I thought it was common knowledge by now that Google is a play on googol. The fact that they named their HQ googleplex, after googolplex is a dead giveaway, if there was any doubt before
Common knowledge that it's a play on googol? Not quite. The founders spelled googol wrong and came up with Google.
The punch clock, I-will-milk-it-for-all-its-worth-or-until-the-ship-sinks"" DNA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Yahoo's DNA? Check out their board - http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/directors.cfm. ; How many of these directors know or care what Yahoo's DNA is? They effectively dumped Jerry Yang! They hired Carol Bartz and then Scott Thompson! What Yahoo DNA do they personify?
Based on recent events, the only consistent phenotypes of Yahoo's DNA are (i) CEO change every 3-24 months; (ii) survival and in fact profitability despite the turmoil.
AppleGreen....What's your problem? If anything SolipsismX's comment was overtly non-sexist. Don't be such a$$ hole. Marissa's obviously good looking. There's nothing wrong with pointing it out.
Since it appears you insist on having something to bitch about, I'll give you a sexist comment:
As compared to most women she's good looking, but for an engineer, she's smoking hot.
AppleGreen would rather look at this?
Mayer and Larry Page used to "date". She was apparently marginalized at Google. It would be interesting to see if she turns Yahoo into a Google revenge project.
What a fabulous choice. She's incredibly talented, has created a lot of value for Google, and I am quite surprised that they let her go seemingly so easily. I think she would have made a far better CEO than Larry Page.
That said, she probably won't succeed at Yahoo. Which would be ok, because, it's common knowledge that Yahoo is unfixable. People will give her major props for trying. Without a doubt, she's going on to much bigger things in tech.
I wish her luck, because there are a lot of ego-driven jerks in the industry who'll be trying to bring her down.
You should read up about her, she will be hardly missed at Google. Anyone with an engineering background will suck at turning around a company.(E.g. Co-founder Yang) The business sentiment about her is negative. You don't hire someone with zero executive experience to turn around a company.
Most Yahoo users aren't native English speakers. You completely forgot the rest of the world.
Also, Yahoo itself originally claimed that the name stood for "Yet Another Hierarchical Officious Oracle" (the company's roots are in a web directory, the product now at dir.yahoo.com).
To most people on this planet, Yahoo is just the name of an Internet company. It doesn't mean anything else to them.
But enjoy your narrow-minded worldview. My guess is you've never traveled outside the United States, probably not even outside your state.
I would argue about the name Yahoo, but I'm too busy digging these pretty stones out of the mud! You make yourself sound like some kind of intelligent horse.
"Three years ago, The New York Times reported that she asked her team to test 41 shades of blue before settling on a color."
I BELIEVE that a certain Steve tested quite a few shades of beige before settling on the color for a certain Apple model, you surely don't need me to remind you which one
You should read up about her, she will be hardly missed at Google. Anyone with an engineering background will suck at turning around a company.(E.g. Co-founder Yang) The business sentiment about her is negative. You don't hire someone with zero executive experience to turn around a company.
Why are you bringing reason and sense into this thread. We should simply continue to comment on her looks and whether we'd "hit it". /s
Oh. Well as long as you say the name is alright I guess it is. :-/
There is such a thing as over thinking it.
People said the same kinds of things about the Wii's name. It was hardly the failure that your argument about a ridiculously inappropriate name choice would have predicted.
I don't recall anyone making any kind of negative remark about the name of the company until yours. I don't believe the naming was a problem at all, but rather gross mismanagement, among other problems.
In 1997 no one would knew what Steve Jobs would have accomplished with Apple by his death in late 2011 so your argument doesn't hold water.
Incorrect. Steve Jobs was highly accomplished by 1997. He started a company in a garage. He made the Apple I and Apple II. They then made the Mac, and revolutionised entire aspects of humanity. Apple was known for earth-shattering marketing campaigns and a litany of innovative ideas. Pixar and NEXT were perhaps not recognised as much back then but if you look at the interviews something was ticking in Steve's mind. Apple bought NEXT, leading to Steve Jobs' return.
I do not see any evidence that Marissa, however accomplished she is, is anywhere at the level of Steve Jobs when he returned to Apple.
Therefore, given the state of Yahoo, at this point in time there is no reason to believe Marissa can turn around the company to any worthwhile position even in 10 years.
Comments
Her success at Google would have been nowhere as successful if she weighed 100 pounds more and if she wasn't so pretty.
