Microsoft makes $44.6B bid for Yahoo - Page 2

For anyone narrow enough to think it's only "Apple fanboys" who might be upset at this idea, here's a post from ArsTechnica, by "dougoftheabaci". I don't know this person, but his sentiments seem to have nothing to do with Apple.

I think it's particularly pathetic that some people think that you need to be a Microsoft basher in order to be called an Apple enthusiast!
Even the Apple online store sells and features Microsoft Office2008 on its front page.

Actually it's a "normal," i.e., highly common psychological mechanism: when we criticize others for having terrible qualities we use an internal frame of reference, i.e., our own worst qualities -- or our fears about our own worst potentials -- (whether we accept having them or not) and then simply project those onto those we criticize.

Very prevalent in political attacks, part of why couples have so much trouble understanding each other and totally on display in Ballmer's ironically true statement.

Watch people accuse each other in these arenas with this in mind and you'll see people most comfortable and adamant about attacking each other for things that are actually at least as true about themselves (or that they fear may be true about themselves), if not much, much moreso


Not so fast. Politicians (and not just in the US) are going to want to grandstand on this one for quite awhile, the courts may become involved, the tender has to be accepted and then even beginning to mesh the corp cultures will take lots of time. Years possibly.

While both Yahoo and MS will be forced to spin their strategic wheels, caught between uncertainty and regulations which prevent them from co-operating too closely before the deal's done. Which may be best news Google could want here..... ...so your old friend will not only be there, it'll be constrained from changing much.....


Have you been USING Hotmail for the last few years? It was my original account, and kept for my non-personal address, partly because of all the subs/accounts tied to it, and to keep an eye on the competition once I switched to GMail. (I also have Yahoo account for a user group and 'cos the calendar txts my cell phone twice before an appt.

By any measure HotMail has improved from terrible to at least OK since becoming part of the Live stable. For one thing they've vastly improved spam filtering, my biggest complaint. And as they say, much, much more. PS: After long experience with all three, I'm still sticking with GMail.


Better than Yahsoft......


No, only you, in your articulate, balanced, studied way care.

The Justice Dept., SEC, etc., etc., just play video games all day, and all the emergency measures to respond to the subprime mess aren't taking place.

And the Euro-crats aren't constantly nibbling at MS's ankles (and increasingly at Apple's) -- for all the good gov't getting involved in business matters generally does. (Would you like to see Apple forced to divest themselves of iTunes because the link to iPods constitutes "restraint of trade"??)

Nor are you sorry to be blunt (though I'm sorry you're so passionate about being so ill-formed) -- rather, you get off on fulminating and regurgitating lefty talking points.

PS: "Governments" don't CARE. They are abstract things, not people. Which is why it's tragically misplaced to place one's hope for any kind of salvation on them, because the love will never be returned. Big Communist gov't's don't love their people a bit more than the capitalist kind. And not to burst anyone's bubble here, but Apple, Inc. as Apple, Inc. doesn't love you either. Sorry, kids.



PMJOE is closer here. It's probably more relevant to ask what Microsoft HAS contributed to computing rather than tracing the fate of all their acquisitions ('tho DOS -- which begat Windows which begat Mr. Softee -- was an acquisition).

MS did not invent Disk Operating Systems, word processing, spread sheets, presentation software, databases, graphical user interfaces, mice, internet browsing, internet search, eMail, computer gaming, server OS's, nor much else it sells. Rather, through acquisitions, appropriation of ideas, aggressive marketing and then monopolistic practices, they "muskled' their way into all of them, and using brilliant folks (MS tries to hire the best) building on the deeply flawed foundations of Windows and IE, have produced a series of "barely good enough" improvements and evolution to stay there, with the fact that competitors have to write to the API's MS provides them keeping their innovation in check.

That's why Jobs' "Redmond, start your copiers!" quote still resonates. It has that gut level ring of truth.

Note: but neither did Apple invent any of those things for that matter...... ..and Apple's also bought companies which then just ceased to exist and if their tech ever saw the light of day again, it was well-masked, and have done a little shameless xeroxing from their own ISV's (and from Xerox for that matter, in a big way!). But I leave it to the rest of you to define what the differences and similarities are from there.......

It's still worth less than what I paid for it some time ago. With a cash and stock trade from MSFT, I'll just own more junk stock. \

Just cancelled my.yahoo.com and switched to iGoogle, even though at the current time my.yahoo.com is better. I agree with the others here about Hotmail. I was one of the first to use Hotmail and all went to crap after the M$ acquisition of Hotmail. Hopefully this will empower Google to get off their butts and speed up their development on their services! Yes, a very sad day indeed. We love and will miss you Yahoo, rest in peace.

