Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft in Talks To Acquire Ebay

thatedeguy writes "The NY Post is reporting that Microsoft and Ebay are in talks for the online auction house to join the Microsoft family." That said, the talks aren't going that well at the moment. From the article: " Sources indicate that the talks, while still active, have cooled somewhat in the last two weeks as executives considered antitrust issues. It is unclear what the full impact of yesterday's advertising and search alliance between Yahoo! and eBay will be for talks between MSN and eBay. One source close to the matter suggested the Yahoo-eBay tie-up would not stop Microsoft from pursuing the online auctioneer."

235 comments

  1. mmmm monopolies... by abigsmurf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With MS already in trouble over abuse of market share, I can't see any anti-monopoly commission approving a buyout of this size.

    1. Re:mmmm monopolies... by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You make it sound like any anti-monopoly commission has any power in America.

    2. Re:mmmm monopolies... by packetmon · · Score: 1, Interesting

      A lot of lobbying money goes a long way. Right now Google is doing what Microsoft was sued for. If MS played its political cards correctly they'd be able to pull it off (the purchase of eBay). The problem with so called commissions and appointees judging what's right and wrong is that they can often be tainted with money and political influence. MS has deep reaches in Washington hence them getting away with e-Murder for years. What I find to be unmentioned is the foreign take on this. When it comes to matters such as corporations buying each other, I see little foreign intervention. I wonder how many "strawman" companies are under control of American interests end up coming back and buying out a company under a diff name. (Apologies if the explanation seems confusing...) MS tries to buy Company Z. Antitrust worries won't allow it. MS buys Company X in Europe. Company X buys Company Z. Company Z is liquidated back into MS. Happens all the time.

    3. Re:mmmm monopolies... by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      In short, I think the monopoly issues will likely ditch the idea of eBay being purchased by Microsoft. Especially since Google and Yahoo! doesn't have anything near the scale of eBay when it comes to online auction sites.

    4. Re:mmmm monopolies... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
      Right now Google is doing what Microsoft was sued for.

      Really? What precisely is google doing now that Microsoft was sued for?

    5. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Funkcikle · · Score: 2, Funny
      I am hereby continuing to withhold the £13.57 of eBay fees I have outstanding. That will teach them to displease people on Slashdot!

      But how will I sell my fabulous Xena: Warrior Princess merchandise now?

    6. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Cadallin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      eh? what exactly? What competitors is Google putting out of business by delivering ultimatums to their customers of "if you use our competitors products it'll be curtains for you, see, Curtains!"

      Lots of people are getting all "aww poor Microsoft, getting bullied just for a few dozen Sherman AntiTrust Violations! Is big bad Google/Apple trying to eat your pie?" What you're missing is that Microsoft is just as evil as ever (They NEVER stopped Antitrust violations!) And none of their competitors has ever even been close to weilding Microsoft's level of Influence.

    7. Re:mmmm monopolies... by DrSkwid · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In what way is that anything like with bundling IE/Media Player in Windows while having a "monopoly" position in the OS market ?

      Does Google have a monopoly in ANY sphere ?

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    8. Re:mmmm monopolies... by packetmon · · Score: 3, Informative

      My comments show no sympathy for MS. If you think no company has wielded MS' influence then you've never heard of the Baby Bells, Big Blue, Tyco or SAIC.

    9. Re:mmmm monopolies... by DrSkwid · · Score: 4, Informative

      eBay is not an auction site, it's an auction-style site =)

      An auction has a legal definition, which eBay doesn't meet - that is : goods have to be available for physical visual inspection for at least 24 hours prior to auction time.

      Auctions were used to return or disperse recovered stolen property (or just stolen). Once offered at auction, stolen property is not automatically returned to its owner should it be proven stolen later, unlike other stolen property.

      This is why eBay describes itself as : "eBay, the world's largest online marketplace!"

      and ... "Experience the thrill of placing the winning bid on an auction-style item"

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    10. Re:mmmm monopolies... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
      What google is doing is legal, what Microsoft did was not legal.

      The difference is that a company has to act differently when they have a monopoly position in a marketspace. Google does not have a monopoly position, Microsoft does.

    11. Re:mmmm monopolies... by guilliamo · · Score: 1

      It's OK to put companies out of of business. Called competition. I have no affinity to any company or OS. Just let them fight it out. We all win thru technology advances. I say let it go and let the good times roll...

    12. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And none of their competitors has ever even been close to weilding Microsoft's level of Influence.

      Please read the actual Sherman act before spewing your ignorance:

      (The Sherman Act).."was not specifically intended to prevent the dominance of an industry by a specific company, despite misconceptions to the contrary."

      In other words, the act had nothing to do with how much influence a particular company had in an industry!!

      See Wikipedia article here

    13. Re:mmmm monopolies... by ocbwilg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With MS already in trouble over abuse of market share, I can't see any anti-monopoly commission approving a buyout of this size.

      I just woke up, so I may be missing something bleedingly obvious, but I don't see what sort of anti-trust issues exist here. Microsoft is the worlds biggest software company, and one of the webs top 5 or so search companies. Ebay is the worlds biggest auction house (online or otherwise), and owns one of the world's biggest VOIP services (Skype) and online payment systems (Paypal). I just don't see the overlap.

      I do, however, see lots of interesting business opportunities there for Microsoft.

    14. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Happens all the time? Really. Please provide some detail re just one time where your scenario occurred.

    15. Re:mmmm monopolies... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      First of all, Google did not sue Microsoft over the matter you suggest. They publicly criticised them for it, but that was it. Second, Google are not (ab)using a monopoly in one area to try to gain a monopoly in another.

      Microsoft have a de facto monopoly in the operating systems market. If Microsoft bindles a 'free'[1] web browser with their operating system, then they make it much harder for other browsers to compete. This is anti-competitive behaviour. It would have been acceptable for them to produce a web browser as a free download (since Netscape already offered a browser free for non-commercial use) and even for OEMs to bundle Microsoft's browser with their computers. It was not acceptable for Microsoft to penalise OEMs who bundled Netscape's browser.

      Likewise, Microsoft now have a de facto monopoly in the web browser market. If they make their search engine the default in their browser, bundled with their OS, then they are using their monopoly position in two markets to attempt to gain a monopoly in a third. This is anti-competitive behaviour and should be criticised. Sure, the user can change it, in the same way that they can change the default browser. The point is that it is much easier for them not to, and the ability to do this is only available for the monopolist, not other members of the market.

      Google's page defaults to Google's services, and that's fine. Why? Because Google (as of November 2005 - I can't find any more recent statistics) has 46.3% of the search engine market. While this is more than any of their competitors, it is nothing like a monopoly. If they had 80% or so, then it might be seen as anticompetitive behaviour to encourage Google users to use gmail and Google Talk. Well, except for the fact that these both use open standards and so anyone can interoperate with them.

      [1] Free is quoted here since the cost is included in the OS, rather than it being truly zero-cost.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:mmmm monopolies... by iccaros · · Score: 1

      ya, the Big Bad SAIC.. and their whole 8 Billion.. now thats power....

    17. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      My comments show no sympathy for MS.

      No, but you DID say "right now Google is doing what Microsoft was sued for", which is a big fat lie.

      If you think no company has wielded MS' influence

      Not within the rhelm of computers there hasn't been, with the exception of IBM. And what stopped IBM? A little lawsuit from the government that hobbled them long enough for the market to grow around Big Blue. Microsoft hasn't gone through anything like that.

    18. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      "If you go to Google' all of their defaults are Google services. You don't even get the option to change those links to say Yahoo or the like.

      Yes you can.

    19. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 0, Troll

      You know, this short sighted argument in defense of Google will not hold up for much longer than a year or two. They have gained market share without fail since their inception.

      Soon they will hit critical mass, become the defacto search choice, and are going to get the shit sued out of them by everyone and their mother. Everything from favored ranking positions to unfair bundling of free software in their download packs to the installation of thier software on Dell machines will be fair game.

      You know who's going to be the biggest backer of this movement? Microsoft. They'll win too.

      Let's take a look back. Before Microsoft there was no such thing as an OS monopoly. They were the first and have been dealt with heavy handed for some practices that deserved it and some that were just witch hunts. Everyone involved was essentially flying blind, or at least half blind, as this was completely new territory with no directly related reprocussions to base arguments on. Alot of it was conjecture, no one really knew what the results of certain behaviors would be.

      Please, before someone loses their head and brings up the broken API's - that was pretty clear cut BS on Microsoft's part.

      Let's take a look at Google now. As they approach global search dominance it soon becomes apparent that any business who wants a web presence will be at Google's mercy. If Google decides that they don't want your website listed, your screwed. If Google suddenly decides that they give priority to browsers with a certain agent id, users are screwed. If google decides that they are going to start offering a link to Firefox on their front page, the other browsers are screwed. If Google changes their algo just a little, and ends up drastically changing their rankings as result - the businesses are screwed. Every one of these behaviors has a relative action by Microsoft and a clearly defined result. How long before google has to start opening up the algo for us to see or has to stat giving us the option to use some other search engines results?

      Google is quickly becoming a search monopoly, and I can't wait till they get knocked around a bit because of it. The delivery of information should NEVER go through such a pinch point. Do no evil? Bullshit, just make sure you're doing evil that the everyman has no clue about.

    20. Re:mmmm monopolies... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      GP didn't say that no company has ever wielded Microsoft's level of influence. GP said none of Microsoft's competitors has ever wielded Microsoft's level of influence.

      Back to Reading Comprehension 101 for you! :)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    21. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Google's page defaults to Google's services, and that's fine. Why? Because Google (as of November 2005 - I can't find any more recent statistics) has 46.3% of the search engine market. While this is more than any of their competitors, it is nothing like a monopoly.

      Finally, someone who gets it. At this point, they may not be considered a Monopoly, but they are well on their way.

      The numbers you show are for the US. Here are the globals for 2006 (so far). Now, the part I find interesting is that google is listed multiple times here. Adding up all of thier listings I get 65.68% of world share. That is pretty damn close to the 80% you quoted. Now maybe their services are open source, but they bundle Firefox and Nortons in their download pack.

      Thier Monopoly would also be in a less defined area than Microsoft's. Businesses will all be at the mercy of google is they wish to have a web presence. This can be directly paralleled to Microsofts API shenanigans and perhaps to their VAR relationships.

      If they make their search engine the default in their browser, bundled with their OS, then they are using their monopoly position in two markets to attempt to gain a monopoly in a third.

      Yes, but it has been legally cleared. To be fair, what would you have Microsoft do as a business entity (which they are), not a person (which they aren't). To not attempt to do this would just be plain stupid. If the courts stop you, fine - stop doing it. If they don't, well full steam ahead.

      I'm not saying that your incorrect. They most certainly ARE using a monopoly position to gain leverage in another market, it just hasn't been ruled as anti-competative.

    22. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Adding a RSS feed is not changing a service.

