New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.New Name: Yahoo! Its Microsoft.
I remember when I used to use hotmail a lot until Microsoft bought it, and then I left (sure a lot of people sayed). The only reason why I choose to use Yahoo, was because it was friendly and not Microsoft, so as soon as Microsoft takes it over, I will abandon it. I will move over to Google more full time I guess.
Seems like I will have to install my own MTA on my Linux Box and run my own mail server and log in via my own browser window.
I am not worried at all, where there is an opportunity, someone will fill it's shoes.
I would have never paid 44.6 billion for Yahoo, crazy sum of money, no wonder MS stock went down today, I guess Microsoft doesn't care about what it's investors think, after all they are the ones that gave MS all that money and made Bill rich. MS stock hasn't done crap since 2000, 8 years.
Apple has a secret card up it's sleeve, do you know what that is called ? OS X.
That's right baby, it already runs natively on Intel machines, all that Apple needs to do now is create a hack to overcome the BIOS problem and they can start selling OS X 10.5 on shelves in any Retail store for any PC.
Apple could crush Windows if they wanted to, they can establish driver relationships with vendors too, that isn't too hard.
First, check out this: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.news.com/5208-1014_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34818&messageID=373716&start=0" target="_newWindow">http://www.news.com/5208-1014_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34818&messageID=373716&start=0</a>
Then, ask yourself - with Apple's market share rapidly approaching 10% (after languishing at 3-4% pre-Vista), and their growth rates at near-explosive levels, why would they have to?
Yes, Michael Dell (the guy who runs Dell... go figure :) ) has already said publicly that he would positively love to pre-install OSX on his machines and start selling 'em. HP and Lenovo wouldn't be far behind.
OTOH, Apple has no real incentive to cast aside their insanely juicy per-unit sales margins, or their reputation for machinery that lasts nigh on forever.
If OS X was sold for installation on non-Apple PC's, then they would lose control over the hardware environment and sales of new Macs would likely take a hit.
Would you want to buy a Mac for $2K or a PC base system with OS X for $1K.
Apple loses if they release the OS separate of the hardware. Unlocking it dilutes their hardware sales.
I know you can run OS X now on PC's, but that's a hacked process and not a simple retail box solution. It's also certainly not something Apple would be expected to support.
Then there comes the real issue- if Apple ever posed a serious threat, MS could simply buy them out with the spare cash they have laying around. It isn't a nice thought, but really, the money is there. Apple is worth more as a standalone 'competitor' to keep people happy at this point.
Sorta True - But a Dream as Long as Jobs Walks the Earth
Technically, it's not a huge jump, but would require negotiation of a number of tech and relationship details to get a white box version of OS X mountable on a third party machine onto the market. Institutionally, it's impossible as long as Jobs lives. He'll probably have it written into his will that Apple OSes only run on Apple hardware. Jobs is a thoughtful and greedy businessman who wants to retain the margins inherent in being the vendor of software and hardware. He's also an old fashioned store keeper in that he simply accepts taking care of customers as part of the deal of being in the consumer products space, crafting and supporting the user experience. The big threshold he overcame with his first computers was bringing a hobbyist machine into the home for everyday use. All of that experience is Apple's DNA now and there's no changing it. Microsoft's model is all about manipulating the manufacturing sector by creating and exploiting chokepoints to eliminate competition. The company's institutional culture was established by thoughtful and greedy businessmen who were at heart really just pedigreed lawyers with gangland sensibilities.
Right. They also want the headaches that are associated with supporting a few hundred thousand pieces of hardware. That's not my argument with what you're saying though. What I have an issue with is how you fail to see Linux as one that can crush them both. It's built off the unix platform, as OSx is, however it's entirely free. It supports all kinds of hardware is 100% entire free, and can run on cheaper hardware. Linux could crush Apple and MS if they wanted to......oh wait, it's already beginning.
