Microsoft Bids $44.6 Billion For Yahoo

The news is everywhere this morning about Microsoft's $44.6B offer to buy Yahoo. The offer represents $31 a share, a 62% premium over Thursday's closing price; and Yahoo's stock price has been rising in after-hours trading. Microsoft has been making overtures to Yahoo since 2006, according to the CNet article, including a buyout offer last February that was rebuffed. Mediapost.com has some perspective on the deal from the point of view of ads and eyeballs. Such an acquisition, which would be Microsoft's largest by far — it bought Aquantive last year for $6 billion — would need approval by US and EU authorities. A European Commission spokesman declined to comment.

Comments

Very odd

[l-ascorbic]

Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators, yet they're willing to throw billions at it anyway. They must feel confident for some reason.

Re:Very odd

[2.7182]

It will be the Japanese buying Rockefellar center all over again. They'll lose and it will throw us into a worse economic state.

Re:Very odd

[crispi]

Well if you can't build a good search engine of your own, just buy one.

In fact just like about everything MS has ever done (eg SQL, IE, PowerPoint ...)

Re:Very odd

[jeroenb]

Considering that internet search and online advertising are exactly the places they don't dominate, I don't see why regulators would object.

Re:Very odd

[l-ascorbic]

This isn't like the previous anti-trust stuff either - either the US or EU can just block the deal outright. No piddling fines for them to ignore or stuff like that. A massive gamble, implying they really want this deal.

Re:Very odd

[Mr. Underbridge]

Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators, yet they're willing to throw billions at it anyway. They must feel confident for some reason.

If they allowed Google and Doubleclick, they'll probably allow this too. This doesn't give anyone a monopoly or anything close to it, since Google's still #1 in search.

The question is, how long until MS feels compelled to screw up Yahoo like Hotmail?

Re:Very odd

[coolmoose25]

Actually, I don't think regulators would have a huge problem with this... Clearly the big guy on the block is Google at this point... Microsoft and Yahoo joining forces makes sense from a competitive point of view... Let's face it, MSN sucks, it has always sucked, and so it is a good merger from a business perspective too. The only thing I worry about here is if Yahoo just sort of "melts" under Microsoft's ownership, the same way Excite did when it got bought.

Re:Very odd

[dkleinsc]

I think they figure that at least in the US they have a better shot of doing this now than with a President Obama or Clinton in charge.

Re:Very odd

[Bert64]

And most of those products went down hill in various ways after being bought...

Re:Very odd

[Bert64]

Well Yahoo, like hotmail, run all their stuff on FreeBSD...
You can bet yahoo would go the same way, migrating to windows, spending a ridiculous amount on new hardware and suffering significant problems in the process.

Re:Very odd

[Red Flayer]

The only thing I worry about here is if Yahoo just sort of "melts" under Microsoft's ownership, the same way Excite did when it got bought.

"melts"... or "is extinguished"?

Maybe I'm stuck in the past, but I can't shake the feeling that MS is more interested in narrowing the competitive field than in acquiring Yahoo properties -- though search is something they could use Yahoo's help with.

Re:Very odd

[garcia]

Considering that internet search and online advertising are exactly the places they don't dominate, I don't see why regulators would object.

Especially that Yahoo doesn't dominate that area either and with the addition of Microsoft it's only going sink further.

Re:Very odd

[Ilgaz]

Well if you can't build a good search engine of your own, just buy one.

In fact just like about everything MS has ever done (eg SQL, IE, PowerPoint ...) Yahoo's power and success comes from multi platform awareness, using right tools for job without caring about what OS it runs (mostly FreeBSD), giving the same service to everyone with a recent browser regardless of OS, being open to all developers even including competitors...

I checked Live.com the day it was announced. When it bitched about not using IE (when I tried to login my passport account) , I never visited it back. That is what makes every MS attempt unsuccessful. They can't live with the fact that there is a thing called HTML standard, TCPIP standard and Internet is platform neutral from beginning. They use every opportunity to alienate other OS/Browser users.

I could never see Yahoo as a great search engine although it seems spammers/blackhats/SEO junk targets them less. For the record, Google has always been a spammer heaven for me too.