    23. Re:mmmm monopolies... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft have a de facto monopoly in the operating systems market. If Microsoft bindles a 'free'[1] web browser with their operating system, then they make it much harder for other browsers to compete.

      This is entirely true; however...

      This is anti-competitive behaviour.

      While it hurt the competition, I honestly think that bundling a web browser with their OS was an improvement to their product. Think about it: people want to browse the web. People expect the default install of an operating system to include most of the functionality that they'll need for everyday tasks, and a web browser definitely part of that. Every major desktop OS today ships with at least one in the base install for this reason. Several Linux distributions have more than one (konqueror, firefox, galeon?). And while we bitch about Media Player, I haven't heard complaints about their built-in calculator, email client, scheduling software, solitaire game, screen saver...

      It would have been acceptable for them to produce a web browser as a free download...

      Yeah, I'll just surf on over to microsoft.com and grab it... oh wait...

      Seriously, this brings up a bunch of issues. How do you download it if you don't have a web browser? Some FTP client? But then they have to separate the FTP client from IE, and bundle it... And how long does it take to download over 14.4? Where do you give the user directions to get the web browser, and do you have to give directions to get Netscape too?

      If you're going to offer it for free, and anticipate that even a significant minority of your users will want it... why not bundle?

      Now, pressuring OEMs is clearly illegal, as are the API shenanigans, but I don't understand the bundling thing.

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    24. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Google is quickly becoming a search monopoly, and I can't wait till they get knocked around a bit because of it. The delivery of information should NEVER go through such a pinch point. Do no evil? Bullshit, just make sure you're doing evil that the everyman has no clue about.

      Tell me, what evil thing are they doing, and what non-evil thing could they do to fix it?

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    25. Re:mmmm monopolies... by l33t+gambler · · Score: 0

      It's much easier to switch a search engine or home page (I have mine set at google.no) than to merge from Windows to Linux. Let Google do enough evil and I'll make sure all my friends and the funny guys at work hear about it. They already know about gMail is creepy
      http://www.google-watch.org/gmail.html

      --
      Teasing the nobles, and rightfully so!
    26. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Gmail - Data mining and spyware/ stop doint it
      Google Toolbar - Spyware/ stop doing it
      AdWords - No support for clickfraud/ support the people who make you money
      Google China - Following local laws at the expense of human decency/ Decide that money isn't everything

      Do I need to keep going?

    27. Re:mmmm monopolies... by jxyama · · Score: 2, Insightful
      >Google's page defaults to Google's services, and that's fine. Why? Because Google (as of November 2005 - I can't find any more recent statistics) has 46.3% of the search engine market.

      Your post was great until here. Google's page defaulting to Google's services is fine even if Google has 99% of the search engine share. This is because Google won't have control over where users go to search on the internet no matter how much share Google has. Users are choosing to go to Google and competitors are free to enter the market. No one complains that a BMW only uses BMW technologies, parts and logos, right?

      Google would be in trouble if they started leveraging their considerable share in search to gain "unfair" advantage in, say, online marketing. If Google said to an advertiser "If you want to advertise on Google, you cannot advertise on Yahoo or MSN.", then they'd get into a trouble comparable to the one MSFT did for OS.

    28. Re:mmmm monopolies... by rpdillon · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You said a lot of things, but I'm I didn't get any actual critcism out of it. By criticism, I mean anything Google should do differently than what it is doing.

      That said, I agree with the underlying sentiment of your post - which basically boils down to "Google is in a position of great power." We all know that, and there are no laws against corporations being in positions of great power. This should not (in and of itself) be a cause for concern, because it is the nature of the market.

      In the same vein,the reason Microsoft is such an issue for so many people is assuredly not because they have power. No, if that were the only problem, I would have no concern at all. The problem with Microsoft is that they abuse their power in one sphere to gain an unfair advantage in many other spheres, often stifling innovation (crushing smaller companies) in the process. The examples are numerous - the most obvious is IE's dominance purely due to it's inclusion with Windows.

      I do not see this with Google. First off, Google doesn't even have a 50% share of the global searches. So your arguments about it being like Microsoft are premature to say the least. There is no indication that they will ever be a monopoly...it is simply too easy to switch search engines. If Google does something I don't like, switching is as simple as typing "yahoo.com" in the address bar of Firefox I would be very interested to hear any argument from anyone on this site regarding how Google would ever become a monopoly in the search market.

      How long before google has to start opening up the algo for us to see or has to stat giving us the option to use some other search engines results?

      Well, how about never? Why should Google open up their algorithm? It doesn't matter, the results are the results. If for some reason people believe that they unfairly favor some sites over others and the results are therefore less valid than Yahoo's, MSN's, Ask's or anyone else's, they'll just switch to some other engine. As for Google offering the option to see other engine's results? They already do: it's called DogPile.

      Now, Google is in more markets than just search - as you pointed out, they provide free downloadable software. You characterized it as "unfair" for Google to bundle software and release it free. Umm, why? I assume you're referring to RealPlayer, and my reaction is "So what?" RealPlayer was already available free. They're not forcing anyone to download their software...it's not bundled with some other product their selling, and most of all, each piece is available individually. Besides, when installing their bundle, it gives you the option to only install certain parts of the bundle! I'm really not sure where you were going with that argument.

      Google is quickly becoming a search monopoly...

      Really? I don't see that. I'd like to see evidence anywhere that this is the case. As I said, almost by definition, there will be no search monopoly because the cost of switching is almost zero to the end user. One search engine may one day dominate in the manner of Microsoft with Windows, but the opportunity to abuse that dominance will be very small. The moment people even have the slightest distaste for either the results of their searches or the business practices of the company, they will simply use a competitor. This is clearly not the case with Windows - many people dislike Windows, but they have so much invested in it that it makes it almost impossible to switch for non-geeks, and annoying even for the technically saavy.

    29. Re:mmmm monopolies... by HermMunster · · Score: 2, Informative

      Google does not own a monopoly in any sphere. You must be ruled a monopoly to be a monopoly by a court of law. Google, from the last statistical results that I remember reading is that it holds some 40% of the market in searches and was near last in portal.

      40% tops of anything is no where near a monopoly.

      That's much different than 90% of the key technologies that drive the computer and information access.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    30. Re:mmmm monopolies... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, none of those companies were competing with Microsoft when they were monopolies.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    31. Re:mmmm monopolies... by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1

      Better still, what would the implications of Microsoft owning PayPal
      and
      Skype be?

      Would they kill Skype to let MSN Messenger take over the IM world, or would they harness the Skype technology and incorporate it into their own IM?

      Would they make Skype anti-Linux too?

    32. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 3, Informative

      the most obvious is IE's dominance purely due to it's inclusion with Windows.

      It wouldn't have anything to do with Netscape's browser sucking balls or Netscape trying its hand at the portal business at the wrong time or IE actually being BETTER at that time. You ignore alot of facts to supplement your own perceptions.

      I do not see this with Google. First off, Google doesn't even have a 50% share of the global searches.

      They have a little over 65% global. Your stats are for US.

      You said a lot of things, but I'm I didn't get any actual critcism out of it.

      That's because I didn't criticize. I merely pointed out that Google is well on its way to being the defacto search monopoly. I also gave parallels to what happened to Microsoft and what will happen to google.

      There is no indication that they will ever be a monopoly

      Its called a trend.

      it is simply too easy to switch search engines.

      It's simply too easy to buy an Apple or get a free Linux distro. The barrier to entry isn't the issue here, its the tendency of the user. The user doesn't want to switch search engines. Do you really think Joe enduser can tell bad search results from good? He is unmoitivated to switch.

      As for Google offering the option to see other engine's results? They already do: it's called DogPile.

      Google doesn't offer this, InfoSpace does. "They" is innappropriate here as it isn't Google doing it. Now, is there an option, yes. In the same way I have OS options, doesn't make MS any less of a Monopoly. Please don't try to blur the lines with semantics.

      As I said, almost by definition, there will be no search monopoly because the cost of switching is almost zero to the end user.

      And I said barrier to entry is not the defining point of monopoly, marketshare is. Googles trend since its launch has been increased market share every year. You assume the end user will know that there is a monopoly or will care. Thats alot of assuming to do. A monopoly in this case would be most relevant to the businesses involved with online components, not the end user.

      Here's the thing, the end user you keep touting is Googles PRODUCT. Google uses search results to get the users and sell them to advertisers. You get a monopoly on that, there are serious issues that need to be discussed.

      This is clearly not the case with Windows - many people dislike Windows, but they have so much invested in it that it makes it almost impossible to switch for non-geeks, and annoying even for the technically saavy.

      This is only true of businesses, and that is quickly coming to an end with web standards used for integration.

      The end user has less than $500 invested in Windows and plenty of options for Operating Systems. The problem is that they don't want to switch. They don't want to learn how to do something another way. That is a tendency of people, not any business practice.

    33. Re:mmmm monopolies... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      The investment isn't $500.

      I can get ANY of the people working in my office up and running FreeBSD with Firefox & Thunderbird & Gaim for communication and some sort of office suite. That covers most of the working lives of the office personnel I have come into contact with.

      Then one will hear : "Person X has sent me a (powerpoint presentation) | (excel spreadsheet) | (word document) | (wmv file) and I can't view it".

      That's the point at which confidence breaks down. One file unopened can scupper the willingness of people to make the change.

      That's before we've even started to look for specialist applications.

      It is Office that cracks the whip, not Windows.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    34. Re:mmmm monopolies... by llefler · · Score: 1

      Finally, someone who gets it. At this point, they may not be considered a Monopoly, but they are well on their way.

      You also have to consider barriers to enter the market too. What MS did was lock in computer OEMs so that they couldn't load another OS without risking their license to load Windows. Not something they were likely to do. And the fact remains, you have to have OEMs load your OS to complete with Windows. To compete in the OS market you need to invest billions of dollars.

      What are the barriers to entry in the search market? You need to write a search engine. Can Google limit search engine knowledge? You need computers. $100k? $200k? Sun, IBM, Compaq. Can Google limit the sale of servers? Internet access. Can Google limit who gets high bandwidth Internet access? Finally, the consumer. What do Google customers have that creates a barrier to using a different search site? I remember when Altavista was THE search engine. Or Yahoo.

      Google could lose their dominance if Microsoft's search is imbedded into the next version of Windows. Google could lose if someone does Internet searching better. What Google is doing is called diversifying.

      --
      It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit. -- Harry Truman
    35. Re:mmmm monopolies... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      This is why I block ACs and rarely read them. Not that I found it insulting.

    36. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree, but office doesn't come bundled with Windows anymore. This is a completely different issue.

      I can't tell you how many average joe end users are pissed that it doesn't. They think its Microsoft being greedy trying to charge them for 2 products. They don't know the history.

      Also, my math was a little off, it's more like $650 to buy Windows plus Office.

