Is AOL The Key to Microsoft 'Killing' Google?
VK writes "When Steve Ballmer yelled at a departing Microsoft employee that he would "kill Google" we had no idea just how direct a method he had in mind. Buying all or part of AOL may be the first part of the master plan, as Google relies heavily on the advertising pages that come from AOL, since it now syndicates its search to Google." Update: 09/23 19:20 GMT by J : As our readers pointed out, the original and Reg reprint both typoed "Yahoo" for AOL. Fixed.
The main reason this can't work, is that Google already owns the mindshare of the internet. You can't buy what Google has going for it, IMHO. Consider the mindshare that AOL has...
People who don't like computers or the internet buy AOL, because they think they have to. They think it's the internet.
So Microsoft is going to waste billions on AOL. *tries to contain glee*
Microsoft can certainly buy that client base. They can milk it for all it's worth for maybe even ten years.
As information becomes more and more readily available online, as people read blogs and learn the way of the force, they change. They learn to despise the despots and the weasels. They retaliate.
And this lesson is something that Balmer et al have never understood. They aren't evolved enough to get it. So they buy it, but they can't possibly buy what Google has, and that is what's driving them crazy.
Microsoft needs a whole new mindset if they want to compete in this market, and it's not going to happen.
And as a final note on this deal-based waterfront, FTA: AOL has been losing subscription customers rapidly, which is why it recently switched its business from purely subscription based to increasingly advertising-based.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
"Is AOL the Key to Microsoft Killing Google?"
"Killing Google"? I think you misspelled "not competing effectively with Google, by purchasing a struggling enterprise with massive consumer illwill that adds to Microsoft's bloat and lack of focused direction."
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Parent is on the right track: Google has forward momentum, a positive Karma of the internet. Google does what you want it to do (find stuff) and stays out of the way. That's a big plus when you just want to get things done. Outside of search, Google seems to be one place where fresh ideas originate in rapid succession, even if a lot of those ideas never materialize. These new ideas, good or bad, still don't get in the way of their core product, which is still fast and stays out of the way.
Microsoft is in the opposite situtation. They've stalled and in many ways, are slipping backwards. They are widely seen as the behemoth, to the point that you don't have to even read the latest security warning to know that it's from another "Buffer Overflow" problem. Office hasn't done anything inventive in years, except for Clippy. Business users (the ones who actually pay for it) are getting the idea that new versions of Office don't do anything new but do screw up the UI enough that it's not worth the trouble to upgrade. These paying users are steadfastly not paying anymore by sticking with the 2k generation of products. New sales of MS Windows and Office are driven mostly by new computer sales, but some businesses are just moving the software and licenses over from retired systems.
XBox has done well, but it has a different appeal and is becoming its own division, anyway.
AOL is another old behemoth, and if AOL and Microsoft want to hold on for dear life together, so be it. It won't help either one.
Fanatically anti-fanatical