God protect us all ! MIS, which can't even manage its own portal, now wants us to believe it can merge AND run the best portal in the world (Yahoo) ? Come on ? Not to mention the thousands of Yahoo's who'll be looking for work since there's plleeeeenty of overlap between the existing companies. The only company I see gaining from this is..yep..you guessed it. Google.
I use yahoo groups and find it to be a great tool to communicate with people about various things that interest me or relate to my job. I can't image how microsoft will screw it up. Their interfaces are terrible compared to both Yahoo and Google. The new Yahoo Mail interface is quite nice and beats hotmail by a large margin. If they buy yahoo I'm sure next year I will get a message saying Microsoft Yahoo Groups requires Windows Internet Explorer 8 with Windows Vista, click here to download or click here to buy Vista.
I still don't understand though why Yahoo would need a merger. They made over $200 million last quarter. If their balance sheet was all red then I could see it... but now? Why?
That is why Yahoo or Google shares have dropped so much, which have made the Yahoo shares cheap enough for MS to buy them. After all who wants to pay 10 times more to Google or Yahoo for same search engine advertising that costs 1/10th on Anoox because Anoox is not-profit-motivated! It is the same as: who would want to buy Oracle when you can get MySQL for 1/10th of the price, or who wants to buy MS server OS software when you get Linux for 1/10th of the price?
Companies like Anoox, MySQL or Linux are just fundamentally changing the business plane for the software and Internet services industries. I give you my own company example: we are saving close to $5000 per month since we switched our advertising from Google to Anoox. Now multiply that by another Million small businesses and you can see why Google or Yahoo sales (shares) are going to be hurt the more Anoox is known. Go Go Anoox, Go Go inexpensive open source alternatives :) Check this FAQ on Anoox and you will see why they are the better search engine: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.anoox.com/faq-anoox.jsp" target="_newWindow">http://www.anoox.com/faq-anoox.jsp</a>
I believe that this might be the end of Microsoft: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://fishtrain.com/2008/02/01/microsoft-is-their-own-downfall/" target="_newWindow">http://fishtrain.com/2008/02/01/microsoft-is-their-own-downfall/</a>
Hard to say what the downfall will look like. The best outcome would be for MS to spin off all it's parts to shareholders. However it's already started to happen. It's going to take time for the giant that they are to hit the ground though. I'm guessing it's the lack of attention to customers that's the cumulative noose around their neck.
If they have that much to spend on Yahoo they could have fixed Vista and chose not to. That's why they will fall. That mentality.
Both are second to Google by a lot. So instead of 2 + 2 = 1, it will probably be very bad, maybe 4. That's because putting together two losers doesn't make a winner. You can fix a loser by injecting technology and vision. But not two losers who have lacked vision and technology on the web. Buy Google, sell Microsoft!
The other reader is right on many. Building a better mousetrap is correct to a point. There are so many factors Brand loyalty, Market Share, Government interference, and many times consumers who don't know better.
It does not take a person long to find all the other products that have come around in the past few thousand years that where "Better" but got quashed.
This is not new, when you are on top, the goal is to stay on top.
Is this bad buissiness? No not really who says Microsoft has to Technically inovate? They are good innovaters in there own market, but for other things, they do better then others with simle market share, and marketing.
I am not sure if you yourself understand the fundamentals of buissiness. But this is not abnormal. This is the way the world works.
heck the entire basis of the country of the US is based on this fundamental process. Do the best at what you can do, crush and buy what you can't.
Microsoft made this deal full well knowing they are desperate to score some wins on the ad/web front but they are not stupid. With Google currently bidding on the wireless spectrum, Microsoft knows that this will drain Google of a large portion of assets. A counter bid from Google is pretty much going to be an impossibility (market cap constantly shrinking, slowing growth/profit, and cash going towards the FCC auction) therein making this bid for Yahoo! a sure thing.