    37. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gmail - Data mining and spyware/ stop doint it

      Obviously Gmail uses the content of your e-mail to select context-sensitive advertisements; I don't see anything evil about that. What kind of data mining are you talking about? Mining data by itself isn't inherently evil; it's what you do with the data you've collected that's important (e.g. sell it to other companies).

      Google Toolbar - Spyware/ stop doing it

      The Google Toolbar includes an optional feature which can only operate by "phoning home" with every URL you visit; upon installation this is explained and you're given a very clear option of whether you want to enable it or not. Is this what you're calling spyware, or something else I haven't heard about?

      AdWords - No support for clickfraud/ support the people who make you money

      I agree, they need to be more active here. Although, supporting the people who make them money is precisely the problem; they need to stop supporting some of the people who make them money.

      Google China - Following local laws at the expense of human decency/ Decide that money isn't everything

      You don't think offering a filtered Google search in China is a positive thing? Sure, it's not as good as unfiltered access, but nobody can legally offer that, so that's completely irrelevant. It's not like the Chinese government is going to back down if Google threatens not to do business there, or something. You think it would be better for the Chinese people to be stuck with just MSN and Yahoo, filtered the same way?

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    38. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      What MS did was lock in computer OEMs so that they couldn't load another OS without risking their license to load Windows.

      There are A LOT of other companies that have the same set-ups for their VAR's. This is not an uncommon practice. You can get a Linux box from Dell, I think thats the biggest End User to PC maker out there.

      To compete in the OS market you need to invest billions of dollars.

      What are the barriers to entry in the search market?


      You switch the point of your argument here. Actually, barrier to entry into the OS market is now as easy as getting a version of Linux and then making your own distro, one guy could do it. Not expensive in the least. Now, to COMPETE - thats a whole different question.

      To enter the Search Engine market all I have to do is write a search algo, build an index, and open a webpage pointing to it. Cost of entry is close to nothing.

      Now lets get to the cost of COMPETING in the search market. 200K in servers isn't going to cut it, much less cover the costs for creating a new ontolology based algo that would kick the crap outta Googles. The costs of competing in search are staggering.

      What do Google customers have that creates a barrier to using a different search site? I remember when Altavista was THE search engine. Or Yahoo.

      OK, this is a very interesting point - but there are some serious market aspects that oen go ignored when analyzing this turn.

      How many households had web access when Alta Vista was the king? Out of those households, how many had a broadband connection? The reality of the matter is that the internet was not really being used by Joe average until much later. Techies, geeks, and savvy users made up most of the web user demographic. We had our fingers on the pulse of the internet because it was a relatively small club.

      Enter Yahoo. Internet use becomes a little more available to the masses, so something a little more user friendly was developed. Yahoo also had some portal services too, making it easier for the less savvy end user to find interesting parts of the internet. Broadband still isn't widespread, and alot of the material available out there wasn't aimed at Joe average. At this time, Yahoo and MSN get greedy - they start offereing higher placement for money.

      We flipped out. The savvy user population decided to go to the new kid, Google. At this time internet usage goes up and broadband begins to become ubiquitous. New tools enable ANYONE to dump their content onto the web. Blogs allow everyone to be part of the web and better designers make it much easier to navigate.

      We must be aware that the majority of web users now are Joe average non-savvy users. They won't respond to bad search results the same as the more technically inclined have in the past because they aren't even aware of it. As the market base grows, it's response to events becomes more and more apathetic.

      It is Microsoft all over again, but people ignore it because they say - "I can switch." While that is most certainly true, the question that should be asked is "Will most of the peopel switch?" If not, and you controll a dominant market share, you are a canidate for defacto monopoly.

      We can debate this all we want, but once Google hits 75%-80% US share, this issue will come up in a court. Until then, its all conjecture.

    39. Re:mmmm monopolies... by bergeron76 · · Score: 1

      I don't see anything stoping them. eBay has consistently refused to accomodate non-IE users with their picture viewing software. Since eBay is all .asp, this really doesn't come as a surprise.

      I figure Paypal is the next aquisition peice of the puzzle; oh wait, they're already 0wned by eBay.

      1) allow major market leaders to dominate the industry
      2) aquire them
      3) profit!
      4) fsck the consumer
      5) laugh en-route to the bank

      --
      Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
    40. Re:mmmm monopolies... by llefler · · Score: 1

      There are A LOT of other companies that have the same set-ups for their VAR's. This is not an uncommon practice. You can get a Linux box from Dell, I think thats the biggest End User to PC maker out there.

      How many of those other companies have been classified as monopolists?

      Go to Dell.com, type Linux in the search box (which is more than most buyers would do), and you will get 31 pages of results with 3 precision workstations (Business systems, not Home), a hand full of servers, and hundreds of component products. Dell offers token systems to customers that require Linux. As a consumer, I'm going to be looking for a system that falls within a specific price range or set of requirements (IE 2.8 P4, 512m RAM, 80g HD). Try shopping that way and finding a system with an option for Linux.

      Actually, barrier to entry into the OS market is now as easy as getting a version of Linux and then making your own distro, one guy could do it.

      Linux has billions of dollars invested in it. It is simply spread across thousands of stakeholders. You can not simply take a copy of Linux, roll it into a distro and call yourself a competitor to Windows. You don't have control over the IP in Linux and until you invest big $$$ you can't influence it's future path. If you can't control your product, you can't be a competitor. Linux as a whole can be, but then you're back to billions invested to compete. And if you can't compete, you are not a competitor in the market. RedHat (RHAT) has a market cap of $4.87b. RedHat competes in the smaller server market, but not in the desktop market.

      As far as competing in the search engine market, advertising tends to be grass roots. Google does pay Mozilla, but that wasn't until after they became a dominant player, and I suspect the amount they pay Mozilla is insignificant. But what really counts is Google doesn't have a means to hamper competitors. Microsoft continues to damage competition even after losing their anti-trust cases. That is why the oversight period is being extended in the US and why they are being fined by the EU.

      How many households had web access when Alta Vista was the king? Out of those households, how many had a broadband connection?

      You're trying to build a strawman. It doesn't matter how many customers there are in the market, and broadband is not and never has been a requirement for USING a search engine.

      You don't seem to understand, for a dominate player to be an anti competitive monopolist, they 1st have to be a monopoly (and we'll just have to disagree that Google is capable of becoming a monopoly), and 2nd they have to do something that leverages their monopoly to the detriment of a competitor. Changing a search engine is as simple as typing a different URL. I use Google for searches, yet I'm not hampered in any way when I use my Yahoo home page for news. I use both Yahoo and Google IM. I use Yahoo and Google email, and there my only limitation is I can't do POP with Yahoo, and that is Yahoo's limitation because it's not a free service.

      I fail to see how adding services to their portal (in many cases just catching up to the competition) is Google leveraging their market position to lock you into other services.

      Let me show you a real life instance of using a monopoly to leverage another market. (assuming you'll agree that MS is a monopoly) On my W2K desktop on the start menu is a Search option. If I click on that and tell it to search the internet it will open IE (despite Firefox being my default browser) and go to MSN search. Is there a way to change that? Possibly. But I've already set my default browser and it ignored that. If there is a way to change it, it's not readily apparent to the average user. Giving IE and MSN a much favorable position as a result of the user having Windows. Now lets apply it to Google, can Google do anything, other than putting links on their web site, to discourage me from using their competition's products?

      --
      It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit. -- Harry Truman
    41. Re:mmmm monopolies... by WoLpH · · Score: 1

      Skype kan be used as an IM client, MSN Messenger is an IM client..... That's the only I can think of.

    42. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      You're trying to build a strawman. It doesn't matter how many customers there are in the market, and broadband is not and never has been a requirement for USING a search engine.

      What fucking strawman? I never said broadband was a requirement. I never said someone couldn't switch search engines. I never said the amount of searchers changed anything. I commented on the changing market landscape, and its composition, as a backdrop for why certain things happened. Search isn't the monopoly, online advertising and being the defacto listing of websites is. The searcher isn't in any way forced to use google, but if Google gains over 75% market share in search, online businesses will be forced to get listed and to advertise on it. If the user base isn't moving, you're a monopoly in web listings and online advertising.

      The searcher is the PRODUCT. Google provides the PRODUCT to advertisers and online businesses. Once Google provides over 75% of the product out there - it is a Monopoly. Get it?

      How many of those other companies have been classified as monopolists?

      Good point.


      Linux has billions of dollars invested in it. It is simply spread across thousands of stakeholders. You can not simply take a copy of Linux, roll it into a distro and call yourself a competitor to Windows.


      The same way you can't just start a search angine, get some servers, and say you can compete with googles advertising scheme.

      Perhaps I wan't being clear enough in what I was trying to state in these posts. Perhaps I was trying to take counterpoints head on. This may have led to my point being unclear. But Google is most definitely approaching a monopoly. The points I didn't clarfy were as I said before. The search isn't the product, it is the tool used to deliver the product. The product is the searcher.

      And I have said before, this is a very new area to look at. The Internet and the web have created a lot of similarly difficult questions that have yet to be handled completely. Th issue I have goes much deeper than "the searcher can change the engine they use."

    43. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Mining data by itself isn't inherently evil; it's what you do with the data you've collected that's important (e.g. sell it to other companies).

      I'll decide what's evil when your doing it with data about me. Here's some info about gmail. You are free to disagree with their uses as evil, but I'm not obligated to recognize your definition.

      Is this what you're calling spyware, or something else I haven't heard about?

      It phones home. Its spyware. Notifying me or not notifying me is not a defining trait, it just makes it worse if you don't.

      Although, supporting the people who make them money is precisely the problem; they need to stop supporting some of the people who make them money.

      You don't think offering a filtered Google search in China is a positive thing? Sure, it's not as good as unfiltered access, but nobody can legally offer that, so that's completely irrelevant.


      Just don't go where you can't do it the right way. Oh, wait theres money there. You contradicted yourself.

      On another note, what good is a search engine with filtered results doing for China? I seriously want to know what awesome goodness Google has brought to China that MSN or Yahoo can't other than the ability to use a different product. If more accurate search results is the only answer then that's sad. It subjective first off, and second - not really what the citizens of China need. Considering all Google is really doing is making the population of Chinaa available to people who wish to advertise to them, I wouldn't call that a positive thing.

    44. Re:mmmm monopolies... by ocbwilg · · Score: 1

      Skype kan be used as an IM client, MSN Messenger is an IM client..... That's the only I can think of.

      True, but that is a pretty big stretch if you ask me. MSN messenger is a free text-based chat system. Skype is a subscription-based VOIP telephony system. Sure, you can voice and video chat over some IM clients (don't know if MSN allows this or not), but can you dial up somebody's phone?

    45. Re:mmmm monopolies... by MBraynard · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Fascinating but totally irrelevant. Did you just save that as your 'stock Ebay karma-whore' post?

