Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Eyeing AOL?
meriksen writes "This article on the CNN website suggests that Microsoft is looking to acquire AOL. What are the chances and do /. readers think this will ever happen?" The NY Post story is slightly more informative.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Besides having to sell over Netscape (I think I have $10 here...) wouldn't there be a problem with Microsoft's existing deals with Comcast?
Well, when they deny like that, what additional proof does anyone need that this is pretty much a done deal?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Microsoft eyeing AOL? Sounds like they would make strange bedpartners for a few reasons I can think of; The Microsoft Butterfly seems to market directly to the AOL mentality, which many of you know to be among those who use "The Internet" to find out things, download music and chat ("The Internet" being the AOL homepage!)...
:-)
While I may think AOL is too big for Microsoft to acquire and manage properly, that's just my opinion and it's likely incorrect, as Bill Gates is an iron leader of a huge corporate empire, with the Midas touch, and elite backing that gives anyone with that much money a guarantee of acquiring even more. What is more interesting than all the market'spaek, is that Time/Warner wants to dump AOL... and for this I am not surprised, while the article is more along the lines of Microsoft wanting to get their greedy hands on AOL, any objective observation would lead one to ponder if AOL is having trouble, or projected trouble? Whenever I have ever sold a car, it wasn't because I wanted some schmo from the public to get my super amazing car and benefit from it; it was because the car was old and I didn't want it anymore.
'Nuff said.
could be very very bad... Say goodbye to AIM!
But then I thought of the combined cluelesness of AOL and Microsoft support combined. Be afraid.
Gnusay -- for all your talking gnu needs.
AOL builds horrible, buggy software. So does Microsoft. They are a perfect fit!
America Online acquired Netscape Communications $4.2 billion dollars in 1998 ...
RFC1925
Oh what a great couple that would make. I always knew there was something strange about this spring time...
On the other hand, this might also have its advantages. We wouldn't have to be anti MS AND anti AOL anymore because it would be just one thing or one enemy less.
It's like the Borg assimilating the forces of darkness from the Lord of the Rings.
www.samuraidreams.com - My Blog
www.samuraifiles.com - Get Some Videos Here
You mean they don't own them already?
Unfortunately, this makes excellent sense for Microsoft. When they put together MSN around 1994, it was obvious that they were trying to get in on this action. MSN never succeeded in terms of its weak user base.
Microsoft already has the cash on hand, and AOL Time Warner stock has dropped about 75% since the merger was completed.
This suggests that they're only trying to acquire AOL, not AOL Time Warner - so this wouldn't be the complete media content delivery yadda yadda that they want. However, AOL has a large subscriber base and serves as an awesome potential outlet for Microsoft's content.
But is it a scary thought? Oh hell yes.
-m.
Megacorporation TimeWarner (formerly AOL Timewarner) is eager to divest itself of the lagging AOL brand. This megamerger was a disaster for consumers (as all mergers are) as well as the interested parties, e.g., the capitalist shareholders.
Microsoft would make an equally odius partner to combine with AOL. Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas...
Stop corporate
This is typical Microsoft behavior. MSN has always been meant to be an AOL-killer, but despite having the Microsoft promotions machine behind it, they've never come close to defeating AOL. If you can't beat 'em, try to buy 'em.
Now I'll get viruses on a disc through the mail.
A-IMSOL.
(read each letter individually)
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
One of AOL's greatest strengths at the moment is the fact that it has easy access to the TV, movie, music, and magazine content empire that is Time Warner. Microsoft just doesn't have as large of a content machine.
This is important because AOL's not really just an ISP anymore. Many people who have a fully functional ISP connection are still paying AOL just for it's boatload of exclusive content. AOL without the Time Warner content base would look something like MSN, and just not have as many members as it has now.
Any MS-AOL would need to license more content than it would have in house. AOL's worth more inside a media company than it is inside Microsoft, I can't see how this deal makes sense.
Besides having to sell over Netscape (I think I have $10 here...) wouldn't there be a problem with Microsoft's existing deals with Comcast?
