Bing has spent untold amounts of money on in-house development and buying up companies and they've barely made a dent. I'm sure there are various reasons for that, but it at least suggests that having smart people and lots of money is not sufficient to crack Google's monopoly.
Bing went after Google's center. The way to go after a dominant player is go after a market niche they are ignoring, then expand from there. See "The Innovator's Dilemma" by Christensen.
Yep, great book to read. Read it and you will see that:
- You can't just take incumbents out of the market at will, there are some external conditions that must be right;
- Not every niche is the same, you must get the correct one;
- That is a completely inverted way to think about the problem. You first innovate (or lay plans to do so), then you start looking for niches your innovation fits.
If somebody really wants to try to apply "The Innovator's Dilemma" disruption onto Google, it's not a bad idea to look at posts asking "and how do you expect to monetize this?" on this thread, and try to answer that question.
Easier said then done. MS spent billions and has not been able to create a competitive search engine even with many advantages over Google. It is the same with browsers and mobile.