Re:Very odd

[Calinous]

Even if they won't be successful, there is a chance that this will give Yahoo! some of its fame back. If Yahoo increases its market share, Google's market share will decrease

Re:Very odd

[fons]

Didn't I read a story here a few days ago that the period of supervision of Microsoft for monopoly stuff has ended.

Would this have anything to do with the fact that they now bid on Yahoo?

Re:Very odd

[dintech]

Google has always been a spammer heaven for me too

Everyone knows spammers don't go to heaven.

Re:Very odd

[yog]

So what's your point? Most companies start by buying some existing work; very few invent something completely new. Dell didn't invent the PC, nor did Compaq, nor did HP. Apple didn't invent the windowing GUI.

Microsoft is smart. They did not get where they are by being idiots. If they think Yahoo is worth $46B to them, I'm inclined to believe it. On the other hand, it might be that Google has been mulling an investment in Yahoo and Mr Softy just wanted to prevent that scary thing from happening.

It makes me sad that YHOO might cease to exist. To me, Yahoo represents the internet revolution. For ten years I have been using Yahoo's email, stock quotes, news, weather, sports, shopping, maps, and directories on a daily basis. I have bought and sold Yahoo stock when it was in the $300's and more recently when it was in the teens. I used to post on Yahoo's news comment boards before they shut them down, mainly to counter the many idiots I saw there. To me, Yahoo has always been a safe port in a storm.

When Microsoft takes over Yahoo, assuming the antitrust authorities let this happen (doubtful, actually), it will be a sad day for the internet. The old guard will have won out over the pure internet players. It will be Google against MS at that point. I guess I'll just spend even more time on Google from then on.

Re:Very odd

[Tom]

Actually, I don't think regulators would have a huge problem with this... Clearly the big guy on the block is Google at this point... Fortunately, regulators are smarter than you and sometimes have an eye on more than just the "who is #1 today?" question. They will certainly not want to support the #2 if it means the market is going to be divided by the two top dogs. Their task isn't to watch the #1 dog, it is to watch the market. And a market controlled by two huge corporations is only marginally better than a monopoly.

Which means I'm pretty sure they'll block this. Because who else would be left?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Very few mergers are flat-out rejected. In most cases, the acquiring company makes some small concessions, waits a while, pays homage to the regulators, and then they get approval. But this one is begging for special treatment. If they let this go through, it's tantamount to admitting there is no regulatory oversight whatsoever.

This is where we find out if the SEC is as crippled as the DOJ.

Re:Very odd

[somersault]

Of cros they do! Evey night heavn with the ladeis you can have too if you purchaise soft Cililiaolois!!! Only 49c a pill!

Re:Very odd

[Vexorian]

Should consider to stop looking for "crack porn warez" on search engines.

Re:Very odd

[rtb61]

Does M$ really want this deal, or is it simply a last ditch attempt by Ballmer to survive. Ballmer has staked his continued existence as the CEO of M$ on his own myopic focus on google. Not only does M$ have to bear the cost of buying Yahoo but also the cost of virtually writing off MSN.

M$ fails in the add market because they have single mindedly created a reputation of untrustworthiness. M$ is the last company you would want give information about future marketing campaigns, if they suddenly decide that you are a competitor they will use that information to their advantage. Reminds me of the Sony root kit debacle, the blogger who released the information about the root kit, his association with M$ and that M$ was fully aware of the root kit well before it's release and for some odd reason the release of the information about the root kit coincided with the launch of the PS3.

Dang it would suck to be a Yahoo or an MSN employee, if the buyout goes through, waiting for the axe to fall, as M$ works to reduced running costs and improve profit margins, especially as the yahoo owners would be crazy to take M$ stock rather than cash.

Of course the US Administration wont bat an eyelid they love monoplies (at least loyal ones) but the EU will most likely baulk at the idea.

The whole idea is crazy, M$ couldn't run MSN properly, so why would the same management team do any better with Yahoo, well at least the ex-Yahoo investors could always buy it back at a 75% discount in about 5 years.

Re:Very odd

[rdradar]

Does M$ really want this deal, or is it simply a last ditch attempt by Ballmer to survive. I think its mostly an attempt for him to show his power. Now someone send him to here instead. However, it would create really interesting battle with Google. They're both becoming really large competitors now.