You're really making this too complex. The only significant thing Microsoft has "contributed" to computing is the concept of licensing an operating system to a variety of computer manufacturers. Everything else is water under the bridge.

I mean they had some good versions of BASIC in the 70's and 80's to their credit, but they didn't invent BASIC either.

You realize it hasn't been finalized?


Its beyond being a Apple enthusiast though. I own a MBP and an iPod Nano. But I don't blindly think anything done by MS is evil and is going to be turned to crap and that everything done by Apple is the most awesomest thing ever. I'm calling out those people.

Initially I thought this was bad and I don't like the idea of Microsoft getting any bigger, but they won't even put a nick in the side of Google. I have to say Google has really impressed me lately. I now use Google for my primary e-mail and homepage not to mention 50 million searches a day. Yahoo quite simply blows IME. Google has become a part of society in an amazing way. It literally has become a verb. This is the exact same thing that McDonalds did back in the day- or arguably what Coke did. All fast food became "McDonalds", all pop became "Coke". Internet searching has become "Googling". Microsoft is making a bad move here pouring that much cash into something that is not going to be able to beat Google. Its like someone trying to buy Burger King to beat McDonalds- just not possible.

Right now Google is king. And who are Google's closest competitors? Yahoo, Microsoft, and (believe it or not) Apple. It's all about this whole migration towards the "Web OS." Google and other websites are replacing things we typically do on our PCs and moving it to the web. Think Google Docs and Spreadsheets. Sure they're still rudimentry right now but as technology improves, these web apps will start to match the quality of the native apps on our PCs. From this, you can start to see a future where a "computer" becomes only a monitor with a web-connection and all your apps are resting somewhere out in cyberspace. Be it 10 years or 30 years away, this is the future of our computing, and unless Microsoft and Apple get in to the game, they will be left behind, still developing more expensive desktop OSes.

Yahoo is MS's way of getting into that game.

I chuckle, too, because Yahoo is to Google as Microsoft is to Apple. I mean it. First go to yahoo.com. Look at that mess!!! Ads, clutter, business. Now go to Google. Nice and organized. No intrusive ads, a list of some links on top... otherwise, it's just a company logo and a search bar. The same goes, pretty much, for all of their sites. Ads are very subtle and non-intrusive.

Microsoft, believe it or not, is actually being smart for securing their future in this realm. Like Windows, however, I fear bad implementation, dirtiness, security issues, and LOTS OF ADS.

Apple, too, has begun their WebOS very subtly as, believe it or not, dotMac. However, right now, as subscribers know all too well, it is terribly overpriced for its capabilities, which are few. Apple should work on transforming dotMac to have the option of becoming a user-friendly web-portal which actually has features that make it worth its cost. Widgets on the web... it's the next OS X frontier.

-Clive

I still dont see why MSFT is so hell bent on squashing Google, they dont really compete.

Is just like a psychosis that Microsoft has," regarldess of how much money we lose in the process we're going to kill Google." WHY?????

Thank goodness it isn't finalized. Let's hope for some reason it doesn't go through. BTW, did you just say "awesomest"?

The thing that most irritates me about Microsoft is that they continually use the acquisition of new companies as a means to evolve and grow their business. Instead, maybe they should look inward and improve their existing products.

That's for the link but that's not actually what I meant.

Reading it again, my ? wasn't very clear.

By "succeeding" I didn't mean, will the merger succeed. I meant, what are the chances that this proposed hostile take-over will actually happen.

Thank you. There are way too many zealots here and it makes civilized discussions so difficult. Just the other day, I was giving my reasons for why I thought Windows 7 would be a better (and speedier) than average release, saying that I am going to give MS the benefit of the doubt this time around... and I got SLAMMED from, like, six different people, calling me a "Windows Fanboy" and a "troll!!!" Imagine! Me, a guy who preached the ways of the mac since the '90s when the Mac wasn't cool - nor evern really a great computer, looking back - being a Windows Fanboy.

Sure I also built a PC for general hacking and occasional gaming (xMac, Apple, xMac!) but my allegiance is to the Mac. I'm here because I like to discuss mac-related news and issues in technology... but sometimes the Zealots really frusterate me.

Glad there are people who understand.

-Clive

I use Hotmail, but only because it is free and works with my mail programs for free. I also use Yahoo and AOL, but only Hotmail and AOL for my email programs because Yahoo charges a stinking fee. Hotmail does totally stink, though.