What problem would that be? Nothing really prevents Comcast and Time Warner Cable from merging if that's what they wanted to do, since there's no place in which the two cable companies compete with each other.
And if this deal goes down, you can thank the millions of dollars thrown around in back rooms. I can't believe this would ever even be thought of by MS, but they've got some huge balls. The operating system monopoly with the Internet service provider monopoly? (I know there are other ways of getting on the Internet and so do you, but does Billy Ray and Sheila down in Podunk? Besides, 35 million subscribers is not a drop in the bucket, either) Sheesh.... Do you need any more proof that this is a Bad Idea (tm)?
I've done business with AOL for the past few years. Everytime I visit the AOL campus there is always talks of micro$oft buying them out. There were even talking about it when they merged with Time Warner. Stating that TW would spin off AOL for auction. Nothing really has changed much over the past few months to really push this deal through anytime soon.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. --Edmund Burke
I could be wrong, but I don't think they are talking about aquiring the entire AOL Time Warner. Any deal between MSFT and AOLTW would probably only involve a sale of the AOL division to Microsoft. It is no secret that Time Warner has been looking at ways to make the most of AOL while it still can. Selling it to Microsoft, would probably be a very good deal for TimeWarner.
On the other hand, I cannot see the deal being that great for Microsoft. AOL is a dying division in AOLTW, their core market is in dialup, and they don't offer enough to survive (at least in their present size) in a broadband dominated market. Unless of course Microsoft is just looking to get the AOL division on the cheap, and strip it for the few assets it can make some use of.
Why not? They've already proven themselves immune to anti-trust concerns and netscape got the official ax a little bit back. AOL customers are already used to prorietary software and versions of their search and browse capabilities. They're used to prepackaged experiences and very high amounts of ISP marketing.
AOL is a black mark on Time Warner, and they would love to get rid of it. This would vastly increase MS penenatration in the broadband markets and they can expand their strict policies on what can get on the Internet. MS has the cash, AOL has the customers of the type they so desperately want. It's a marraige made in hell. I predict this goes through.
"If this happens: Would they assimiliate AIM into MSN?"
Of course they will. And resistance is futile. All AOL's Base Are Belong to MSN.
It'll take an antitrust ruling to kill this, because MS probably likes the idea of getting all thos AOL users (and IM users, too). For us Linux AIM users, heh, better hope Jabber spreads....
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
At this point Microsoft is only ever going to die the way the fat-man in the restaurant sketch in the Python's Meaning of Life, i.e. gluttony. I believe that the best thing that could of ever of happened to Microsoft, and every computer using consumer on the planet, would have been for them to split their OS division. But the way they are set-up now, one poison pill can make the entire organism sick. Knowing how AOL is run, the only reasonable course of action would be to shut it all down and switch them over to MSN otherwise it's a tar baby they won't be able to get unstuck from.
I'm all for Microsoft getting as big as possible. That way people will know, in lump fashion, what technology to avoid and obviously see the benefits of the alternatives. Also, at some point Microsoft is going to compete with more and more businesses - if you are a competitor, even tangentially, with Microsoft - would you trust 100% a company as aggressive as Microsoft to be the technology foundation of your business?
-_-
When we think of a rival for AOL, who do we think of mostly? MSN, of course. When AOL launched their prized High-Speed DSL service, who was next to follow and stayed right behind them? MSN. Now wouldn't you see some little "defeating competition" problem in there somewhere?
Just wait until we hear from the DOJ. If they wouldn't let Oracle purchase PeopleSoft, they sure as hell had not better let this happen.
In the better case, if they somehow do purchase it, it's pretty hard to say what would happen to it. After all, AOL is pretty unstable by itself alone... much less with Microsoft tinkering with it.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
Let's just consolidate evil in one spot.
Bill G pretty much already owns SCO -- if MS and AOL merge, Slashdot will just need one "It's Evil. Laugh" icon for all three.
Hmm.... then we can put Apple, Java, and BSD under one "Yup, It's STILL dying" icon.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
I note the EU had a disagreement with Microsoft. Does this mean an eventual purchase of Europe by the Redmond Conglomerate? So when is Bill Gates getting his reserved seat on the UN Security Council?
