Google Considering Merger With Microsoft

buford_tannen writes "According to this New York Times Article (registration, etc.), Google may be considering a merger with Microsoft in the near future. As many people know, Google's search services are powered by Linux. "

Comments

Holy time machine!

[Chelloveck]

Um, isn't it still about 5 months until April 1st?

Re:Holy time machine!

[UrgleHoth]

And the new company's name will be Mooglesoft.

Re:Holy time machine!

[SirPrize]

That's because Microsoft's IIS servers are hidden behind Akamai's layer of Linux redirection/load-balancing servers, which is what Netcraft actually sees/identifies here.

Before anybody gets too worked up...

[DeadSea]

It does not appear that Google is seriously considering merging into Microsoft. Here are some links to stories (no registration required) and some quotes.

The Ledger (NY Times business section) - Microsoft and Google: Partners or Rivals?
'Microsoft - desperate to capture a slice of the popular and ad-generating search business - approached Google within the last two months to discuss options, including the possibility of a takeover.'

Financial Times (business section) - Google approached by Microsoft for takeover
'The approach "gained little traction" , according to the report, with Google indicating that it preferred to pursue an initial public offering.'

CNN Money - Microsoft courting Google
'Microsoft may still be interested in pursuing the Web search company at a later date' (The page title is 'Mr. Softee Courting Google' despite the article heading.)

It appears that Microsoft is trying to threaten Google with "If you don't merge with us, we'll make MSN search built into Longhorn, and everybody will use it instead of you because they won't know any better." To Google's credit, they think they can do a better job, find new and interesting areas to innovate, and generally tell Microsoft to suck it. The real question remains: Will Google be as good once they are a public company?

Re:Before anybody gets too worked up...

[drooling-dog]

The real question remains: Will Google be as good once they are a public company?

Or, will Google's Board of Directors even have the option of resisting a Microsoft bid once they're representing public shareholders?

Be very afraid!

[Stiletto]

SEARCH: Linux

Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "WINDOWS"?

SEARCH: Anti-trust

Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "CAPITALISM"?

SEARCH: Bill Gates

Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "YOUR NEW CORPORATE OVERLORD"?

Re:Be very afraid!

[pmz]

SEARCH: Anti-trust

Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "CAPITALISM"?

Funny, perhaps. However, the reality is that Microsoft broke the rules of the free market in the context of even a libertarian government, and they will face the consequences. They painted themselves into a corner, where companies like Red Hat, Sun, IBM, Lindows, etc. are standing outside the door smiling widely. Of course, this will play out over the next decade, but it is rather inevitable even without the Justice Department intervening.

Hrm.

[Geekenstein]

Nice sensationalist headline there. MS said they were interested, Google politely said no. I see no "consideration" there.

Of course, the whole point of the subject was to draw comments like this, so nice troll submitter, and nice troll to the admin who approved it.

Also seen in the headlines:

US Government considers merger with MS, Apple considers merger with MS, and GWB considers quitting presidency and working at Mickey D's.

Fun, isn't it?

I can see the errors now...

[hookedup]

Microsoft JET Database Engine error '80004005' Could not find file 'C:\inetpub\wwwroot\google\search.mdb'.

Two observations:

[jcknox]

First: I wonder how long it will take MS to figure out how to move Google to Windows. Remember the fiasco surrounding Hotmail's move from BSD (I think) to Windows?

Second: I can see the top 5 results from a search for "Linux" now:

1. Independent study shows Windows more secure than Linux
2. How to lower TCO by switching from Linux to Windows
3. Linux for terrorists, says expert.
4. Nazis retake Germany, install Linux
5. Linux bad for innovatoin, says expert panel.

Of course, all of these links will be to "archived" versions of "authentic" articles on a MS server somewhere.

Seriously. If we can't trust the MS marketing engine to be honest about their products, how can we trust them to keep their grubby fingers out of search results?

At least we'll still have alltheweb.com.

Offer They Can't Refuse

[4of12]

It's clear that Microsoft recognizes the value of Google's technology.

I don't know about you, but my web browsing relies heavily on Google to find sites that I will look at. I mean, that level of reliance is almost like how I rely on libc . And any businesses that I might find on the other end probably consider high Google rank worth a lot of money.

Microsoft, of course, loves to be in a position where people and businesses have to rely upon them heavily. It's potentially quite profitable.

Until now, people have relied on Google's goodwill not to use their powerful position unfairly. Since there are monetary incentives for Googles business to "manage" those searches differently, I'm alway apprehensive and would be appalled if a company with Microsoft's track record were to gain that additional power (as if they aren't sufficiently powerful now).

Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot

[BrynM]

The proper term is assimilated.