Re:Very odd

[speculatrix]

I don't think hotmail has been on a windows platform for a long time, although they do stuff to hide server fingerprints to make things look like IIS for the sake of publicity. When MS first took over they found they needed lots more servers than the old platform because windows and IIS was comparitively much less efficient.

Re:Very odd

[Gene_K123]

I hope that they do not object since I feel that Google needs much stronger competition. If their search engine domination continues, they will soon control the internet. Things thrive with competition.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

In theory, the goal of the regulators is to strive to ensure competition.

In the search market today, the #2 and #3 vendors COMBINE to be something on the order of a third of the market. Without imposing artificial barriers on Google, it would inevitably crush one or both of the remaining "competition" in the search-engine market space. It would be hard to argue that the combination of the "next-in-line" search vendors wouldn't create an entity that should (theoretically) be better able to compete with Google than either vendor can manage independantly. It would certainly be better able to remain in the market against overwhelming odds. Both of those factors would work to improve the competetiveness of the market given the alternative of Google smothingering everyone and becoming "the New Microsoft" for the post 2010 generation...

-AC

Re:Very odd

[MECC]

Yahoo's power and success comes from multi platform awareness,

For the most part, yes, but the yahoo IM client differs significantly in capability and support from platform to platform.

I checked Live.com the day it was announced. When it bitched about not using IE (when I tried to login my passport account) , I never visited it back. That is what makes every MS attempt unsuccessful. They can't live with the fact that there is a thing called HTML standard, TCPIP standard and Internet is platform neutral from beginning. They use every opportunity to alienate other OS/Browser users.

If ms does get yahoo, they may find that their desktop monopoly won't help them leverage crap as it has for all the other products they've bought and downgraded. The Internet is turf foreign to their business model and corporate mindset, and buying yahoo won't change that. As if anything could. If this deal goes through, yahoo goes down.

Re:Very odd

[jimicus]

Microsoft is smart. They did not get where they are by being idiots.


Yep, Microsoft is fantastically smart. At sales and marketing.

From a technology perspective, historically they've lagged behind almost everything else that's available. They've improved that significantly in the last few years (IIS 6 isn't the security and stablity nightmare earlier versions were, for instance, and Windows SBS is pretty good value for money) but if you look at their product lineup over the course of the last 25 years, virtually everything there is a second-rate clone of something else that's already on the market.

Re:Very odd

[euicho]

Yes, very deserving of the Borg Gates icon.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, you never hear anything about SQL Server or PowerPoint anymore. Good insight.

Re:Very odd

[jimicus]

Unless you can back this up, I'd be very surprised if it's true.

The story goes that MS tried to migrate Hotmail from FreeBSD to NT4 Server back when they bought them. It failed miserably and eventually they gave up and put everything back on FreeBSD. But they learnt a lot from the experience - things like "systems admins like to automate every repetetive task they can think of" - seriously, this was news to Microsoft back in the day - and when 2K server came out they slowly migrated Hotmail to it with rather more success.

If a Netcraft check of www.hotmail.com reveals it's being served by Linux, chances are that's because they're using someone else to provide a caching frontend. They use Akamai for www.microsoft.com, but an nslookup of www.hotmail.com suggests Hotmail uses something by Savvis.

Re:Very odd

[ajs]

Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators, yet they're willing to throw billions at it anyway. They must feel confident for some reason. If I were MS, I'd do this now. If there's a democratic President in January, then this would be much less likely to be allowed to go through, but Bush might have the SEC fast-track it. After all, keep in mind that one of his first acts in office was to soften the DoJ's pursuit of MS. Democrats are much more in favor of anti-trust regulation than Republicans, simply as a platform, and I think specifically, MS has got to think long and hard about how progressive Obama is likely to be. McCain or Clinton might throw them a bone, but they can't bank on either of them being in office at this point, even if it's too early for any conclusions to be drawn.

Re:Very odd

[drachenstern]

Seeing as how AT&T and Yahoo! are so in bed together already, is this a way for Microsoft to get into the Telco/Wireless market? Ballmer may be looking to use the Yahoo! brand name to sell the MSN product, but not scrap MSN in the least.