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
This would solve all the problems for spam in the world today.
* ^From.+(aol|msn).com
beautiful!
"You've got a BlueScreen!"
That's because you only watch American television. Try getting some news from more internationally-based sources (like the BBC), and you will see just how biased the American media actually is.
It's not that they taint the truth they are reporting, but they just seem to leave out the other side of the story a little too often..
When I formerly worked with Sprint, and MCI was trying to buy them, it was a God-send that it got blocked. It may prove to be the case here as well. We've already read stories on here about the EU not being Microsoft friendly.
In the end, would it benefit the consumer? I'd be inclined to say, "Maybe, but probably not". The only benefit to M$ shareholders is rolling in the monthly subscriber fees. However, they are from a fickle market: consumers. M$ gets their monthly royalties from a reliable, steady source: businesses. This is part of the reason Nextel kicks everyone's ass in terms of revenue per user (because they identified this marketing trend early and targeted it).
John
Summary is that TimeWarner says that TWX and MSFT have been talking about DRM, but that the other rumors are simply not true. The full press release is here:_ 2.html
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040319/tech_aol_microsoft
If it happens, we'll be able to find out once and for all if two wrongs really do make a right.
filmcritic.com - Movie reviews on Internet time
A while ago Microsoft was considering purchasing Google. On the other hand AOL has right to buy nearly 2 million Google shares. If MS buys AOL then, by implication, MS has the same right ...
A religious war is an adult version of a fight over who has the best imaginary friend
Miscrosoft may as well buy TW and have their massive content delivery system, which is one of the reasons MSN isn't doing well. After this can a merger with the Disney/McDonalds/Coca-Cola empire be close behind? McDonalds McWi-Fi or whatever is already "powered by centrino" whatever the hell that means, so they're already in bed with Wintel. This looks like the start of the sci-fi predicted super-corps that eventually replace the government. Blue Sun anyone? Where do i signup for the libertarian party...
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
Please people, stop speculating on what would happen if MS bought AOL-TW. The article is about TimeWarner selling its AOL portion to Microsoft. It does say that they are discussing MS possibly investing in TimeWarner as part of the deal though. But that is not quite the same a MS taking over the whole kit and kaboodle.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
...because of anti-trust reasons. It would be a monopoly on "sucks".
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
America Online has the right to buy a $22m chunk of Google, according to a filing by parent Time Warner.
Hmm...
g =n efd_top
This could be an interesting buy, I guess. See this
article in C|Net on AOL's rights in buying Google's
shares...
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5175783.html?ta
May god help net
AOL/Time Warner Dumped AOL. This isn't a big deal, lots of companies do something similarly - IBM comes to mind.
/.er concerned about this because AOL was considered the worst Internet provider just a few years ago and there isn't much love for MS here.
Now I can't imagine any
The question is what technologies does MS want? Netscape, AIM - what else?
Netscape the browser is dead. Mozilla was spun off into Mozilla foundation, seperate non for profit entity. Netscape is now just the budget ISP that AOL offers.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
A lot of people have been bashing AOL, and it's true that it's probably not a good choice for most /. readers. But they have a lot of features that are good for some pretty big niche markets (people with small kids, for example).
I have a Time-Warner cable modem. Time-Warner has to let other ISPs use its cable lines, so when you sign up, you can take Time-Warner's Road-Runner, Earthlink, a local company, or AOL as your ISP.
If you walk into the cable company office, you see tons of promotional material for Road Runner. They have cartoon road runners on posters all over the place, terminals in the office so you can see how fast it is, and all the rest.
But there is no sign whatsoever that AOL is available. You have to know about it. I'm not even sure you can sign up for AOL at the office -- you might have to call AOL and get it set up.
Whether or not you like AOL, it's a big brand, and a lot of people do like it. I think that if they had posters for AOL at the office, along side of the Road Runner stuff, they'd sell as many AOL accounts as Road Runner accounts.
They don't, though. Why? Corporate infighting? Not wanting the other guys to look good? I don't know.
