devices. Although some of their criticisms are off the cuff, many are planned and vetted -- making it impossible to argue that they lack the corporate seal of approval.

    Microsoft is Google's most frequently target of derision. During Google's early days, top Google executives regularly made snide comments about Microsoft's antitrust conviction and software-based products that they considered obsolete. As the rivalry grew, their public feud continued on a number of fronts. For example, Eric Schmidt, Google's chairman, during an interview last year with the editors at AllThingsD, the technology news site, dismissed Microsoft's online efforts and push into hardware. In general, he said that Microsoft has been unable to create "state of the art" products. When naming the four most influential technology companies, Schmidt conspicuously left Microsoft off the list.

    Page's criticisms of Microsoft yesterday focused on a lack of cooperation by the software giant that he said is holding back the Internet's development. Microsoft integrated Google's email service into its Outlook email but didn't let Google give its users access to Microsoft's services. It wasn't the only flash point between the two companies yesterday. Earlier, Google sent Microsoft a cease and desist letter demanding that Microsoft remove the YouTube app from its Windows Phone operating system because the app lacked its usual advertising, according to The Verge, a technology news site.

    Apple (AAPL) is another of Google's punching bags. Google executives alternate between praising Apple and beating on it. For example, Vic Gundotra, Google's senior vice president of engineering, attacked Apple at Google's developer conference in 2010, without mentioning the company's name. The message was clear, however: Apple and the iPhone were a threat to free competition while Google and the Android mobile operating system were its saviors.