    46. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If MS did not include IE with Windows how would anyone download an alternative web browser? It's not like Windows has wget or and ftp client built in.

    47. Re:mmmm monopolies... by rriven · · Score: 1
      Also, my math was a little off, it's more like $650 to buy Windows plus Office

      I don't know where you do your shopping, but my math comes out to $369.47 for Windows Xp Home and Office 2003 Pro.
      Even if I made it Xp Pro it would still be only $487.65.
      If you have a kid in school or are in school then you can get the Student and Teacher edion of office. That saves you an extra $100.

      http://www.viosoftware.com/Office+2003+Professiona l/Office+2003+Professional+Promo+OEM+with+Bonus+On eNote+2003.html Office 2003 -$189.65

      http://www.viosoftware.com/Office+2003+Professiona l/Office+2003+Student+and+Teacher+Edition+OEM.html Office S&T edition -$89.99

      http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_ id=3405538Win Xp Pro -$298.00

      http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_ id=3405555Win Xp Home -$179.82

      --
      Dan
    48. Re:mmmm monopolies... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      lol, I have used the same facts a few times so far but I write them from scratch.

      I was discussing the MS/eBay issue with some of my pro-MS friends and even their reaction was "oh no, that's the end of eBay".

      We imagined Clippy coming along with "Hello, seems like your hard drive has bad clusters, would you like to Buy a New One"

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    49. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      I was using Best Buy as my pricing guide because I didn't want to use OEM software pricing.

    50. Re:mmmm monopolies... by rriven · · Score: 1

      I can see that it would make the prices a little higher. If you are on a tight budget like me being a student and you don't want to go the illegal way, I find OEM can save lots of money and you get pretty much the same thing.

      --
      Dan
    51. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It phones home. Its spyware. Notifying me or not notifying me is not a defining trait, it just makes it worse if you don't.

      You missed the part where it doesn't do this by default, and there's no way for this particular feature (displaying Google's PakeRank score for each web page you visit) to work without phoning home. Other features like the spell checker send a query when you use them; of course you could make a similar feature using a local dictionary, but Google's spellcheck is based on popular words actually used on the Web, not an actual English dictionary, so it can easily handle proper nouns and slang, which traditional dictionaries have never been good at.

      If you don't want this kind of functionality, that's fine, don't use it. If you want this functionality, but want to send your data to somebody other than Google, that's fine too, use somebody else's toolbar. But don't say Google is evil just for offering these kinds of services.

      By the way, you do realize that web sites collect data about you too, right? Every time you do a search on ANY search engine, they log your search terms; any time you use a translation service to translate something to/from another language, they log your query; every time you look something up in an online dictionary or encyclopedia, they log what you were looking for. I hope you don't use Babelfish, Wikipedia, or Dictionary.com! They're all spying on you!

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    52. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1


      You missed the part where it doesn't do this by default,


      You forgot to mention where it tries to scare you into using it by offering up protection from Phishers if you leave the service enabled. You think the average end user knows the deal their cutting there? They don't.

      I hope you don't use Babelfish, Wikipedia, or Dictionary.com! They're all spying on you!

      I work intimately with data collection as it relates to the web on a daily basis. All you need to do is click a link and you are being logged. Server logs are filled with great information if you know how to read and analyze them. Keep your snide jeers to yourself. You know damn good and well what I'm talking about here. Google logs data about your surfing habits. By defaulat, no. But they definitely try to scare the average user into it with a little "protection racket."

      We don't even need to debate whether or not it logs a personal identifier as it is way too easy to get a fairly positive id using basic data cross referencing.

      Also, the option to turn the pagerank feature on or off at install is a recent thing. It used to be on by default with no notification until Alexa got sued. Wow, sounds like they were really looking out for me from the start. Nope, it only became an issue when they could get sued for it. Hrm, not evil at all.

    53. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make it sound as though this "legal definition" is a global absolute.

      I say "piffle", and move that a 24-hour prior-inspection period is no requirement for an auction in some places.

    54. Re:mmmm monopolies... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      yes, you're right, I should have said "here in England".

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    55. Re:mmmm monopolies... by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention where it tries to scare you into using it by offering up protection from Phishers if you leave the service enabled. You think the average end user knows the deal their cutting there? They don't.

      I wasn't aware of this feature; it's something new they've added since the last time I installed it.

      Also, the option to turn the pagerank feature on or off at install is a recent thing.

      I wasn't aware of that either; the first time I installed the Google Toolbar it came with the big red warning.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  2. Obligatory Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bidding for Ebay starts at $8 billion, but you can Buy It Now for $12.5 billion.

    1. Re:Obligatory Joke by greggish · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know you were kidding, but actually ebay's current market cap is $48 Bil. I would start the bidding there and put a BIN at $75 Bil. Only those with positive feedback should bid. Accept PayPal only. Good luck to the winner.

    2. Re:Obligatory Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but it's used! Heavily used, too.

    3. Re:Obligatory Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      > ... Only those with positive feedback should bid. ...

      Does Microsoft actually have positive feedback?

    4. Re:Obligatory Joke by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but it's. . .

      . . .lovingly aged, with a beautiful patina.

      KFG

    5. Re:Obligatory Joke by kerplunk1984 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dear seller,
      I really want to buy this item and i need a seller who is ready to sell,i
      will be paying 750euro for this item and you will ship it to my client in
      Nigeria.
      (1)I will be paying you by western Union Auction Payment(Bidpay).
      (2)You will ship the item by FEDEX,DHL,UPS,EMS.
      (3)You will ship the item to my client immediately you recieve my payment
      approval from the western union.
      If you agree with these stated terms,send me your full name and address so
      that i can go to the western union office immeidately to make payment for
      the item.

      Robert Dallas

    6. Re:Obligatory Joke by CheeseTroll · · Score: 4, Funny

      They'll make up the difference with an astronomical shipping price.

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    7. Re:Obligatory Joke by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1

      It would seem to me that in buying eBay, one would necessarily accept PayPal, along with all the attendant legal troubles.

    8. Re:Obligatory Joke by ImaLamer · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would advise seller "ebay3802" to not sell to buyer "billmoney" because the user has too much negative feedback. User billmoney has 32,800 positive feedbacks while having 97,400 negative feedbacks.

  3. doesn't make sense by free+space · · Score: 3, Insightful

    why would Microsoft want to aquire a whole company when there's nothing eBay can offer that MS can't get by investing a few hundred million in them like they did with apple?

    1. Re:doesn't make sense by GroeFaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because eBay has something that can't be bought with money: "eBay" is the synonym for "online auction", just like "Google" is synonymous to "web search". That's the Holy Grail of brand recognition.

      --
      The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
    2. Re:doesn't make sense by l-ascorbic · · Score: 0

      Two words. Network effect.

    3. Re:doesn't make sense by daviddennis · · Score: 1
      True enough.

      But this would make eBay a content company (which, in my opinion, it actually is), and
      One source said Microsoft boss Bill Gates came to the conclusion that Yahoo! was more a content company than a tech company. This source said Gates has no interest in owning a content company.

      D
    4. Re:doesn't make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Microsoft would have to start from scratch getting people to sign up, and then they'd compete with another well-established company. This is the same when they bought the company I work for: Microsoft is able to do anything we do themselves, for a lot less money than they paid for us. But we were at that point well-known for quality products in that field, so MS bought us.

    5. Re:doesn't make sense by l-ascorbic · · Score: 1

      It's not about their content, it's about their customers. They'd be paying for market share, and it's probably the only way to enter the auction marketplace. eBay has simply too much first-mover advantage there. The barriers to entry are huge.

    6. Re:doesn't make sense by daviddennis · · Score: 1

      My point was that it's about the content generated by that huge critical mass of customers far more than the technology itself, which I'm sure could be beaten.

      So I think of it as a content company, of sorts.

      D

    7. Re:doesn't make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skype?

    8. Re:doesn't make sense by iwsnet · · Score: 0

      Microsoft is desperate to become an Internet power and they have figured out they can't do it with their own programmers and MSN.

      They should have bought Yahoo, eBay or Google a long time ago. They even could have bought AOL when it was young.

      Anyway, don't think this acquisition could help Microsoft or its stock. EBay would be better off independently traded than with a bureaucratic software giant.

  4. Oh, wonderful. by SEE · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft, running eBay, PayPal, and Skype.

    1. Re:Oh, wonderful. by TheSeer2 · · Score: 1

      but with Microsoft's stigma if such an aquisition did happen they might feel more pressured to deal with what people see as problems with Paypal.

    2. Re:Oh, wonderful. by hlh_nospam · · Score: 1
      Remember MS Bob? That's the sort-of PIM that MS was offering a few years back. If you entered your password into MS Bob wrong 3 times, you would get a messagebox suggesting that you choose a different password that is easier to remember/type. If you entered a new password into the dialog at that point, it would accept it without any further authentification.

      Is this this company you want running PayPal? Isn't PayPal screwed up enough already?

    3. Re:Oh, wonderful. by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      Is this this company you want running PayPal?
      Yes. That way people would stop using it once everyone gets all their money stolen.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  5. Reminds me of HotMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    MS will spend YEARS trying to dump the *nix servers out of Ebay ;-)

    1. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't understand why this is rated funny. Given that ebay runs on Java switching the server OS should not be a problem at all. One question remains though: Would MS try to switch from Java to .Net?

    2. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by vandelais · · Score: 1

      -or-
      MS will forget to renew the ebay domain name.

      --
      Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
    3. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by ryanduff · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually, they run Sun Solaris. Theres an icon for it right on their main page under the search box (upper right) "Java Technology powered by Sun" The link a popup containing
      eBay is Java(TM) Powered running on powerful Sun Fire UltraSPARC® and AMD Opteron(TM) servers supported by Sun services and solutions. eBay has chosen Sun's Solaris Operating System, the most advanced operating system on the planet, and its Sun Fire servers to help power The World's Online Marketplace. If you're running a business like eBay's, or have similar aspirations, contact Sun Microsystems. For more information on the eBay and Sun relationship please visit our Reference Center.
    4. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by Scudsucker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, they run Sun Solaris.

      Yeah, which is a *nix. Just like the parent said.

    5. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by HairyCanary · · Score: 1

      Even better, it's not *nix, it is UNIX. The Real Deal :)

    6. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by headqtrs · · Score: 0

      eehhh, Ebay is running on win32 for all I know. Look at the URL's....

    7. Re:Reminds me of HotMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you are all right. E-bay/Paypal has over 100,000 servers spread across an un-named number of datacenters. They are moving into Phoenix right now and IBM is scared because it will more than triple their support needs to cover all of Phoenix.

  6. Investors would freak by crummyname · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering that eBay has a market cap that's 20% of Microsoft's, such an acquisition would probably cause a panic among investors and kill the stock. What they're more likely talking about is a partnership/alliance in certain areas.

    1. Re:Investors would freak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think so? For years investors have LOVED Microsoft. They rarely care what they do as long as the money keeps coming in.