The point is that AOL is an asset that Time-Warner, for whatever reasons, doesn't want to maximize. Someone else would do a better job.
Why would the Borg want to buy The Teletubbies?
No No, Mozilla will be alive and well, first off Mozilla was an open source license. Second the Mozilla Foundation was created and AOL gave them a nice $2M gift to get started. They are are a separate legal entity. Mozilla is now independent of AOL. As for the future of xmms and winamp well who knows. However I think (IANAL) the "look" of winamp would be a trademark and not a copyright. If a trademark is not defended then you lose the trademark. Since xmms has been out for a few years now no worries.
As of Sept 2003:
-America Online had 24.7 million subscribers and a 25.6% share
-MSN had 8.7 million subscribers and a 9.0% share.
So MSFT could buy the dialup business and hold a significantly larger share of the ISP business. 34.6% does not a monopoly make.
Take the content and Roadrunner and Cable. Combine it with Paul Allen's Comcast and you now have 45% of the ISP market and a significant portion of the cable TV market
Time Warner Roadrunner broadband never offered AOL as an ISP option. So I suspect that they do not think highly of AOL even within the walls. You can even get Earhlink or Max.Inter.Net as an alternative!
Have you Meta Moderated t
In other news, Microsoft today announced plans to acquire the government of the United States. By leveraging innovative technologies, content providers streamline compelling enterprise solutions.
A Microsoft spokenperson commented, "By controlling what is arguably the most powerful government in the world, Microsoft will be able to better control the rights of consumers in regards to the company's valuable intellectual property." The first change to be made, according to Chairman and now Chief World Domination Officer Bill Gates, is to rename the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) to MRS (Microsoft Revenue Service). From now on, all tax dollars will go directly into Bill Gates' checking account.
Microsoft's acquisitions last week of the RIAA, MPAA, SCO, and the Equifax credit reporting bureau have empowered the company to supply the best operating system since Windows XP, enabling the multinational corporations next on Microsoft's acquisition list to gain a higher return on lawsuits against their own customers.
Microsoft stock climbed 90 points after the announcement.
That's a first.
I could be wrong, but wasn't this one of the signs of the Apocolypse?
Seriously though, if Microsoft were to aquire AOL, what would stop them from ISP and OS domination? They could make a big mess for non-windows users to be online in that case... I could see it now:
**Joe user opens www.--------.com**
"We're sorry, this Microsoft Enhanced webpage cannot be viewed on this computer. Do you want to upgrade to Windows OS?"
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
I realize you probably have your own answer to that question, but for me, the answer seems simple:
:P
Mind/Marketshare.
Like the other fellow said, for those people who don't know any better, AOL is the internet. When those brilliant souls start making the association "Microsoft == Internet", well... what a huge coup that'll be, eh?
Secondarily, I think MS would love the opportunity to squash Netscape a little more. AOL has toyed on and off with the idea of defaulting to Netscape browser tech; buying AOL would probably mean no further chance of that happening. Just another way to enforce vendor lock-in.
And Nullsoft? WinAmp is dead! Long live WMP!
Just my $0.02.
You've got a vulnerability!
ICQ didn't disappear or merge completely into AIM when AOL bought the company. While Microsoft would probably work slowly and gently to migrate users over to the whole Passport system, I seriously doubt they'd just pull the plug or force everybody to suddenly switch.
Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
in the millions of man-hours needed to retool all known scales of, measures of, and references to 'corporate suckage'
/.ers reading the story headline had their face in the hands and were making some sort of noise that would make your dog cower, it's the synergy of the basic groans most make at the mere mention of either of these companies
admit it - the majority of
the new grownup ms ads make me want to watch 'office space' to see more realistic cubicle behavior, and the kids ones make me imagine that kid never gets to astronaut school because he's doing his application in office...
on the other hand, the prospect of apple / pixar / disney being aligned could make people skip down the street...
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Oh wait...
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
This is idle speculation and it is completely unrealistic for all of the antitrust reasons.
1. AOL has the option to buy a large chunk on Google and Google is AOL's preferred search option. AOL promotes Google in their commercials.