The Xbox gets some credit, but not a lot. It is not the biggest money maker in the world, but it does alright. But again, it comes through bleeding your wallet through "services."

IE on the other hand did not get to where it is today because it is such a great browser or because it has been managed so well, but because it came preinstalled on all of the Windows computers, which have been 90+% of the computing markets for over a decade. It is simple math and no, IE does not count as a success. Even IE 7 lacks true open standards support.

Microsoft Office 2007 for windows is an excellent piece of software, but it has its issues too. I just took a class on it and was surprised how hard it is to use effectively unless you take a class on it.

With Windows 95 and 98, and even XP, Microsoft made a pretty good OS. the 95 and 98 versions were better than any other at the time. That changed with OS X though. And Windows quality has improved, but the quality of Mac OS just highlights the flaws in MS products that much more.

Microsoft buying Yahoo sounds like a nightmare. Microsoft has tyrannical business practices and makes it hard to just simply get things done. They always want to be sure your money is streaming out of your pockets toward them. No purchase and your done. no sir, you license away and subscribe and rent.

In recent years it has come to light that Microsoft is not a very well managed company. they do well based on economies of scale and that is about it. Companies like Apple, Google and IBM run circles around Microsoft management wise. And Yahoo is no better. Yahoosoft sounds like a nightmare. Take two woefully mismanaged companies and merge them. yeah, that sounds good. Not only that, but many of the things that users have come to know as normal workings of internet life will be thrashed with MS business strategies.

MS needs to focus. they are trying to copy Google and they aren't meant to run that way. Google is Google and they have the infrastructure to be what they are. Microsoft is an OS and Office software company at heart and they are having their struggles even there. there venture into online search seems halfhearted and only whatever they need to do in order to make surre they make some money out of it. the online advetising they have implemented is a nightmare. Every time you go to a website that uses it, don't tell me you don't get incredibly annoyed by mousing over a word and having a long "Live" animation come up trying to get you to click on it for some "relevant search."

Microsoft and yahoo sounds so bad. I may even have to close my Yahoo account. some may think that sounds crazy, but it is for the same reasons I don't use GMail. I don't trust them. At least with GMail, google tells you they are looking at your stuff and can use the info to further their own interests.

In any case, Yahoo is at least showing a potential upswing, while Microsofts attempt at a buyout only serves to highlight how badly managed they are, taking on tremendous debt to do the deal that would probably not benefit either company.

Its a matter of either innovation or controlling and stifling a market and then exploiting the resulting monopoly. Long term I vote for the innovations that create a little better and more exciting life for all of us. Sort term, show me the money!

That has got to be the best, most concise and well put thought on the subject I have heard or can be said. Very, very well put. Especially the Burger King analogy. that about hits the nail on the head.

"Yacrosoft?"

This is interesting- I read a few posts earlier where people said essentially the same thing- and I thought the exact same thing. Yahoo just feels cluttered and complex. It feels like there is a learning curve just to use it- just like Windows. If I hadn't grown up on Windows I would have no idea what I'm doing - it just isn't "intuitive" I suppose. Google struck me with its simplicity and ease of use. I have never used OSX but I am buying a Mac soon. I don't know if OSX has that sort of clean easy to use Google feel but I hope it does. I switched to Google from AOL a few months ago (Now I just use Firefox with Igoogle homepage/email etc...) I have to say I am incredibly impressed with what Google has done. Microsoft has a helluva task in front of them if they are going to beat Google on this one.

because google is going after microsoft traditions like word and such with online apps that are browser and OS independent.

I don't have any links but when I heard the news this morning on CNBC, the commentators called it a Murdock bid. They implied that the bid was so high it would have to be accepted. Much in the way Murdock got the WSJ.

I guess there are anti-trust issues that could arise, but I've not heard of any.

Yahoo has some measures to prevent that though. Arstechnica goes into that in which the board can grant extra shares of preferred stock to make sure they can never be taken over in a hostile circumstance.

it sounds like MS wants to force the issue, but the shareholders in this case have more say than the hostile company. The only way the deal goes through is if Yahoo wants to do it.

Here's hoping it fails. It will be marginal news for Microsoft, bad news for Yahoo, and the worst possible news for you and me.

Suppose that this deal goes through, and Microsoft drives Yahoo into a death spiral. Would it be so bad to have a Google monopoly? I posted this on slashdot a month ago, in response to the Google/DoubleClick merger:

"Where is the danger? If we (the consumers) were paying Google money, then this would be a dangerous thing, but it isn't us - it is the advertisers. If Google gets a 100% monopoly over online advertising, then the worst thing that they can do is raise advertising rates through the roof - which would mean fewer ads for us to see, since online advertising would then be less cost-effective. I hope they get a monopoly and raise prices through the roof, personally."