    2. Re:Investors would freak by benna · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Microsoft's stock has fallen dramatically in the recently, and is trading near its 52-week low.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  7. Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce COMPETITION by B5_geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IMHO this is great news.

    1) It gives Google _more_ of an incentive to develop GPay and Googles Ebay (G-Bay?).
    2) Now all 3 companies that we love to hate are all in one convient package (Pay-Pal, Ebay, MS)

    This is Scary because:
    Given the excellent security record that Microsoft OSs' have do we really want pay-pal tied into the OS? OR even worse if Microsoft thinks* you are not using a "Geniune" copy of it's OS, will it put a lock you your paypal account and/or deduct the amount straight from your account.
    AND EVEN WORSE: This will make it _very_ easy for MS to start charging $xx/(day/week/month) for using Windows.

    OMG the sky is falling! =)
    Should make for interesting times.
    (The Chinese proverb: "May you live in Interesting Times" is apt I think)

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  8. That explains this new category by raider_red · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was on the eBay sight this morning and there's a new category labeled "Vaporware". It only had listings for advance purchases of Windows Vista.

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
    1. Re:That explains this new category by joe+155 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It only had listings for advance purchases of Windows Vista

      wow, although if you looked a little harder though you would have found versions for sale right now...

      --
      *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    2. Re:That explains this new category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That's not true - i saw a couple copies of Duke Nukem Forever and a few consoles from this company called "Infinium Labs"...

    3. Re:That explains this new category by suspected · · Score: 1

      I was also able to purchase Starcraft Ghost.

  9. PayPal? by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I doubt Microsoft is after Ebay itself. I think - for Microsoft - PayPal (owned by Ebay) is the interesting asset here, especially considering their plans for subscription models.

    1. Re:PayPal? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      hummm. Skype? All in all, e-bay has multiple pieces that MS could use to fit into their model. Keep in mind that MS is looking for a way to stop not only Google, but Linux. Linux has strength in such things as asterisk and web servers, and coming up on the desktop.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:PayPal? by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      I don't think Skype is a very good long-term asset. SIP providers are popping up everywhere and most people considering VOIP would rather plug a proper phone in their DSL modem than buy a headset only to be used from their computer.

    3. Re:PayPal? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Skype will shortly be on voip phones/atas. At that time, it will be easy to use them. In addition, if MS owns skype, you can bet that they will fold it in, and push this as a way of stopping asterisk, google talk, and commodity sip.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  10. ummm by free+space · · Score: 1

    Yes, but how would that directly benefit Microsoft's MSN strategy? I mean if eBay launched a search engine today not many people will say "gee, they're eBay..the famous auction guys! so their search engine must be good!".
    Amazon tried to use their success in ecommerce to promote their search engine and yet people didn't leave Google and flock to A9..making your brand name mean one thing is often better than making it many things.

    Sure, making MSN the default search on ebay will certainly make a proportion of eBay users MSN users but is that worth enough for Microsoft to pay billions and inherit all the workforce and liabilites of another giant company?

    1. Re:ummm by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If Google has only search, and MS can buy all else, then it will be only a matter of time before they own search as well. Keep in mind, that MS is always stronger when it is them vs. 1-2 competitors. When their is real competition, then MS has a very difficult time competiting (such as what Linux and BSD does to them).

      With a different admin, I would give MS zero chance of being able to even partner with e-bay, let alone buy them. But this admin does not care about legal or moral issues. I suspect that MS will be able to own e-bay if they do it quickly enough.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:ummm by Woldry · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But this admin does not care about legal or moral issues.

      Has there really ever been an administration that did?

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
    3. Re:ummm by free+space · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The thing is, Microsoft always had a "Buy for product, not market share" mentality.

      Almost all companies they bought have been startups with a really cool product ( Hilgreave, WebTV, Bungie...). As far as I know, Microsoft has never bought a Novell or a Lotus or a Compaq, they kill competition with hard work and/or unfair practices, but not with company acquisitions.

      So when you see Microsoft thinking of buying eBay instead of developing an alternative and slowly increasing their market share( like they did with IE) you know they are very desparate and afraid of Google.

    4. Re:ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "they kill competition with hard work at unfair practices"

      There, fixed that for you. ;-)

    5. Re:ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've glanced at the marketing vision/strategy surrounding eBay. Desperate isn't the right word. Tradeoffs is. Microsoft executives aren't stupid -- they've just decided it's cheaper to buy a packaged solution (and in doing so remove a competitor) than build one from scratch. One reason for this is they expected eBay to sue for at least one patent violation (although Microsoft policy is that none of us employees knows what patents eBay has, but it was a reasonable guess that we'd step on toes).

      My company is very interested in building MSN for the ad revenue, and right now they think "renewable content" is key. This is why they've invested heavily in the entertainment side of MSN (they believe teens crave music and videos, and they want MSN to integrate with WMP so it's easier than the other guys) and why Live.com is all about personalization (they want people to take ownership of the site). The overall goal is to get customers who schedule time to view MSN holdings and thus the ads.

      eBay presents an attractive purchase because we all know how many people do schedule it into their lives. Think if just 10% also started using MSN because it was integrated. The ad revenue earned PLUS the ad revenue taken from Yahoo/Google PLUS the momentum shift from the extra users makes the purchase worth it. PayPal is also attractive for its loyal customer who will view MSN ads. The executives are leery of using PayPal as a "preffered" payment gateway because the logical step is to incorporate it into the huge failure Passport. On the other hand, with the subscription model publically announced for Vista, MS would like to forgo as much of the credit card fees as possible with their billion-dollar cash cow.

      (I'm posting as AC on neighbor's wireless since this may violate my NDA.)

    6. Re:ummm by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Fucking bingo!

      MSN searches have a little box on the right showing active eBay auctions for the search term. It would be similar to eBays Google adWords campaigns but at no cost AND removing revenue from eBay advertising on Google.

    7. Re:ummm by benna · · Score: 1

      Is that really worth the over $50 billion that eBay would cost. I realize they have $48 billion in current assets, but there is pressure from many shareholders to use that money for a large buyback, and with the extremely low price of the stock right now, that might be a better investment. I am beginning to think that perhaps Microsoft takes Google too seriously as a competitor. Microsoft's core business is not, and likely never will be, search.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    8. Re:ummm by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      If MS gets by with buying ebay and even if it cost them 50 billion, it would be the smartest money they spent. Look at money vs. quicken. MS is finally beating quicken, but it has cost them many times more than what it would have cost them to buy the company. In addition, they still do not own the tax arena (even though a number of the tax software start-ups over the last 10 years was funded by bill gates :) ). It will probably cost them 10's of billions to own that. And as long as Intuit stays on windows and does not go over to Linux, they will have no incentive to pursue it anymore.

      If you look carefully, MS is only worried about stopping anybody on Linux and any strong net play. All else can be dealt with later.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    9. Re:ummm by benna · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you are assuming Microsoft's end goal is market share, but that should only be a means to an end. Eventually, market share must lead to profit. In the operating system business, there are obvious reasons why market share is profitable. Market share is far less important in the tax software business. Market share is important for online auction sites, because of network effects, but the auction revenue would not be the reason for an acquisition. Rather, Microsoft wants to use eBay to gain users for MSN. It is this increase in revenue for MSN Search which I do not think is worth over $50 billion to Microsoft.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  11. Wow, I misread that... by Lally+Singh · · Score: 3, Funny

    I saw it as "Microsoft in Talks to Acquire Baby"

    I need some coffee.

    --
    Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    1. Re:Wow, I misread that... by MarkRose · · Score: 1

      Vigo's after Oscar... quick! Check for a river of slime running under Redmond!

      --
      Be relentless!
    2. Re:Wow, I misread that... by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Hmmm

      Would this be Baby v3.0 Have Bill and Lisa been busy? Acquiring Minds want to know....

      =B-)

  12. Microsoft getting ebay would be a nightmare. by Inquisitor911 · · Score: 1

    Now imagine the possibilities... If Google acquired Ebay! : D

    1. Re:Microsoft getting ebay would be a nightmare. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'd rename it Ebeta?

    2. Re:Microsoft getting ebay would be a nightmare. by Inquisitor911 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's kind of strange that half of their products are always in a beta stage.

    3. Re:Microsoft getting ebay would be a nightmare. by ByteGuerrilla · · Score: 1

      Yes, Ted, that was the joke

      [/familyguy]

      --

      A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.

  13. Microsoft is scared. by Rendo · · Score: 0

    Think about it. They try and merge a deal with AOL, and that bombs because Google gets the deal. They then scampy on over to the next "best" thing and they're trying to make a deal with them to combat Google. Microsoft is getting scared and this is just proof how afraid they are that Google is the proverbial needle to the balloon for Microsoft.

  14. Possible Merged Company Names by Androclese · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It might just be possible that Yahoo! could get purchased by Microsoft as well. If they do, it gives us a wide range of new name possibilities to think about:

    M$'s eYahoo!

    M$baYahoo!

    eYahoo$oft!

    Ca$h

    ...most of these look like unsecure passwords...

    1. Re:Possible Merged Company Names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not Funny!

    2. Re:Possible Merged Company Names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mod him down then post as an AC? Why, did he touch a nerve? Is that one of your passwords?

  15. I will stop by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If MS acquires any sort of control over eBay/PayPal I will close out my accounts with both. No way I trust anything to do with my money to MS.

    1. Re:I will stop by alan.briolat · · Score: 1

      I am with you on that one. I have already got rid of anything to do with Microsoft, and encouraged others to do the same - I do not trust them, and I do not trust their market practices. This would just add another thing to the list.

      Luckily though, on the Internet we have something very close to a free market, in that the entry cost to start a business is not very high, and almost anyone can do so. With that in mind, I can see a viable alternative to eBay/PayPal being created. Sure, I doubt it will be as popular as its predecessors to start with, as most users of them will not care about Microsoft being the owner, but I think over time, and as more public opinion becomes levelled against Microsoft (most likely from very public dangerous mistakes, as they are prone to having), the market share will shift.

      Remember, the eventuality of an unregulated free market is one or 2 companies owning everything - there is always a buyer, therefore everyone and everything is for sale. Company directors do not care about what is "right" and the fact that selling out damages the economy as a whole - they care about profits, because that is their job.

      --
      I swear we should be allowed to give mod points to sigs... "-1, Offtopic"
    2. Re:I will stop by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      If MS acquires any sort of control over eBay/PayPal I will close out my accounts with both. No way I trust anything to do with my money to MS.


      Been to your bank lately? How about the IRS?

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    3. Re:I will stop by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      Banks are subject to intense regulation, and they are insured - if they screw up, wether its MS fault or not, my deposits get replaced. And I do specifically look for banks who at least dont use MS as their front end.

      And as far as the IRS, I have no choice there - I *do* have a choice when it comes to eBay/PayPal.