It is no secret Microsoft wishes to bury Google with Longhorn.
2. AOL owns WinAmp.
Microsoft getting its grubby hands on WinAmp and other Nullsoft properties wouldn't be allowed. See the European Union's (non Mad Cow) beef with Microsoft and Windows Media Player.
3. AOL owns AIM and ICQ.
Microsoft acquiring either or both of these Instant Messenger platforms would not be permitted. AIM is essentially the standard IM client on mobile phones in America. AIM is also the basis for Apple's iChat software. There are too many parties involved that would object to this.
4. AOL has options to buy Amazon.com stock and owns shares.
'Nuff said.
5. AOL owns shares in TiVo and is a partner.
'Nuff said. See UltimateTV. Also see "WindowsXP Media Center."
6. AOL is an active partner in Sony's plans of offering IM services to the Playstation platform. While this has not happened on the PS2, it is most likely scheduled for the PS3.
Microsoft and the Xbox, not to mention the Xbox Next. 'Nuff said.
7. AOL is a preferred partner with Apple's iTunes.
Microsoft acquiring AOL will again be seen as a move to squeeze Apple out of the market just like over the AIM situation. This will only aide the antitrust lawsuit Real Networks has leveraged against Microsoft.
8. AOL was an institutional shareholder in Palm since the spin-off from 3Com.
Again, Microsoft acquiring AOL would be a headache because this would be yet another example of Microsoft hitting at its various competitors.
The Bush Justice Dept., already burned over the Antitrust Settlement, will in no way allow this to go through.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
I read something like this and I think to myself
Does America have NO anti-competition laws???
In Europe it is highly doubtful a huge predatory company, with a track record such as Microsoft's, would get the EU go ahead to acquire/merge with a company like AOL.
This sig has been deprecated.
I don't really care about the AOL Internet Service, Microsoft can buy it and crush it and spit it out to the dumpster for all I care. What I'm worried about is projects like AIM and Mozilla. Mozilla (and Netscape, another AOL product) are the biggest competitors to IE, and for good reason: they don't suck.
I rely on AIM for day to day communication, but Microsoft would simply merge it into the shitty Windows/MSN Messenger services, creating one terrible horrible disgusting network. Then they could start charging for IM too.
And they would DEFINATELY disband the Mozilla team and get rid of netscape completely. Although the Mozilla developers I imagine would pick up the browser in their spare time after work, or become sponsored by a 3rd party, it still has potential to damage Mozilla.
Hypocrisy is the 8th deadly sin.
Netscape no longer exists as a software company -- it's now a crappy news page and one of AOL's ISP brands.
A bigger problem would be Nullsoft (MS already has EU problems with Media Player).
New MSN/AOL Verson 6.66 With the new MSN/AOL you now recive the dumbed down internet from the biggest computer software companys that is above the law. You will be informed of updates though our Blue screen of udates. When you see the blue screen you need to update, no pop ups just a friendly blue screen to let you know that we care about you and there is a new patch ready. Don't worry about spam because no one wants email you anyway. Your new buddy list will have all of you AOL/MSN friends and one spot and file shareing has never been easyer with our new "back door" file server.
This Sig for rent.
Actually, I could see Microsoft buying out AOL and it being a sensible business move.
The thing is, they wouldn't be running both AOL and MSN simultaneously. What they'd be paying for is the existing AOL customer base, which they'd then be able to migrate over to their service. (There are a number of ways this could be accomplished, but an "optimal" method might be creating a new "AOL 10" type CD that asks users if they'd prefer the "old AOL style" front-end, or just a direct connection to the Internet without it. This new CD could be modified to connect to MSN's existing phone numbers or gateways, allowing Microsoft to slowly phase out and sell off the hardware they obtained from the AOL purchase.)
As it stands, MSN competes pretty directly with AOL. (The "rest of us" don't generally consider either one a viable option for our internet needs.) If they absorb AOL, they might have enough customers to make it profitable.
That's a first!
Open source sig, feel free to modify and distribute.