I think the premium is too high, but giving their competitors time to recoup funds is too risky so Microsoft needed to make this large bid. Yahoo! will most likely accept the offer- Jerry Yang publicly loathes MSFT but as a board member (and Chairman of YHOO) it is his fiduciary duty to explore options to give value to the shareholders.
Anything of value at Yahoo can be developed at Google for a fraction of the price of this proposed buyout.
Google has the mindshare, all they need to do is make it reasonably decent, slap a Google sticker on it.
Then again why would MS be interested? They are already a giant slug. Adding more heft isn't helpful. They need to trim down and increase their agility. They are like an overweight 50 year old chasing in shape 25 year olds.
Yahoo got worse because they shut down all of the good stuff that made them Yahoo! They screwed up EGroups.com.... Yahoo used to have a HUGE following on the dicussioning boards on news.yahoo.com but they closed it "temporarily" then never brought it back.... WHY??????
In terms of Yahoo Instant Messenger, it has nothing now but SPAM since they merged their Instant Messaging product with Microsoft Messenger why? Beacuse now the spammers are having a field day because it patches through to Yahoo too..... Nobody is willingly choosing to opt for Microsoft products.... that should tell them somthing......
Yahoo would no doubt end up worse under Yahoo.... Heck MSNBC was suppose to be "good".... But no... NBC had to take their service back...
Hotmail was supposed to end up "better" too under Micrsoft... but as you can see...Nothing doing.....
Yahoo also has had the Unix (Free BSD) crowds backing them for years. A Microsoft buyout will do nothing but firmly place the Unix Backers. (Thus the Apple backers too.) firmly into Google's camp too.....
Verizon or AT&T would be a better deal.... Or Google buying out Yahoo now that would be a sweet deal.....
Verizon and AT&T use Yahoo to power their Internet services so they would win out in a buy of Yahooo. Esp. Verizon which is rolling out FiOS and could use Yahoo as a nice content backend for their Fiberoptics service.... Yahoo would be a sweeet content deal for Verizon.....
If Yahoo wants to be company in the future they will need to.
.... buy their own U.S. distribution network... That's the main problem with Yahoo.... Their next problem? They've stopped being innovators. I don't see anymore killer applications/services being created by Yahoo. In fact Yahoo has been scaling back services over the years.
I remember when Yahoo announced they were buying DialPad. I thought great Yahoo could do some great stuff with that... They merged it with Yahoo IM. But they haven't really added anymore killer features to Yahoo IM. SPAM has increased by leaps and folds on it. Soo much so I don't bother to leave Yahoo IM open anymore. (My friends are starting to do the same.)
When Yahoo announced their partnership with WikiPedia I expected to see more good things.... Nothing, really fruitful yet has come from that. I've also come to watch competitors buy-out key stuff that Yahoo let slip by.
MySpace's parent company went to Fox.
Facebook has gone to Micro$oft.
Live.com went to M$.
Craig'sList went to Ebay.
You Tube went to Google.
Anyway, I've thought of some deals which could still save Yahoo???
Buying their own pipeline, so that they have their own customers to draw revenue from by offering monthly Services. Buying perhaps QWEST or FairPoint Communications (The company which Verizon sold their New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont telephone network to.)
Perhaps the buyout of CableVision in New York City area. It would give Yahoo a market to also develop new Cable TV set-top boxes or the like...
A merger with Yahoo (first proposed by in 1999) could save Yahoo. Ebay gets millions of page hits daily that Yahoo could translate into more joint website visits. (e.g. imagine seeing a small box showing Ebay auctions closing soon on Yahoo.) It would make up for the marked failure of Yahoo Auctions. And would bolster Yahoo's marketplace against Google's Checkout Service...
Also Yahoo-Ebay-Paypal under the same roof would be a force to recon- with...
Also, why hasn't Yahoo found a partner to push more of their Yahoo services on cell phones??? Yahoo is becoming stale that is why they're lagging.