    4. Re:I will stop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever known Microsoft to purchase and improve anything? eBay will crumble under Microsoft's tinkering. For exampld, third-party vendors of eBay management software (such as ChannelAdvisor) will likely be locked out, or priced out, of integrating with eBay. MS will develop a shoddy, Windows-based, download management application that they'll push on all their sellers.

      Microsoft's changes will force people to flock to Overture, uBid, and new auction alternatives.

    5. Re:I will stop by Twiceblessedman · · Score: 1

      Same, it's a shame because I've grown to like ebay. Ah well, nature of the beast. ;)

    6. Re:I will stop by wfWebber · · Score: 1

      Actually, PP is subject to that same intense regulation and insurance. So no argument there. Essentially, PP is a bank, just one that's on the Internet. I'd suspect it is watched more carefully then your average bank.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
    7. Re:I will stop by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Actually, PP is subject to that same intense regulation and insurance. So no argument there. Essentially, PP is a bank, just one that's on the Internet.

      Show me where in PayPal's user agreement it shows that your money is FDIC insured? Their ridiculous "FDIC passthrough protection" doesn't count because it doesn't protect you in the case of PayPal becoming insolvent, only the bank they invested your money in. Believe me, if PayPal declares bankruptcy you'll be the LAST person with a claim on getting your money out of those bank accounts. Don't be a fool.. if you have more than $50 (or some small amount you're willing to lose) in a PayPal account you're asking for trouble. I even unlinked my checking account from them a few days ago because I am simply not comfortable with such a fucked up company being able to drain any of my "real" money. The only thing I allow as a source of funds now is a credit card so I can fight fraud charges through the CC company. Sure, this mean's I'm "unverified", which is ridiculous since they verified my account via my bank account once, it should stay verified no matter what payment method I choose to use.

    8. Re:I will stop by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

      You're living in a fantasy world.

      MS may make major mistakes, but they roll out so much PR they get away with it. Most people think MS = good quality and something they can trust. Most don't even have the concept of MS being evil, the same way untill recently super markets (in the UK at least), weren't thought as evil.

      Untill Mum and pops stuff starts to get stream rolled by MS in a visible way (aka little shops closing and huge super markets all over the place), they won't even notice it. I'd love to see MS fall but it's like wishing for the death of a giant when the giant's always covering his mistakes and going "oh that village was full of devil worshippers and child molesters" for any he destroys.

      --
      I like muppets.
    9. Re:I will stop by mnmn · · Score: 1

      I'd probably continue to use eBay until someone comes around with something equivalent and non-MS. Google will probably try. And if theres something plausible I'll jump ship real fast.

      And should I ever sell anything I'll list it both places, just to raise the profile of the competitor system against a MS system.

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    10. Re:I will stop by mysidia · · Score: 1

      False. The terms of agreement between PayPal and its users state that PayPal is only payment processing service, not a bank, and as a consequence, are not subject to the same regulations as banking services.

      See the PayPal User Agreement, which states among other things, the following excerpt:

      2. The Legal Relationship between You and PayPal. 2.1 Agency Relationship. PayPal acts as a facilitator to help you accept payments from and make payments to third parties. We act as your agent based upon your direction and your requests to use our Services that require us to perform tasks on your behalf. PayPal will at all times hold your funds separate from its corporate funds, will not use your funds for its operating expenses or any other corporate purposes, and will not voluntarily make funds available to its creditors in the event of bankruptcy or for any other purpose. You acknowledge that (i) PayPal is not a bank and the Service is a payment processing service rather than a banking service, and (ii) PayPal is not acting as a trustee, fiduciary or escrow with respect to your funds, but is acting only as an agent and custodian.
      PayPal will pool your funds together with funds from other Users, and will place those funds in accounts at one or more FDIC-insured banks ("Pooled Accounts"). Those funds may be eligible for FDIC pass-through insurance.
      ...
      By initiating and sending payments through the Service or adding funds to your balance, you appoint PayPal as your agent to obtain the funds on your behalf and to transfer the funds to the recipient that you designate or to a Pooled Account, subject to the terms and restrictions of this Agreement.
    11. Re:I will stop by e40 · · Score: 1

      100% agreement here. Why, then, haven't some competitor to PP sprung up, one that isn't bogus? I'd go with them in a heart beat.

    12. Re:I will stop by phorm · · Score: 1

      There are lots, the problem is that - as a buyer - you don't have much choice in what you use (it's the seller's available payment options). If you're a seller there are quite a few others you can choose from... but most seem no reliable (or less so) than paypal.

    13. Re:I will stop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.paypalsucks.com/

      PayPal is as much a proper bank as Microsoft is a company producing quality software.

    14. Re:I will stop by inKubus · · Score: 1

      You could just have a separate account to use with your ebay. I have 2 bofa accounts and so I just transfer my money into Account #1, and then use BofA's online transfer to move it into my business account. Thus, any unsavory individuals have no access to my funds but I can stay "verified"...

      Banks are pretty much giving accounts away, there's no reason to have all your eggs in "one basket".. Plus having an account at each of the major national banks (and a few local ones) means never having to wait for funds to come "available".

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
  16. no kidding by free+space · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft has the habit of 'Microsoftizing' all software and web sites it acquires, where 'Microsoftize' means "make ugly, slow and unusable".

    Hotmail, Frontpage and Visio were all excellent, lightweight products until MS added tons of links and toolbars and menus and images and made everything crawl.

    Prepare for slower uglier eBay & Paypal.

    1. Re:no kidding by grazzy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Prepare for slower uglier eBay & Paypal.

      I'm sorry, but I REALLY dont think that is possible.

    2. Re:no kidding by mrbcs · · Score: 1
      I dumped my Hotmail account as soon as MS bought it. I'll do the same with Paypal and Ebay. Ebay kind of sucks now anyway... too many scammers. Paypal has no protection either. Got ripped off for $300 once... only once. You seemed to have "protection" until you actually need it. The credit card co couldn't do anything because paypal acted as a proxy. I was real happy when I found that out.. pricks. /end rant

      Microsoft would probably clamp down real hard on anyone re-selling MS products on ebay as well. I see this as a step to force people to upgrade to Vista. Pretty hard to chug along with win2k if you can't find a license.

      --
      I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
    3. Re:no kidding by sankyuu · · Score: 1
      Microsoft sites are generally clunky, but this would be an exception.

      The page has the lightweight look of digg and link menus open up like those on the Mac. And it works on firefox.

      Looks like they're learning to be sleek.

    4. Re:no kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or they paid someone else to do it.

  17. Hint... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just saw a friend's beta copy of MS Small Business Accounting software and in it it has "E-Bay Integration" included.

    MS is going hard after the small business market and yes, that includes all those EBay sellers.

  18. Re:Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce COMPETIT by DimGeo · · Score: 1

    "May you live in Interesting Times"
    Actually, it's a curse ;-)

  19. Ebay is a Sun Solaris site by geoff+lane · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Ebay runs on Solaris and has just bought new hardware from Sun.

    We all remember (don't we) how long it took MS to convert Hotmail?

    So either MS runs a Solaris based service for the forseeable future or breaks Ebay for months while they try to get it right.

    1. Re:Ebay is a Sun Solaris site by Decaff · · Score: 1

      Ebay runs on Solaris and has just bought new hardware from Sun.

      Things are far more complicated that than. EBay also runs primarily on Java - it is one of the most successful and high-performance server-side Java sites in the world.

      In other words, almost every aspect of the way EBay works uses the opposite strategy to those suggested by Microsoft.

    2. Re:Ebay is a Sun Solaris site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, Ebay is a huge customer of IBM software products. Both DB2 and Websphere are critical components of ebay's infrastructure. It would be a great marketing coup for IBM software to proclaim how even Microsoft cannot use SQL Server or .NET for their truly critical infrastructure.

    3. Re:Ebay is a Sun Solaris site by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      Did they ever completely replace the BSD machines that Hotmail used?

      I read somewhere that they still had BSD, but that the servers were
      configured to lie about running a MS OS.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    4. Re:Ebay is a Sun Solaris site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hrm.. Websphere is still quite heavily used (at least for now, notice how the IBM logo on ebay.com was replaced with a sun logo a while back), but DB2 is soo insignificant as to not be worth mentioning.

  20. Buy Yahoo! Now! by hthite · · Score: 1

    So what now, one fine day M$ will buy Yahoo! as well?

  21. Hi cost to stop illegal MS Windows sales on ebay by OwnStile · · Score: 3, Funny

    I bet they're just trying to stop the illegal sales of MS Windows on ebay...

  22. Re:Tags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like I care.

  23. Microsoft Friendster by dicarve · · Score: 1

    I wonder if then they acquire Friendster.com. Would it be nice if we have "MS Friendster, please login via your .NET Passports"?? :D

    1. Re:Microsoft Friendster by lsproc · · Score: 1

      Windows Live ID now. Its a good thing that XP was never released as Microsoft Windows.NET or we would have a bit of trouble now with the online parts of .NET being phazed out.

  24. BSOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bid Screen of Death.

    In the new Vista, after a crash, you have to have the winning bid before getting your crash dump.

  25. anyone else think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That MS is going after skype? so they can get the userbase and the chat program thats been quite successful and to get to that you have to get ebay?

  26. Hey, it's in the New York Post.... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    ...so it *must* be true! It's right next to the story about the bouncer accused of murder who likes Chaucer and Kung Fu!

    Chris Mattern

  27. Re:Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce COMPETIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This scares me enough that I'm canceling my paypal account, the thought of Microsoft with direct access to my money is frightning. It's not much to them, but I haven't seen any buisness deal with Microsoft where someone didn't get screwed.

  28. Vista Presence? (was Re:Reminds me of HotMail) by quarkscat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Parent poster reminds /. that Microsoft WOULD replace *nix servers at eBay with THEIR
    flagship product.

    It is not outside the realm of rational thought that Microsoft will be desperate to have
    some highly visible enterprise to demonstrate the successful adoption of MS Vista OS,
    even if they have to buy the company in order for that to happen. Vista is far behind
    schedule, and this only after shedding 90% of the new "gotta-have" features they were
    touting. Many, many corporations will be unmoved to migrate to Windows Vista OS
    until (1) it is a PROVEN product, and (2) prior MS products reach EOL status.

    If Microsoft spends 20% of its' cash reserves to purchase eBay, and then another 20%
    to massage a working enterprise IT structure in order to demonstate Vista's viability,
    what other choice would they have? Their business plan is dependent upon regularly
    scheduled corporate upgrades, including the support contracts and training/certification
    treadmill. So long as such a massive acquisition takes place during the current (BushCo)
    business climate, they are less likely to get pinged by the DoJ regarding monopoly abuse.

    You might say that Microsoft's future business is dependent upon a closing "window of
    opportunity" to demonstrate a viable enterprise MS Windows Vista deployment. The
    most notable feature of Vista, h/w-s/w DRM with corporate key control, would be an
    ideal non-political fit for an enterprise utterly dependent upon e-commerce.