Why did HP buy Compaq? Computers are far less profitable than printers and other such accessories. Why did HP want to further dilute its company with marginally profitable computers?
Perhaps the biggest reason was that it funnelled more customers to the more profitable accessories businesses (if I buy a computer from HP, I might as well buy the printer from there as well). Also, the economies of scale in their parts business (both HP and Compaq sell highly proprietary parts which are only available from them--e.g. $300 motherboards for $500 PCs).
Microsoft has been consistently willing to lose money with MSN. If I am reading the article correctly (AOL profits are not separately available easily, since they are a subsidiary; probably available somewhere, but I'm not taking the time to try), AOL is at least currently profitable (albeit decreasingly so). Further, purchasing it more than triples their subscriber base. All the reasons for Microsoft to be in the ISP business at all (presumably to help funnel business back to their profitable OS and office suite lines) are reasons for them to want AOL.
No, I don't think that AOL has anything to teach Microsoft, but that has nothing to do with the potential aquisition. The biggest thing that Microsoft can gain is market share. Next biggest is content, but they will probably look to outsource most of that anyway (they might even leave the content part with Time Warner, as sharing content was the original purpose of their talks).
*sniff*
I'm going to miss those free coasters and DVD cases.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
They would make it so that both messangers work with one another at first - and leave the brands alone. Then later, little by little they would get rid of one of the messangers with newer patches and versions.
AOL would probably come out on top because of the brand name... but hopefully some of the good things about MSN messanger would get integrated as well.
There is always a frontier where there is an open and willing mind
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Your second mistake was trusting anything in the New York Post. Your first mistake was reading that schlock in the first place.
Something intelligent here.
With recent trends demonstrating that MS is at least trying to better itself as far as quality and long-overdue technical changes are concerned, I must admit to having developed a modicum of respect for it.
But AOL? AOL has never, and has never seriously tried to produce anything other than pure unadulterated crap. AOL's IM survives only because it has a monopoly on the most valuable IM asset: human capital. People are too lazy to switch (not that the other common IM alternatives are exemplary either).
It's as if MS has a corporate team tasked with screwing things up (SCO funding mess anyone?), and a technical team tasked with fixing what has always been screwed up, which would be, well, most of what they produce.
If Microsoft acquires AOL/Time-Warner and Comcast acquires Disney, then Microsoft will effectively control the cable broadcasting and communications market.
.85 votes per share will likely be determined to be unfair, as all shareholders that are brought along in the merger will have not been given opportunity for fair consideration of those terms.
The key to this deal is Microsoft's position as the largest single shareholder in Comcast owning 15% of the companies stock. Compare this to the Roberts family (Ralph Roberts, founder of Comcast, and Brian Roberts, CEO) holdings of slightly over 1% of the company.
If Comcast acquires Disney, then a voting policy dictating that the Roberts family shares are weighted in voting to = 7.5 votes per share while other shares are = to only around
Just think about the future that these two deals could bring us, Microsoft being in control of the vast majority of news, music and recording, movie, and print media in the United States while being capable of dictating the protocols that are used to connect to, and to filter the trafic to and from, the internet.
It's not a tin foil hat theory. It's simply the logical extension of such consolidation of communication and media marketplace under the control of one company that has a rather nasty history of not respecting the wishes of the community that they chose to do business in.
Oh yeah, Paul Allen's vompany Vulcan Northwest Inc. owns a 5% share in Microsoft, so we can probably count Charter Cable and a number of other media and telecom companies as being involved in this as well.
Read, L
I suspect the biggest benefit for Microsoft buying AOL will be to compete against Google for search market share. Currently the market is split between Google, MSN and Yahoo. If MSN take AOL's share from Google they might be able to claim a majority of the search market when they launch their upcoming search engine.
However, there's a chance this will be another case of the European Union blocking a merger that American anti-trust law OKs?
So i made my deal w' the devil and went to work for AOL. They're not such a bad devil, and 12 year old girls need internet access too. Now, i think i'm beginning to see the fine print...
But I could see them trying something with the "home" version. MSN is already heavily advertized on a "home" desktop on install. If you don't know any better, you'd probably end up with MSN.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
"You've got updates!!!"
Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.
After worldcom imploded, everyone looked to put the blame on them, but forget to ask about the partners in crime.
Simlar to the illegal practice of swapping bandwidth at the end of the quarter to inflate the value of the company that worldcom, quest and colt were involved in was also practiced by AOL.
But AOL has been deeply involved in Worldcom, as well as Microsoft with both of them.
Worldcom was also hugly overvalued, and way buying up company left and right, until the bubble burst when the MCI merger blew up.
The real question at hand is, when will the AOL bubble burst?
Or is there more to the Microsoft Worldcom AOL Triangle that will we find out when more people lose thier pension funds?
It is also a question, what is the real value of Microsoft? How much of it is hyperinflated, and what if it turns into another worldcom with cooked books full of accounting tricks. If it is anything like its partners, I would not be suprised if they were involved in such practices with them.
Also, Why is it that microsoft was interested in buying corrupt companies like Worldcom?
Introspection is the key to understanding
News.com
No se vayan todavia, aun hay mas. http://www.error500.net
I would be very interested to see what this could mean for the fate of AOLServer. AOLServer is AOL's open source server that they have maintained as OSS despite the tide of naysayers when they acquired it. I, for one, would be very amused to see MS maintain an open source project, but realistically, acquisition would likely mean replacing this, and any other non-MS software with their MS "equivalents".
They will have Antitrust problems. MS already owns a chunk of Comcast another broadband provider. Acquiring AOL broadband and dialup business will make them a target for DOJ antitrust investigation. And that a cool thing for Billy and Melinda's kids' future.
In all seriousness, I'm sure that if these rumors are true, M$ is shopping for content. Can't imagine they've taken renewed interest in dial-up.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
That would just mean that MS acquires another incredibly stupid userbase to add to its millions - of course, they overlap, so there's _some_ cancellation. Not much, though.
Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
It's not gonna happen.
I wonder if the federal government is simply holding off on slapping MS with some serious anti-trust stuff (such as, say, federalizing them) until they've amassed enough of the wealth to turn the US into a much less free country.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Don't talk about Fight Club.
No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
one connection...one network...one OS...
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer....
coincidence?
Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
The article says TW lawyers don't think there would be any roadblock, but it seems to me a company that's been legally declared a monopoly in one industry should not be allowed to hold a monopoly in another. But I'm funny that way.
"My break dancing days are over, but there's always the Funky Chicken" --The Full Monty
The EU issue would disappear if AOLTW spun off the EU arm of AOL in a seperate IPO. The EU part of AOL is profitable (hit profitability in 2002). Thus, MS could just buy the American/rest of the world part of AOL (about 25 million users I think) and TW gets some money back from that. It would completely side step the EU anti-trust issues and help TW's share price.
The SEC would be bought (tin foil hat time) and MS basically has what it wants. Captive, stupid internet users with all that monthly revenue. DRM the pants off it if needed, AIM/ICQ/MSN intergration etc (most of these are covered in above posts). Even hook Disney Video on demand into the service, for example.
And with AOL having it's finger is a lot of non-MS pies it would be a huge blow to these other parties. AOL produces a Mac specific application for Mac users to access the internet - if MS klilled the AOL Mac client it would really Apple. Then start to bring in Real, Winamp, Google shares... MS buying AOL would be the smartest thing they could do right now.
Also it's a good way of MS to make sure AOL never releses a Linux client. It would stop a lot of users dependant on AOL who are maybe thinking of sitching to Linux. And with no AOL Mac client buying a Mac goes out of the window too.
Just a few thoughts....
So when is Bill Gates getting his reserved seat on the UN Security Council?
Bill Gates? On Security Council? We're doomed!
You know, I always get nervous when I hear Bill's name mentioned in connection with word "Security".
“Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
And eventually they will merge with Sony to produce the American-Japanese company Microsoft-Sony. Not to be at all confused with Wayland-Yutani.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
How about a single company controlling AIM, ICQ and MSN IM? I know there's competitors, such as Jabber, but all the same...
Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?