Com'mon raise your head Yahoo do something... You're losing your touch.... The leadership of Yahoo must be getting too old... They're not forward thinking anymore.
I actually hope yahoo refused this offer, it never gonna get through EU anyway they just hate Microsoft outright and would not allow it just out of pure spite.
What Yahoo should do is immediately reject this offer announce a full overview of their product range and create a five year vision for the company to follow and then carry it out.
In five years time they will either have a stronger company which Microsoft cannot afford to by or have to rival companies Google and Microsoft in a fall scale bidding war for it, either way they would create bigger profit for the share holders and plus they will not spend years fighting court battles over the details of the deals in both USA and Europe, which in the long run will just mean Google increasing their market dominates in all sectors.
Yahoo is reporting losses quarter after quarter and just announced a layoff. The shareholders have an option to either make more than their shares are worth today or gamble that Yahoo has some tricks up it's sleeve.
I guarantee you this...If Yahoo does not accept the bid their stock value will tank and I mean HARD!
It really doesn't leave the Yahoo shareholders much choice. Yahoo's stock value was up 5% just Friday and most people have not had the time to digest the implications of the sale.
But what was more telling is that Yahoo's stock trading volume for friday was very high, meaning people are trying to make what they can before they cash out.
they will share two 'O' in microsoft spelling. first one ms will keep second for yahoo. so the 'O' will not be entirely for yahoo. marketing team will ofcourse have figured this fact already.
I remember all the statements about how WebTV was going to change the world.
Then again MSN already relaunched itself trying to boost numbers. It was originally "The Microsoft Network" remember the icon on Win 95? Then Microsoft launched that Funny looking MSN 6 Browser with the butterfly and huge jumbo oversized buttons! What the heck was that????
Ah, it's been a great 12 months for the snarling goons at Microsoft. The Vistapocalypse is driving millions to Linux, OS X and to XP, if only in steadfast refusal to move to Vista. The sorry enterprises that bought it are cursing themselves. Live? Stone cold dead. Now comes consumers' turn to gag in revulsion and run for the exits.
Everyone I talk to bailing on their Yahoo! accounts setting up alternatives all over the place, some places I never heard of. MyWay is still around, too. News to me. These outfits should set up Yahoo! refugee programs for people running from the Borg freakout that will surely follow their takeover.
The thing that will nuke the value of the deal, though, is the rank disgust with which most Yahoo! employees view Microsoft. Most would rather be homeless than work for them. The doors will be torn off their hinges from the stampede of employees running from the Yapocalypse. Ballmer can throw every chair in the place 100 times and it won't make a lick of difference. The place will be half empty inside of six months.
Microsoft is a big fat giant with brand recognition problems. Nobody really knows what they are anymore.
Windows, .net, search, cola, new cars, skateboards. Who knows.
Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista. Office is too expensive and will suffer because of free offerings from the likes of Google and nobody knows what .net is.
But .net as a domain extention is number 2 after .com. Perhaps Google is .com and Microsoft is .net?
Anyway Google is focussed, lean, fast, and fit. When people think of the Internet, it is Google that comes to mind. When people think of viruses, it is Windows that comes to mind. Such associations are important and the fact that Google is the Internet is what makes them kick butt. BTW, of any company. Google deserve to be no1. They love the Net more than anyone, and 100% of their innovation is the Internet.
But for Microsoft, 100% of their innovation is making competitors products not work so well on Windows (which has made that a crappy platform) and how to fold the Internet into Windows.
dont be too optimistic about google. they are prettymuch on the same roadmap. I think the roots are in capitalism - where there is no content. just hunger. This is same as prehistoric man. and we havent really improved.
Reminds me of a famous Qeen's statemet - if u dont have bread eat cakes. That is the reality of capitalism. there simply is no bread. have cake or die.
only aamish are the winners i guess. Bertrand Russell sure had some good observations on Technology as aginst science (and philosophical line of thoughts)
[http://Nobody really knows what they are anymore.|http://Nobody really knows what they are anymore.] How about,,, profitable, to the tune of 1+ BB a month.