  29. Antitrust concerns a bit late! by openfrog · · Score: 1

    Sources indicate that the talks, while still active, have cooled somewhat in the last two weeks as executives considered antitrust issues.

    At the face of it, shouldn't it have come to mind BEFORE even beginning any talk? Is this a kind of trial baloon to test how compliant the authorities might be? Are they trying to prepare the minds for a different buyout that will appear more "reasonable" in comparison? MS should already have been split in different operations by now, OS and software, not that this is an absolute remedy, considering what happened with the Bells...

  30. not according to Netcraft by mangu · · Score: 2, Informative

    They run mostly Windows 2000.

    1. Re:not according to Netcraft by DrDitto · · Score: 1

      You are only seeing the web front-end. eBay uses expensive, high-end Sun hardware for all the back-end stuff.

  31. No interest in a content company? by tepples · · Score: 1

    From the article:

    One source said Microsoft boss Bill Gates came to the conclusion that Yahoo! was more a content company than a tech company. This source said Gates has no interest in owning a content company.
    This was confusing because "content" as an adjective means pleased. It is also sometimes used to refer to works of authorship other than computer programs. But in that case, what is Microsoft Game Studios if not "a content company"?
    1. Re:No interest in a content company? by yuna49 · · Score: 1

      I was rather puzzled by this comment, given that in the mid 1990's, Gates focused on acquiring the digital rights to lots of content around the globe. Encarta, Corbis, the acquisition of the Bettman Archive, were all parts of this strategy. Here's a good take on this I found from The Chronicle of Higher Education in 1998:
      http://chronicle.com/data/articles.dir/art-44.dir/ issue-33.dir/33a03301.htm.

      Perhaps they just weren't capable of monopolizing sufficient content to make it a viable business strategy.

      Back when I worked as a television researcher in the 80's it was becoming clear that content holders had more and more leverage over distribution channels as the networks' oligopoly was challenged. At the time I thought that content would be king. Now, I'm not so sure. Perhaps the real power these days are services like eBay or Google that repackage content in useful ways. Of course, in 1981 we couldn't see the Internet coming, so information flow was still pretty much unidirectional. The Internet enables providers like eBay to repackage content provided by its customers; essentially the audience has become the advertisers. To me, the fact that the Internet has destroyed this type of top-down information flow is one of its most revolutionary characteristics.

      Of course, that's not to say that those wedded to the top-down model won't do everything they can to stop these trends, be they the MPAA, the New York Times, or the government. In the long run, though, I don't think they'll succeed.

  32. And how long would it be by kilodelta · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Before Ebay had to stop using Open Source software and going with MS provided software.

    Good god - if you think Ebay is mostly unusable now just wait and see what happens when the entire operating platform is switched to Microsoft products.

    1. Re:And how long would it be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell is it with people in this thread and an apparent dislike for eBay, or in this case, some claim that it's unusable? eBay is perfectly usable, and an excellent service from which I've gotten many, many items at better prices than I could get them from a local store (shipping charges included) and managed to sell quite a few items myself, which I probably never would have done otherwise because I am inherently a lazy bastard.

      If you really think eBay is unusable maybe you need one of those "... for Dummies" books...

    2. Re:And how long would it be by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Hotmail is run by BSD

  33. Re:Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce COMPETIT by j-pimp · · Score: 1

    CompetIT? Is that a new CA product?

    --
    --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
  34. Microsoft has too much money by Slashdot+Junky · · Score: 2, Informative

    If Microsoft and eBay are indeed talking, it is proof that Microsoft has way too much money just sitting around. Microsoft will ruin eBay if they were too aquire it. I don't want everything to be either Google this and MSN that.

    Later,
    -Slashdot Junky

    --
    .
    Landfill Mining Co.
    Managing the (Un)natural Resources of Tomorrow
  35. God dammit Microsoft... by TheNoxx · · Score: 0, Troll

    Just do your fucking OS thing and quit trying to control the world. It's getting really, really, really fucking old. You don't have to dominate EVERY ASPECT OF COMPUTING EVER.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
    1. Re:God dammit Microsoft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're absolutely right. I forwarded your comment to Steve Ballmer, I'm almost positive he'll listen. We can make a difference!

    2. Re:God dammit Microsoft... by ByteGuerrilla · · Score: 1

      Embrace and extend, my padawan learner.

      --

      A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.

    3. Re:God dammit Microsoft... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      Ex nihilo nihil fit.
      Feci aliquid ex nihilo.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  36. Oh, Pul-eaze by doodlebumm · · Score: 1
    The only pressure that Microsoft feels from sheep (uh..., I mean, customers) is when the masses start using a technology where Microsoft isn't very near the top (like Google, eBay, etc.). Once Microsoft has acquired a top position, MS dictates what the customers want because people are stupid. MS doesn't make any effort to give people what they really want because it doesn't have to. Most people think that Microsoft will deliver something they will have to use no matter what, and they bend over and take it in the rear, smiling. If Microsoft said it would double all paypal and ebay rates, most people would just cave in.

    We live in a society where people think that they have no choice but to bow to Microsoft. That is the power of their monopoly.

  37. You can... by suv4x4 · · Score: 1, Funny

    eBay's CEO: You can suck my tiny red-blue-yellow-green balls, Mr. Ballmer!

    1. Re:You can... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know the CEO of eBay is a woman right?

    2. Re:You can... by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      You do know the CEO of eBay is a woman right?

      Could be, but let that not get in the way of a nice reference.

  38. ok. I wanna buy it by asdomar · · Score: 0

    but how much is shipping? I'm interested in this item

  39. MS-Ebay by arakon · · Score: 1

    After our successfull buyout and pending merger with the United States Government, we at Microsoft believe this merger will only strengthen our products and provide our stock holders with more added value. :P

    --
    "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
  40. Microsoft already charges $xxx/mo by Aquitaine · · Score: 4, Informative

    Microsoft has a program called SPLA (Software Provider License Agreement) that anybody who is a Microsoft Partner can join (becoming a Partner is basically filling out a form). There's a bunch of legal stuff you have to sign, but then you get access to their entire library, which you can then resell -- of course you're responsible for supporting it, but you pay MS (or one of their major contractors, like Software Spectrum) a fee per month for each piece of software you use. You can sell per-user 'subscriber access licenses' or per-CPU, unlimited-user licenses. The monthly fees you pay MS are pretety reasonable -- instead of buying SQL Server 2005 Standard Edition for $1500, you pay MS $3/mo/user and charge the client whatever you want. A lot of their commonly-used software is under $5/mo., and some of the more esoteric stuff is only a little more.

    That fee includes free upgrades, so if I sell you a Windows license at $5/mo., you would automatically get Vista when it comes out. It's actually a very reasonable program, or at least it appears to be.

  41. Skype on alternative platforms by Micah · · Score: 1

    CRAP -- this would mean no more Skype for Linux and OS X??? As someone living overseas, I depend on that to make calls back home.

    And no, I will NOT install Windows.

    1. Re:Skype on alternative platforms by yupa · · Score: 1

      But you could use alternative open source software like ekiga. Also after reading how skype works http://www.secdev.org/conf/skype_BHEU06.pdf , you maybe frightened by all the obscurity behind it.

    2. Re:Skype on alternative platforms by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      What no phone?

  42. Sorry, Bungie was not a startup by Shawn+Parr · · Score: 1
    Bungie had over a decade of experience and quite a reputation as a game developer before Microsoft even considered buying them. So that example doesn't really fit in with your reasoning. Actually it works against it.

    As a matter of fact Bungie was bought specifically for the Halo franchise. What made the Halo franchise so alluring was Bungie's previous track record along with the tech demos they had been showing off. Microsoft bought them to make Halo an Xbox exclusive at launch.

    1. Re:Sorry, Bungie was not a startup by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      "Buy for product, not market share" - buying Halo (a product) certainly fits here. Yes, along the way they killed it on other platforms (the first public demo of Halo was on Mac OS 9 on a PowerMac G3 during a Macworld Expo keynote), but killing it on other platforms wasn't Microsoft's motivation for buying it.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:Sorry, Bungie was not a startup by jthill · · Score: 1
      killing it on other platforms wasn't Microsoft's motivation
      Maybe not their only motivation, but games sell machines. For a long time, Macs just weren't gaming machines: Apple had wrong-footed themselves by trying for the "business" image. Bungie were changing that, attracting attention with a long string of outstanding Mac-first and Mac-only games, and it was starting to positively affect Apple's image. Everybody knew Halo was going to be just amazing. Bungie had history, reputation, credibility and absolutely awesome demos. People bought machines just to play that one game. Do you really think Microsoft would stand by and watch those be Macs?
      --
      As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
  43. And the first thing MS will do... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

    ...is track down anyone trying to resell Windows or selling pirated copies of Windows. Once they eliminate that threat, they can safely declare victory.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  44. If you can't beat 'em... by jedigeek · · Score: 1

    buy 'em!

  45. Will they replace the IBM infrastructure? by FatSean · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know, how they did with HotMail...and then spent years getting it back up to speed?

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:Will they replace the IBM infrastructure? by jpetts · · Score: 1

      IBM? Look at the top right of this site.

      --
      Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  46. No they aren't by scronline · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft makes large "enterprise" software packages. Google makes small tools that will probably never come out of beta. They are 2 different business models. Microsoft is a company lead by someone who really doesn't have a grip on reality. He's egotistic and doesn't like the success that Google is getting however right or wrong that success is and that's another discussion. MSN's search is such a small amount of Microsoft's income that it just doesn't makes sense that he would want to crush a search engine.

    Google doesn't make an Operating System. Google doesn't make an office productivity suite. Google doesn't make a game console.

    Under Ballmer's lead Microsoft is starting to fall apart. It's losing direction because of obsessions with beating Google for whatever reason. So what if Google has taken some of Microsoft's talent. That's the way it is in business. Particularly when employees smell the rot that is starting to consume Microsoft.

    Either rate, Google isn't the needle to Microsoft's balloon, Ballmer's obsession with Google is.

  47. When did eBay ditch MS? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I recall when I used to visit eBay that a lot of the URLs had isapi.dll in them. After a while, I noticed that this had gone and there was a big 'Powered By Sun' logo on the front page. Now this has gone too.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    1. Re:When did eBay ditch MS? by ksheff · · Score: 1

      didn't IBM sign a big hardware deal with ebay a few years ago?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    2. Re:When did eBay ditch MS? by sl70 · · Score: 1

      I was surprised to see the Powered by Sun, too. Especially since Netcraft reports all ebay machines running MS Windows Server. Look here.

      --
      Thank God I'm an atheist!
    3. Re:When did eBay ditch MS? by zCyl · · Score: 1

      I was surprised to see the Powered by Sun, too. Especially since Netcraft reports all ebay machines running MS Windows Server.