Look, she may be very smart, but I saw this and I said ................
http://gawker.com/152210/editorial-googles-power-couple?tag=valleywagtechtop
Her move is like quitting an assistant manager's position at Macy's to be a manager at Walmart.
Yeah she might be in charge now, but I wouldn't brag about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo
I thought it was common knowledge by now that Google is a play on googol. The fact that they named their HQ googleplex, after googolplex is a dead giveaway, if there was any doubt before
Common knowledge that it's a play on googol? Not quite. The founders spelled googol wrong and came up with Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtm135
Her move is like quitting an assistant manager's position at Macy's to be a manager at Walmart.
Yeah she might be in charge now, but I wouldn't brag about it.
That's just wrong.
The punch clock, I-will-milk-it-for-all-its-worth-or-until-the-ship-sinks"" DNA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Yahoo's DNA? Check out their board - http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/directors.cfm. ; How many of these directors know or care what Yahoo's DNA is? They effectively dumped Jerry Yang! They hired Carol Bartz and then Scott Thompson! What Yahoo DNA do they personify?
Based on recent events, the only consistent phenotypes of Yahoo's DNA are (i) CEO change every 3-24 months; (ii) survival and in fact profitability despite the turmoil.
I wonder if she's on AdultFriendFinder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471
AppleGreen....What's your problem? If anything SolipsismX's comment was overtly non-sexist. Don't be such a$$ hole. Marissa's obviously good looking. There's nothing wrong with pointing it out.
Since it appears you insist on having something to bitch about, I'll give you a sexist comment:
As compared to most women she's good looking, but for an engineer, she's smoking hot.
AppleGreen would rather look at this?
Mayer and Larry Page used to "date". She was apparently marginalized at Google. It would be interesting to see if she turns Yahoo into a Google revenge project.
http://gawker.com/152210/editorial-googles-power-couple
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
AppleGreen would rather look at this?
Where do you guys even find this stuff? The obsession with Ballmer is just really creepy.
Well lets see what she will do for yahoo !!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
What a fabulous choice. She's incredibly talented, has created a lot of value for Google, and I am quite surprised that they let her go seemingly so easily. I think she would have made a far better CEO than Larry Page.
That said, she probably won't succeed at Yahoo. Which would be ok, because, it's common knowledge that Yahoo is unfixable. People will give her major props for trying. Without a doubt, she's going on to much bigger things in tech.
I wish her luck, because there are a lot of ego-driven jerks in the industry who'll be trying to bring her down.
You should read up about her, she will be hardly missed at Google. Anyone with an engineering background will suck at turning around a company.(E.g. Co-founder Yang) The business sentiment about her is negative. You don't hire someone with zero executive experience to turn around a company.
I would argue about the name Yahoo, but I'm too busy digging these pretty stones out of the mud! You make yourself sound like some kind of intelligent horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
"Three years ago, The New York Times reported that she asked her team to test 41 shades of blue before settling on a color."
I BELIEVE that a certain Steve tested quite a few shades of beige before settling on the color for a certain Apple model, you surely don't need me to remind you which one
Why are you bringing reason and sense into this thread. We should simply continue to comment on her looks and whether we'd "hit it". /s
Why bother, I ask. Can they close Yahoo and give all the employees three year's severance pay. I think that would be a better move overall.
Before you go making absolute claims about a company's future you might to consider Michael Dell's comments about Jobs returning to Apple.
Well is there a Steve Jobs returning to Yahoo? I don't think it's Marissa, somehow.
In 1997 no one would knew what Steve Jobs would have accomplished with Apple by his death in late 2011 so your argument doesn't hold water.
There is such a thing as over thinking it.
People said the same kinds of things about the Wii's name. It was hardly the failure that your argument about a ridiculously inappropriate name choice would have predicted.
I don't recall anyone making any kind of negative remark about the name of the company until yours. I don't believe the naming was a problem at all, but rather gross mismanagement, among other problems.
Incorrect. Steve Jobs was highly accomplished by 1997. He started a company in a garage. He made the Apple I and Apple II. They then made the Mac, and revolutionised entire aspects of humanity. Apple was known for earth-shattering marketing campaigns and a litany of innovative ideas. Pixar and NEXT were perhaps not recognised as much back then but if you look at the interviews something was ticking in Steve's mind. Apple bought NEXT, leading to Steve Jobs' return.
I do not see any evidence that Marissa, however accomplished she is, is anywhere at the level of Steve Jobs when he returned to Apple.
Therefore, given the state of Yahoo, at this point in time there is no reason to believe Marissa can turn around the company to any worthwhile position even in 10 years.