[http://Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista.|http://Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista.] Read the news and stop watching the Mac commercials.
[Office is too expensive] Open Office is free. Where is it? Google Apps are used by?
[http://nobody knows what .net is|http://nobody knows what .net is] LOL- You really don't read the news. IIS is eclipsing Apache as we speak (and not to run java). WWF, WPF, ADO.NET, LINQ/PLINQ - any of these ring a bell? If they don't, don't send your rsume to Goldman, Lehman, Dow Jones; you know the AAA types.
[But for Microsoft, 100% of their innovation is making competitors products not work so well on Windows]
I still can't get that free OS to run any of my laptops.
GOOGLE is a great search engine with a great business, but that is it. They have had no real success anywhere else.
In a Bizzaro world... I mean, c'mon! Only the most rabid of MS sycophants would be able to ignore simple math (as well as Business 101), by saying that "MS BUYING OUT THE COMPETITION = COMPETITION". Face up to reality already, will ya's? There are current THREE Big Players in this market. If Microsoft BUYS OUT one of those three, then THERE ARE ONLY TWO PLAYERS LEFT. Got it? This ain't rocket science, folks, so for ya'll out there pushin' yer buzz werds o' competition in the forums, the simple fact of the matter is this... TWO PLAYERS = LESS THAN THREE, SO THERE WOULD BE LESS COMPETITION. Sheeesh!
Insignificant player and market leader should merge?
Yes, that would be a fantastic fit, Google would get to be around 0.02% bigger. Even MySQL has an insignificant market share compared to own SQL Server, let alone something like Oracle.
I agree. Google has built itself heavily into the internet culture now. One of the most common terms I hear these days when people initiate a search on the internet is "I'll google it".
What? It already has changed things dramatically. Google just lost billions in the value of their stock and it's not going to stop. Wait till their stock price drops to $400
Manage updates with the Download App
Seems like I will have to install my own MTA on my Linux Box and run my own mail server and log in via my own browser window.
I am not worried at all, where there is an opportunity, someone will fill it's shoes.
I would have never paid 44.6 billion for Yahoo, crazy sum of money, no wonder MS stock went down today, I guess Microsoft doesn't care about what it's investors think, after all they are the ones that gave MS all that money and made Bill rich. MS stock hasn't done crap since 2000, 8 years.
That's right baby, it already runs natively on Intel machines, all that Apple needs to do now is create a hack to overcome the BIOS problem and they can start selling OS X 10.5 on shelves in any Retail store for any PC.
Apple could crush Windows if they wanted to, they can establish driver relationships with vendors too, that isn't too hard.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.news.com/5208-1014_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34818&messageID=373716&start=0" target="_newWindow">http://www.news.com/5208-1014_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34818&messageID=373716&start=0</a>
Then, ask yourself - with Apple's market share rapidly approaching 10% (after languishing at 3-4% pre-Vista), and their growth rates at near-explosive levels, why would they have to?
Yes, Michael Dell (the guy who runs Dell... go figure :) ) has already said publicly that he would positively love to pre-install OSX on his machines and start selling 'em. HP and Lenovo wouldn't be far behind.
OTOH, Apple has no real incentive to cast aside their insanely juicy per-unit sales margins, or their reputation for machinery that lasts nigh on forever.
/P
Would you want to buy a Mac for $2K or a PC base system with OS X for $1K.
Apple loses if they release the OS separate of the hardware. Unlocking it dilutes their hardware sales.
I know you can run OS X now on PC's, but that's a hacked process and not a simple retail box solution. It's also certainly not something Apple would be expected to support.
