Google And Microsoft Can't Seem To Find The Innovation

When I wrote about Apple, Inc.'s

earlier this week, I anticipated a few complaints from Apple fans who are content with the company's current strategy. What I did not expect was that people would assume my comments stemmed from my love for Google, Inc.

or Microsoft Corporation

. That couldn't be further from the truth. In reality, my expectations of both MSFT and GOOG are much lower than my expectations of AAPL. To be clear, I use Windows machines more than Macs out of necessity, and I have no plans – or any interest – in using an online-only OS like the one Google has proposed for netbooks. But I use Google's search engine everyday; hands down, it is the best one available. I also love my iPod Touch and Xbox 360, and would love to get a Mac just for Final Cut Pro. As a fan of products or services from all three companies, you might think that my expectations are the same across the board. But they are not. You see, while Apple has an impressive track record for innovation, Microsoft has a track record for disappointment. It wasn't Apple (or Google, for that matter) who forced consumers to carefully examine the available RAM and processing power before purchasing a new laptop or PC. No, it was none other than Microsoft. I was fortunate enough to hear the horror stories (such as: “I bought a one-gig laptop and it moves so slow!”) before wasting a ton of money on a Vista machine. But there were many who weren't so lucky, hence the concern and skepticism people had before the release of the much-improved Windows 7. Vista wasn't the first time Microsoft burned consumers. Aside from the many issues Windows users have experienced, Microsoft has released a lackluster MP3 player (Zune), lousy anti-virus software (Windows Live OneCare), and has repeatedly promised mobile online gaming without delivering results. Microsoft may finally deliver

via Xbox Live on the

platform. But it's too soon to get our hopes up. Then there's Google, the company that was built on a search engine. When it comes to the worldwide web, Google is king; its browser rocks, its search tools are impeccable, and its corporate/business offerings (Google Analytics, Google Docs, etc.) are great. But in terms of mainstream products – like a phone or computer OS – Google isn't as innovative. In trying to one-up the competition with something different (I may not like the Chrome OS concept but it's certainly original), Google ends up playing a game of me-too. Google Buzz, the so-called Facebook killer, hasn't gotten much buzz since its release. Google's mobile OS, meanwhile, is very popular, but I never hear anyone say that they bought an Android phone simply because they were impressed by its innovations. That's likely because Android consumers have already seen and experienced the iPhone. After that, the “wow” factor for all other (similar) phones is greatly diminished. And that might be the problem all three companies have: they're all trying to one-up each other by playing the same game. Up until Twitter came along, you couldn't find a social network that was capable of competing with Facebook. Unlike the rest, Twitter is vastly different; it's quicker, shorter, and was almost immediately integrated into mobile phones. It's a different beast with a different goal, and that's why it works. The same could be said for Xbox Live, one of Microsoft's biggest innovations, or iTunes and the App Store from Apple. All three offerings were completely different from everything else that preceded them. Hence, consumers embraced them with open arms, and before long, our expectations were in place. Unfortunately, the reality is that the next major innovation – whatever it may be – might not come from the same crop of familiar corporations. Just as Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter emerged from nothing, the future innovators are likely to be fresh faces we never saw coming.