      You misunderstand. They were solar-powered windows servers.

  48. I'm gonna by jlebrech · · Score: 0

    Set up a fake ebay account then put up a ridiculous, squindilion dollar bid for ebay so that m$ cant buy them :D

  49. Too bad by woohootoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've enjoyed doing business with ebay, but it would be over if there's a buyout.

  50. Skype by BlueFiberOptics · · Score: 1

    Don't forget eBay now has Skype. That could get Microsoft into more markets.

  51. MS by certel · · Score: 1

    Man, MS is just trying to get a hold of a bunch of new business areas. Does anyone feel they should just stick to what has made them what they are? Windows? I mean, Vista needs to be secure, stable and highly functional. Work on that.

  52. Never happen by jasonditz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft probably would not be able to afford eBay. I'm a shareholder of ebay myself, and the way I see it, I would need either:

    $45 per share in cash
    or
    2.5 MSFT shares per 1 ebay share

    Which means Microsoft is either going to have to issue $30 billion in debt and spend all their existing cash, or relinquish 30%+ of the ownership of the combined company to eBay shareholders.

    I find it hard to believe they're willing to do either.

    Now, if they want to buy Skype from us or something, that's a different matter.

    1. Re:Never happen by hammackj · · Score: 1

      In other news Bills Gates pays cash for eBay, he was quoted as saying "eh it is pocket change."

    2. Re:Never happen by benna · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they could offer some combination of cash and stock. They have $48 billion in current assets. That plus 1 MSFT per EBAY would be reasonable, I think. Not that Microsoft's shareholders would be very happy about such a deal. Many of them are pushing for a massive share buyback. If I really did think Microsoft would make an offer, I'd be buying eBay right now.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    3. Re:Never happen by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      Not all of the $48 billion in current assets are liquid though... unless they want to send me an Xbox 360 as part of my compensation package

    4. Re:Never happen by benna · · Score: 1

      Inventory makes up a tiny percentage of Microsoft's current assets, $491 million to be precise. They have at least $37 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments. About $9 billion is in somewhat less liquid receivables. In any case, they'd be able to pay a large percentage of the cost in cash.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    5. Re:Never happen by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      True, but they've also got $16 billion in short term liabilities.

  53. Re:Skype on alternative platforms. Already started by jackjeff · · Score: 1

    Already in process.

    Since EBay bought Skype, new features were only added to the windows version (like the video).

    In fact, I still use an older version on OS X because it is less BUGGY than the newer, and I hate this clumsy blue login screen inside the user window. The "echo cancellation" feature has also vanished (instead of bug-fixing it).

    On windows they have also played some dirty tricks to limitate usage of the software on AMD processors.

    I'm already planning to kiss their ass good bye when my skypein subscription is over. Some other VOIP software exist.

    I heard about Wengo. It's a GPL crossplatform one. And "oh miracle" has video on Mac and Linux too. It's likely to be my next VOIP.
    http://www.openwengo.org/

  54. When did that change? by FatSean · · Score: 1

    It used to say Powered by IBM. WebSphere and DB2 on the back-end. I met the guy who's job it was to customize DB2 code for eBay. Interesting. I guess Sun threw them a sweet-heart deal to get their name up there in public eye.

    --
    Blar.
  55. Consider the source by sfjoe · · Score: 1, Informative

    This is the New York Post we're talking about folks. Famous for its headline "HEADLESS BODY IN TOPLESS BAR" and also for extorting money to kill negative stories about people. Don't place too much faith in the veracity of this story.

    --
    It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
  56. It would be fitting by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    MS would vault onto end-user level servicing big time. But the most prominent thing that makes this super-fitting is that Ebay as a Web Portal is just as shitty - or even shittier - than the Windows family is as operating systems. The whole smell of Ebay put's it right next to AOL and shady Sharespyjunkware vendors imho.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  57. Alternatives? by hlh_nospam · · Score: 1
    One of the most promising ebay alternatives that I've seen is onlineauction.com, which is currently the #2 auction site (in terms of listings). Unfortunately, onlineauction sellers still appear to rely heavily on PayPal. I've heard that WagglePop.com is back -- but they rely exclusively on PayPal, which pretty much kills it for me. What we really need is a viable PayPal alternative. I wish Google would hurry up with Google-Pay or whatever they end up calling it.

    The auction format is not really very well suited to the stuff that I sell, and I have been having fairly good luck with Blujay.com.

  58. They deserve each other by kimvette · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Microsoft has earned scorn from customers for suing customers for reselling old/retired software "licenses," a crappy activation process, DRM, bucking established standards, and insecure operating systems and applications (and downplaying vulnerabilities until some script kiddie takes a proof of concept, implements it, and unleashes it). Maintenance is a headache, and many tasks require bringing the system down (e.g., "maintenance windows"). Not only that, but to appear competitive, they redefine common terms such as "downtime" for marketing purposes. Don't get me wrong; Microsoft produces some great products (in terms of feature set) but they libel and slander the competition to make themselves look better.

    eBay has earned a reputation for having the world's worst customer service, not refunding charges when they should, and for unjustly cancelling users' auctions. They have been so atrocious that they have earned the moniker "feebay" from a large group of customers.

    Therefore, in my view, Microsoft and eBay deserve each other.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    1. Re:They deserve each other by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Flamebait? Have you not followed what either company is doing and what their business practices are?

      Like it or not, both companies' business practices are highly questionable.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  59. There's a definite plus side to the buyout.... by HerculesMO · · Score: 1

    Maybe eBay will actually get a GOOD user interface. Say what you will about Microsoft, but their products are pretty slick looking, even if they don't work that great.

    The problem will really come when Microsoft tries to port eBay into .NET :)

    --
    The price is always right if someone else is paying.
  60. Re:Just try EBay's load on MS's toy products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Actually, there aren't many E15k's most of the solaris boxes are 880's and 1280's. The only E15k's were in paypal, until paypal dumped them for big Hitachi sparc boxes. Also, don't forget that AFAIK all of the paypal front end servers run linux. Oh and some of the ebay frontend boxes are bening moved to solaris 10 running on opterons.

  61. There's far more to it.. by Skudd · · Score: 1

    If Microsoft is successful in the acquisition of eBay, then they will in turn acquire Pay-Pal and Skype. I'm sure that's more of a "well duh" statement than anything, but think of what it would do to Microsoft's monoplistic nature.

  62. Re:mmmm monopolies... Just goes to show by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    mshaft couldn't innovate their way out of a paper bag.

    I mean, look at it: rather than create or improve a home-built portal to online buying, they go and BUY up one, and then obtain ALL the patents eBay obtained (whether these are ALL legit or who many are illegit is not my point), and then we ALL get to see our personal details, sales activities and more in mshaft's warchest.

    I REALLY hot the anti-trust units resoundingly "nay" this. I'm pretty sure the EU will condemn it and not let it fly. If the EU unit forbids it in the EU, then I'll run my ads through the EU units and hope they still show up in the US and elsewhere...

    effemmess

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  63. The sale will go something like by seanyboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A+++++++++++ Would buy out large web company to protect our monopoly again.

    --
    Training monkeys for world domination since 1439
  64. Re:Ladies and Gentlemen, let me introduce COMPETIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before you cancel it, you have to update it for security purposes: https://www.paypal.com/

  65. Ok by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

    SIGH

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
  66. Special eBay features for IE users only? by markdj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And if MS ran eBay, would there be special features only available to IE users? That would encourage eBay users to use Windoze instead of Apple or Linux.

  67. Skype by trenien · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Well, ebay bought out skype a while ago, and I somewhat doubt they'd be willing to let it go so fast.

    Skype would be perfect for M$ and the way it does business - foothold in the market, recognized name, closed proprietary soft and protocols...

    Wouldn't it be enough of a reason for M$ (I don't quite see how an auction-style site could interest them)

  68. Oh my... by Arcturax · · Score: 1

    Now there is a match made in hell. I can hardly even fathom this. But at least it might spur more people to move to something better.

    --

    --Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
  69. Bill & Meg are at the opposite ends of spectru by cpatil · · Score: 1

    Bill & Meg are at the opposite ends of spectrum. Bill has always belived in Developers and wants to Develop Products and Portals(After MSN was put into Windows group). Meg a deal maker doesn't understand product development and blew few billion dollars on a third rate product called, Skype.
    Bill's merger with Meg would make MSFT priceless.

  70. They want skype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Skype is what they are after I believe.

  71. No Microsoft, you can't have Ebay. Not Yours! by Bushido+Hacks · · Score: 1

    In yet another attempt to take over something they know little or nothing about and fail miserably at it, The Borg now want to take over the worlds largest garage sale.

    As a client of Ebay, I REFUSE to have my personal information in the hands of a company whose antivirus program lets in more viruses, worms, spyware, and solicitors, than it keeps out.

    In fact, both Ebay dropped using Microsoft Passport (now Windows Live ID) a long time ago.

    The only thing on Ebay that is not for sale is Ebay.

    --
    The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
  72. I agree, but Paypal is just one of many reasons by JRGhaddar · · Score: 1

    Skype & Paypal are enormous pickups for microsoft. It makes sense for them to incorporate these directly into windows media center. Make phone calls and payments right from your television, but the biggest gain is in hitting google in the pocketbook. Ebay is a huge customer for Google advertising wise. Microsoft may move to pull the plug on that revenue source for google.

  73. Only M$S platforms would work after awhile by watermodem · · Score: 1

    Just looking at microsoft's previous endevors you just know that in a short time only M$S platforms would be able to successfully bid. PayPal would require M$S. They might have a kludgy way for Mac's to work in a degraded mode but linux and bsd and other os's just wouldn't work. That would include PayPal so you would not be able to donate to your favorite OpenSource Software writer or Blog.

  74. Re:There's definitely something here ..... by chawly · · Score: 1

    I saw this bit, and I have to admit that it has me worried

    Say what you will about Microsoft, but their products are pretty slick looking, even if they don't work that great.
    I can only say that I'm pretty slick looking myself. The girls don't run after me though, or not too much. Maybe we should try the feminine attitude to Microsoft products? Just a thought. Don't want to start a flame-war. I think Bill Gates is great. Did you know that he had an Irish grandmother (on the maternal side) ? I've heard that his grandfather (paternal side) was, in fact, a Russian Admiral who got sunk by the Japanese.

    But you're right - these products really look great. I feel bad about wanting them to work as well as they look (and as well as they're priced). My fault - I'm just stupid.

    --
    How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  75. Stop cursing eBay with the M word! by ConvenienceComputers · · Score: 1

    I think I'm having a nightmare! Say it isn't so! At least I'm hopeful that they don't succeed in the transaction. I, for one, would probably look elsewhere for sales of anything and distance myself from eBay, if the transaction effectively happened and completed. I am no fan of the M word, and I am hoping it won't happen, for the public's sake.