Now that GoogleOS for phones is out, and Google is looking toward WiMax apparently, why would it be impossible for MS to want to get into the DSL business since it's already had Windows Mobile on the market for years now. I realize the discussion about the 700MHz auction looks like Google doesn't actually want to offer WiMax on 700MHz, but rather to reap the benefits of an open network. My point is they are doing a dance where each copies the other shortly after the first does something. (or sometimes not so shortly, but follows suit).

It looks to me like two big superpowers doing what it takes for each to get into the others market.

And now for a way to get modded troll, or whatever: My prediction is that Google purchases AskJeeves! next... [ha!]

Re:Very odd

[Chris Mattern]

Because they *do* dominate the desktop, the place from which internet search and online advertising is done from. And they have a legal history of abusing that monopoly to try to gain market advantage in other areas. "Google? You don't want that. Redirecting page request to www.yahoo.com."

Re:Very odd

[Khuffie]

Either call it MS, or take your childish-ness to the next level and call it M$N. Seriously, you sound like a bitter kid living in his mom's basement when you continuously use M$. Give it up, it does nothing for you but lose whatever point you were trying to make in the first place.

Re:Very odd

[geoffspear]

I agree. And I think cars would be a lot higher in quality if GM and Toyota bought up every other car company to increase competition.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Psychopath]

There's nothing about this merger that would prevent a new player from entering the market and competing, which is what the regulators care about.

Re:Very odd

[drachenstern]

yep, bu-bye yahoo! games, such as spades or canasta (which my wife loves to play)

ah well, here's to WoW!

Re:Very odd

[EmperorKagato]

What makes you think Microsoft can not run MSN properly?

Re:Very odd

[nschubach]

Yeah, but it will be Microsoft vs Google where Microsoft has practically no cash on hand anymore. In some ways I hope this deal does go through. I think it will be humbling for Microsoft to see that they can't just dump cash into something and make it work.

Re:Very odd

[Bacon Bits]

Exactly. You lose all credibility as soon as you use "M$". It's like calling Linux "Linsux". It looks petty and immature.

Re:Very odd

[psbrogna]

It's not that I trust them any less than I do any vendor that puts share holder value over customer satisfaction (everybody, right?). It's that they've consistently demonstrated that they highest level they can perform at is mediocrity. Which, granted at 99% market share is probably adequate enough for Joe consumer. However I'm not Joe Consumer, I'm a computer geek. I take satisfaction in using tools that are well designed. If I was an automobile enthusiast you wouldn't see me driving around in a Yugo.

Re:Very odd

[dickens]

My first thought was that that they chose now to do this because with the current recession fears regulators would be less likely to raise objections.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not like you can trust Google either. I used to be a Google fan myself but today they compete with my company on so many levels I have lost count.

When it comes to stepping on toes Google is just as bad as Microsoft. With Google though - they are better at executing - that makes it even worse for the little guys.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Regulators will let this happen...Simply because MSN and Yahoo are such a small marketshare, even combined, they won't be neck and neck with Google.

Re:Very odd

[zrq]

• Yahoo! servers use Free BSD
• Flickr servers use Linux/Apache
• del.icio.us servers use Free BSD

Is this kind of merger a good argument for releasing server side software under the GNU Affero GPL ? If these services were using software licensed under something like the GNU Affero GPL, then a company like Microsoft wouldn't be able to go near them.

I know the argument against this form of license is that large players like IBM, Sun and Google would not want to use them, so the projects would find it difficult to get sponsorship. But both Flickr and del.icio.us started as small start-up teams with a cool idea, and became valuable because of the user base they attracted. When they started out they weren't looking to be bought out by a large company, they just wanted to try out their idea and share it with their friends.

If the next cool idea is started by a team who used tools licensed under the GNU Affero GPL, what happens when it gets discovered and attracts a huge user base ? It would be interesting to see which of the big players would be prepared to become involved. A potentially disruptive technology.

Re:Very odd

[NoBozo99]

Regulators? We don't need no stinking regulators!

Given the current administration's corporate friendly ways
do you seriously believe the regulators would stop this?
Think News Corp taking over the Wall Street Journal or the
reassembly of ATT's death star from its former Baby Bells.