Then there comes the real issue- if Apple ever posed a serious threat, MS could simply buy them out with the spare cash they have laying around. It isn't a nice thought, but really, the money is there. Apple is worth more as a standalone 'competitor' to keep people happy at this point.
It's an old argument and nobody really wins.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.osx86project.org/" target="_newWindow">http://www.osx86project.org/</a>
Hackers already found a way to get OSX working on Non-Apple PC systems.
Apple knows this, but prevents Non-Apple PCs from using OSX anyway.
Besides Linux beats OSX any day of the week.
But I think Apple should do it. The future isn't Office and anybody who buys it these days is really just a silly person with too much money to burn.
Google Docs and Open Office are better products and they are free.
That's not my argument with what you're saying though. What I have an issue with is how you fail to see Linux as one that can crush them both. It's built off the unix platform, as OSx is, however it's entirely free. It supports all kinds of hardware is 100% entire free, and can run on cheaper hardware.
Linux could crush Apple and MS if they wanted to......oh wait, it's already beginning.
with people about various things that interest me or relate to my
job. I can't image how microsoft will screw it up. Their
interfaces are terrible compared to both Yahoo and Google. The
new Yahoo Mail interface is quite nice and beats hotmail by a
large margin. If they buy yahoo I'm sure next year I will get a
message saying Microsoft Yahoo Groups requires Windows
Internet Explorer 8 with Windows Vista, click here to download
or click here to buy Vista.
I still don't understand though why Yahoo would need a merger.
They made over $200 million last quarter. If their balance sheet
was all red then I could see it... but now? Why?
Companies like Anoox, MySQL or Linux are just fundamentally changing the business plane for the software and Internet services industries. I give you my own company example: we are saving close to $5000 per month since we switched our advertising from Google to Anoox. Now multiply that by another Million small businesses and you can see why Google or Yahoo sales (shares) are going to be hurt the more Anoox is known. Go Go Anoox, Go Go inexpensive open source alternatives :)
Check this FAQ on Anoox and you will see why they are the better search engine:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.anoox.com/faq-anoox.jsp" target="_newWindow">http://www.anoox.com/faq-anoox.jsp</a>
If they have that much to spend on Yahoo they could have fixed Vista and chose not to. That's why they will fall. That mentality.
probably be very bad, maybe 4. That's because putting together
two losers doesn't make a winner. You can fix a loser by injecting
technology and vision. But not two losers who have lacked vision
and technology on the web. Buy Google, sell Microsoft!
It does not take a person long to find all the other products that have come around in the past few thousand years that where "Better" but got quashed.
This is not new, when you are on top, the goal is to stay on top.
Is this bad buissiness? No not really who says Microsoft has to Technically inovate? They are good innovaters in there own market, but for other things, they do better then others with simle market share, and marketing.
I am not sure if you yourself understand the fundamentals of buissiness. But this is not abnormal. This is the way the world works.
heck the entire basis of the country of the US is based on this fundamental process. Do the best at what you can do, crush and buy what you can't.
I think the premium is too high, but giving their competitors time to recoup funds is too risky so Microsoft needed to make this large bid. Yahoo! will most likely accept the offer- Jerry Yang publicly loathes MSFT but as a board member (and Chairman of YHOO) it is his fiduciary duty to explore options to give value to the shareholders.
2) Google is only ponying up to $10bn for the wireless spectrum. This proposal from MSFT is at $44bn. Big diff there...
3) Jerry Yang (and the board of Yahoo) may not have a choice if federal regulators refuse to let a convicted monopolist buy it.
/P
Google has the mindshare, all they need to do is make it reasonably decent, slap a Google sticker on it.
Then again why would MS be interested? They are already a giant slug. Adding more heft isn't helpful. They need to trim down and increase their agility. They are like an overweight 50 year old chasing in shape 25 year olds.
In terms of Yahoo Instant Messenger, it has nothing now but SPAM since they merged their Instant Messaging product with Microsoft Messenger why?
