As the Formula One season draws to a close and Britain, yet again clenches itself for another nail biting finish where our dominant early form has been eroded and we could easily grasp defeat from the jaws of victory, we at CIO on a Friday, of course need to compare, if tech firms were F1 teams, just what would they be.

So, cast your fears for Jenson Button's championship lead aside and ponder where on the grid your chosen vendor would be. And just to be geeky, we've written in order of this year's construction championships before we head into the Japanese Grand Prix. would be Brawn: They are young, new on the track and have taken a tried and tested method and done it in a very different way. By interpreting the rules with a fresh set of eyes they have taken an early lead, shocked onlookers and given very talented but overlooked users the chance to shine. Already major players are copying aspects of the model and with their vast budgets could make inroads to the title fight.

Apple would be Red Bull: And not because there is a diet link. No, Apple like Red Bull is very good at packaging and coming up with something that attracts the eye, starts out in the market well, but is soon surpassed. We are of course talking about Apple computers, the iPhone and iPod are clear winners.

Microsoft would be Ferrari: A founder of the movement in many ways and has over the years got to know the regulators intimately. Its supporters can be zealous and its detractors equally passionate.

Google would be McLaren: Since the demise of Lotus and until Brawn turned up, this was easily the most innovative team in F1. Like Google you can never tell what will come next from their engineering heads and you can never discount their ability to lead.

SAP would be Toyota: For some it's a never ending money pit, for others it is a solid platform that can on a good day achieve results. Both are based in Germany and have not engendered a group of loyal believers.

Yahoo would be Williams: Once the main contender that rivals looked up at, now a shadow of its former self that spends more time crowing on about its independence and failing to achieve results.

Satyam would be Renault: Good basic product that at some point in 2009 had to remove some senior managers who were acting in a way that was unbecoming to a gentlemanly arena like technology or F1!

Tata would be Force India: Doing what Indian tech firms do best, just quietly getting on with it and achieving results. Good performances and close runs to big players serve to remind people how good they are.

Bing would be Toro Rosso: Identical to someone else's product and no one cares as they continue to use the main player.