A Microsoft monopoly did not sound so bad at first either.

there is an old saying that absolute power corrupts and power corrupts absolutely. Just because it sounds fine now doesn't mean it will when the chips are down.

No monopoly is good for the consumer or the industry for that matter.

I really haven't heard of a whole lot of people saying Gdocs are anything close to a substitute for MS Office. I wouldn't expect that to be the case for many years.

You have to read all what Ballmer said to all of Microsoft at a "town meeting". It was absolutely hilarious!!

You're a troll, and I curse... oh, nevermind.

I kind of like "Yicrosoft"...

I don't know much either - but basically whether friendly or hostile, a company offers to pay a premium price to take over the other. If the board and management like the idea, see the benefits, or whatever, then they recommend it. The price doesn't have to be such a premium if shareholders like the outcome.

For a hostile takeover, the management and board don't want the takeover. Sometimes they can 'poison' the bid, making it hard for the takeover... but generally it just means that the company has to pay much higher to get shareholders to sell. So Microsoft is offering a 60% premium, and they have a lot of cash reserves.

If they want it, they'll get it. If there's a huge public backlash then maybe they'll decide it's not worth it.

I hope Yahoo doesn't go for it.
I use their small business hosting services and I know MS will screw that up.

Nah, lets keep 2 independent companies with 2 sets of good ideas. The whole capitalist/competitive environment setup means that if we have LOTS of different companies that some really surprising and innovative ideas can emerge.

If all the competitors merge into one entity, then they get efficiencies of scale but little competitive external push to work better or have more ideas. Not to target east vs west, but competitive forces (with lots of different companies competiting) are why our systems did so much better than those blocks without competition (where they assumed an 'obvious' fact that single, bigger companies were more cost effective because there was no duplication, etc).

Long live genuine competition

re. what products did MS buy and screw up?
we could (someone could) probably come up with a definitive list, but the ones I know of include:
the original powerpoint (originally developed by "four" something software decade+ ago), Virtual PC (bought and then stopped development when mac os/hw changed), CopyAgent (bought and immediately killed - one of my most favorite OS 9 tools), Hotmail, as mentioned (though it was also always a spam attractor), and must be others but that's a start.
feel free to correct or add.

Bigpics: wow, lots of thoughts there, worthy of further cogitating.

My take -
Overall, I'd be pretty sad if MS gets away with stealing, I mean, hostile takeover of Yahoo. I really have no faith that they would make the product better at all. More like, they are just looking for more ways to pull in money longterm.

If MS takes over Yahoo, does that mean we are all one step closer to the ultimate merger of MS with ATT?
Since SBC bought ATT, changed its name to ATT, and uses Yahoo as its DSL/quasi-cable broadband home portal.
Lets see, that means my internet provider may soon be MicroSATT or YahooSoft or MicroTel or ...

Anyway, I hope their takeover fails, as I think the only beneficiaries would be upper mgmt and institutional stockholders of the two companies -- well, of course, the other big beneficiaries would be the boatload of lawyers and merger managers. They are most likely some of the big proponents on this, with mega $$ signs in their eyes.

I was waiting for that one! Have a great weekend everybody- let's check out those new MBAirs!!!!

Grrr, now I'm going have to find a new homepage!!

(assuming M$ does their usual job of farking things up and making them unnecessarily complicated)

WebTV - first real set top box solution. Squashed/mangled into other set top plans
FoxPro - considered a brilliant database. Forgotten as they let Access take the market share.

For those looking for a list of companies Microsoft bought can visit here:

http://www.vcnet.com/bms/departments.../catalog.shtml

You can all thank me later. Jk!! If you look at the list you'll notice the site doesn't even mention companies Microsoft bought from 2000 and on.

Well he makes my stomach turn almost as much as hayden christensen.

..ok MORE than.

..erm.. damn your first born, err, you troll.. or something.

True people use it, but it STILL SUCKS, I have a legacy hotmail account (8 or 9 years) and recently it has gone to the pits, its EVEN harder to use than it was.


Oooooo KAY, you are either well and truly on the teat, or just cant realise the crap from the M$ PR machine from reality. 6 BILLION pumped in and 500million in profit does not a profit make, when they have recouped the 6BILLION and mad a dollar profit over that, then I'll agree.

VisualZone: Thanks for that list. Yikes, lotsa folks gobbled up by the MS machine.

And there is the precursor to powerpoint: Forethought (which I misremembered as "four" something-or-other)