Beacuse now the spammers are having a field day because it patches through to Yahoo too..... Nobody is willingly choosing to opt for Microsoft products.... that should tell them somthing......
Yahoo would no doubt end up worse under Yahoo.... Heck MSNBC was suppose to be "good"....
But no... NBC had to take their service back...
Hotmail was supposed to end up "better" too under Micrsoft...
but as you can see...Nothing doing.....
Yahoo also has had the Unix (Free BSD) crowds backing them for years. A Microsoft buyout will do nothing but firmly place the Unix Backers. (Thus the Apple backers too.) firmly into Google's camp too.....
Verizon or AT&T would be a better deal.... Or Google buying out Yahoo now that would be a sweet deal.....
Verizon and AT&T use Yahoo to power their Internet services so they would win out in a buy of Yahooo. Esp. Verizon which is rolling out FiOS and could use Yahoo as a nice content backend for their Fiberoptics service.... Yahoo would be a sweeet content deal for Verizon.....
See??
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.att.yahoo.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.att.yahoo.com/</a>
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.verizon.yahoo.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.verizon.yahoo.com/</a>
And it would be good for them too because Yahoo has partners around the world...
British Telecom
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.bt.yahoo.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.bt.yahoo.com/</a>
Rogers Cable in Canada etc.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.rogers.yahoo.com/" target="_newWindow">http://www.rogers.yahoo.com/</a>
I remember when Yahoo announced they were buying DialPad. I thought great Yahoo could do some great stuff with that... They merged it with Yahoo IM. But they haven't really added anymore killer features to Yahoo IM. SPAM has increased by leaps and folds on it. Soo much so I don't bother to leave Yahoo IM open anymore. (My friends are starting to do the same.)
When Yahoo announced their partnership with WikiPedia I expected to see more good things.... Nothing, really fruitful yet has come from that. I've also come to watch competitors buy-out key stuff that Yahoo let slip by.
MySpace's parent company went to Fox.
Facebook has gone to Micro$oft.
Live.com went to M$.
Craig'sList went to Ebay.
You Tube went to Google.
Anyway, I've thought of some deals which could still save Yahoo???
Buying their own pipeline, so that they have their own customers to draw revenue from by offering monthly Services. Buying perhaps QWEST or FairPoint Communications (The company which Verizon sold their New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont telephone network to.)
Perhaps the buyout of CableVision in New York City area. It would give Yahoo a market to also develop new Cable TV set-top boxes or the like...
A merger with Yahoo (first proposed by in 1999) could save Yahoo. Ebay gets millions of page hits daily that Yahoo could translate into more joint website visits. (e.g. imagine seeing a small box showing Ebay auctions closing soon on Yahoo.) It would make up for the marked failure of Yahoo Auctions. And would bolster Yahoo's marketplace against Google's Checkout Service...
Also Yahoo-Ebay-Paypal under the same roof would be a force to recon- with...
Also, why hasn't Yahoo found a partner to push more of their Yahoo services on cell phones???
Yahoo is becoming stale that is why they're lagging.
Com'mon raise your head Yahoo do something... You're losing your touch.... The leadership of Yahoo must be getting too old... They're not forward thinking anymore.
What Yahoo should do is immediately reject this offer announce a full overview of their product range and create a five year vision for the company to follow and then carry it out.
In five years time they will either have a stronger company which Microsoft cannot afford to by or have to rival companies Google and Microsoft in a fall scale bidding war for it, either way they would create bigger profit for the share holders and plus they will not spend years fighting court battles over the details of the deals in both USA and Europe, which in the long run will just mean Google increasing their market dominates in all sectors.
I guarantee you this...If Yahoo does not accept the bid their stock value will tank and I mean HARD!
It really doesn't leave the Yahoo shareholders much choice. Yahoo's stock value was up 5% just Friday and most people have not had the time to digest the implications of the sale.
