There are some companies Microsoft is determined to defeat. The funny thing is that, despite what you might think, we are not talking about Linux, but about companies which will make lots of money out of fields not related to operating systems.

Sony with its PlayStation and Apple with iPod are only two examples of companies that make money out of fields Microsoft would like to dominate. Recently, Microsoft has put another company on the "companies I wish they were dead" list: Google.

And this is not about the recent conflict regarding the hiring of Kai-Fu Lee, this is about Microsoft realizing it hasn't caught the train to a thousand billion dollar market: searches and online advertising. With a MSN Search that owns only 5.5% of the market, Ballmer and his company can state as long as they want that Google will be defeated, because it's hard to believe that's going to happen in the next 20 years.

How should Google respond to the Redmond giant's bellicose statements? By trying to provide high-quality services, some would say. How would you feel if the 'do no evil company' would release a Google OS? Instead of accusing us of writing SF instead of IT news, take a minute of your precious time to think about this hypothesis.

Google is non-conformist enough, and it has sufficient money and knowledge to be able to venture in this domain. The recipe? You take a Linux distribution (Google's appetite for Open Source and Linux is no longer a secret), you mix it with Google's knowledge on Internet searching, e-mail, security, programming and document indexing, you give it a name that includes Google and OS, and there you have it.

Or if you want another image on how Google OS might look like, I recommend you this article.

If two years ago, someone had predicted that there will be a browser to threaten Internet Explorer, he/she would have been recommended to see a shrink, but Firefox has proven that's possible.

Is there room for another OS? Certainly yes. Many times, Windows has been regarded as a necessary evil. Among the other two operating systems, Linux scares users and has the bad reputation of having a steep learning curve (which is not true, but that's another story), and Mac OS X, is currently dependent on Mac hardware.

It's obvious that Windows is missing the challenge. Do you think that if Microsoft had been chased by another OS, it would have been so relaxed about delaying for so long the recently dubbed Windows Vista?

There are some who think that Google should be frightened of having Microsoft on its tail, but things might be the other way around.

After all, it's up to us, the users. How about it, would you use a Google OS?