But what was more telling is that Yahoo's stock trading volume for friday was very high, meaning people are trying to make what they can before they cash out.
:)
first one ms will keep second for yahoo.
so the 'O' will not be entirely for yahoo.
marketing team will ofcourse have figured this
fact already.
The way they spoke were weird at the beginning, but after a while he (Gulliver) could understand it.
The Yahoos, were horses with great intelligence and their society was a fair dream from Jonathan Swift genius.
Its is ironically repetitive to see how the classical becomes pop.
Then again MSN already relaunched itself trying to boost numbers. It was originally "The Microsoft Network" remember the icon on Win 95? Then Microsoft launched that Funny looking MSN 6 Browser with the butterfly and huge jumbo oversized buttons! What the heck was that????
Everyone I talk to bailing on their Yahoo! accounts setting up alternatives all over the place, some places I never heard of. MyWay is still around, too. News to me. These outfits should set up Yahoo! refugee programs for people running from the Borg freakout that will surely follow their takeover.
The thing that will nuke the value of the deal, though, is the rank disgust with which most Yahoo! employees view Microsoft. Most would rather be homeless than work for them. The doors will be torn off their hinges from the stampede of employees running from the Yapocalypse. Ballmer can throw every chair in the place 100 times and it won't make a lick of difference. The place will be half empty inside of six months.
Windows, .net, search, cola, new cars, skateboards. Who knows.
Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista. Office is too expensive and will suffer because of free offerings from the likes of Google and nobody knows what .net is.
But .net as a domain extention is number 2 after .com. Perhaps Google is .com and Microsoft is .net?
Anyway Google is focussed, lean, fast, and fit. When people think of the Internet, it is Google that comes to mind. When people think of viruses, it is Windows that comes to mind. Such associations are important and the fact that Google is the Internet is what makes them kick butt. BTW, of any company. Google deserve to be no1. They love the Net more than anyone, and 100% of their innovation is the Internet.
But for Microsoft, 100% of their innovation is making competitors products not work so well on Windows (which has made that a crappy platform) and how to fold the Internet into Windows.
Microsoft's vision just sucks.
Reminds me of a famous Qeen's statemet - if u dont have bread eat cakes. That is the reality of capitalism. there simply is no bread. have cake or die.
only aamish are the winners i guess. Bertrand Russell sure had some good observations on Technology as aginst science (and philosophical line of thoughts)
How about,,, profitable, to the tune of 1+ BB a month.
[http://Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista.|http://Their most important product Windows has surely failed in Vista.]
Read the news and stop watching the Mac commercials.
[Office is too expensive]
Open Office is free. Where is it?
Google Apps are used by?
[http://nobody knows what .net is|http://nobody knows what .net is]
LOL- You really don't read the news. IIS is eclipsing Apache as we speak (and not to run java). WWF, WPF, ADO.NET, LINQ/PLINQ - any of these ring a bell? If they don't, don't send your rsume to Goldman, Lehman, Dow Jones; you know the AAA types.
[But for Microsoft, 100% of their innovation is making competitors products not work so well on Windows]
I still can't get that free OS to run any of my laptops.
GOOGLE is a great search engine with a great business, but that is it. They have had no real success anywhere else.
I mean, c'mon! Only the most rabid of MS sycophants would be
able to ignore simple math (as well as Business 101), by saying
that "MS BUYING OUT THE COMPETITION = COMPETITION".
Face up to reality already, will ya's?
There are current THREE Big Players in this market.
If Microsoft BUYS OUT one of those three, then THERE ARE ONLY
TWO PLAYERS LEFT.
Got it?
This ain't rocket science, folks, so for ya'll out there pushin' yer
buzz werds o' competition in the forums, the simple fact of the
matter is this...
TWO PLAYERS = LESS THAN THREE, SO THERE WOULD BE LESS
COMPETITION.
Sheeesh!
Sun already bought MySQL for a billion, mow that was a good purchase.