The big question is... What happens to all the support and
good will that Yahoo gives to the open source community?
What happens to Zimbra (as an example) if M$ takes over Yahoo?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

At the same time, YOU ALSO sound like a bitter kid living in his mother's basement writing code in VB.NET like a good little microbot.

Re:Very odd

[rbanffy]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but:

- Dell pretty much invented the large-scale direct sales built-to-order PC business.
- Compaq did invent the PC-compatible - different enough not to get sued out of existence, similar enough it runs the same software
- HP did invent a lot of stuff in the personal computer arena
- Apple did invent lots of stuff in the GUI arena. Have you seen Smalltalk 80 and how Lisa is different from that?

Microsoft did invent a lot too. It's unfair to judge the value of all company's contributions by its current delinquent behaviour (the one you call "smart").

Re:Very odd

[ImpShial]

Are you kidding? I think you're forgetting that they have a better chance with the right-wing side that is soft on large corporations. Liberal Dems are for big government and are harder on big business, so why would MS think a government in that environment would be easy to manipulate?

Re:Very odd

[dwye]

> Does M$ really want this deal, or is it simply a
> last ditch attempt by Ballmer to survive.

Ballmer survives as long as his college roommate does, barring a huge mistake.

> Not only does M$ have to bear the cost of buying
> Yahoo but also the cost of virtually writing off MSN.

How profitable has it been, anyway? Maybe this is just a recognition that it hasn't been able to compete, and Yahoo has. Besides, what else is Microsoft to do with its HUGE store of cash? Pay a dividend?

That last bit was sarcastic, if you didn't guess. MS should have been paying regular dividends from the time it went public; its cash reserves have not been used for anything else, and MS was able to grow just on its income. Theoretically, the cash can be better spent or invested by its shareholders.

Re:Very odd

[rbanffy]

You forgot PC-DOS ;-)

Re:Very odd

[harlows_monkeys]

Well, regulators let Google and Doubleclick through. The increase in the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index due to that was huge. Regulators don't seem to be doing much regulation these days.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that he doesn't like Microsoft.

Re:Very odd

[MrNemesis]

M$ fails in the add market

You've used Excel too?

Re:Very odd

[Firehed]

Not that I'm defending MS for it, but it's easy to expect as much when a software company expands into the services market. Both Google and Yahoo have been services companies from the beginning. It's in their best interest to make them available to as many people as possible, as they're effectively treating their free services as a loss leader to bring in money from their other services (which is to say that searching is free but they profit, at no cost to you, when you click on an ad).

Microsoft, OTOH, started as a software company. Their business model, like that of any other software company, relies on getting people to use that software. Not entirely unlike the services market. What they've attempted to do is use their services as a loss leader to bring in money from their SOFTWARE arm, rather than a different section of their services. In other words, they try to get the end users who are looking for free services to buy their software, which naturally goes against the whole 'free' thing.

Re:Very odd

[R3d Jack]

Get a life. Everyone calls it M$. If that causes you to miss the point, you wouldn't be the point anyway.

Re:Very odd

[Wiseman1024]

The fact that, after countless facelifts and mangling, MSN is still the crap that only gets hits because Microsoft forces its poor users to through MSIE and all their crappy shortcuts and advertisements in their OS?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators

Can't they just train the "regulators" to roll over and get their tummies scratched while this is happening? If any regulator growls, can't they just be fired? Isn't that why there was no breakup of MS in contrast to prior eras of trustbusting in other industries?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

YHOO, MSFT, and Slashdot. Very interesting.

Re:Very odd

[cromar]

Why does this annoy people? It's fun to use "M$." Remember back in the day when everyone had their pet insults like Ahole MacIntrash, M$, PeeSee, etc? That was fun. We all knew it was for fun. What happened to that sense of humor?

Re:Very odd

[Yvanhoe]

M$ fails in the add market because they have single mindedly created a reputation of untrustworthiness. M$ is the last company you would want give information about future marketing campaigns, if they suddenly decide that you are a competitor they will use that information to their advantage.

So it begins. Trust becomes more important than money for success at generating cash. Welcome to Economy 2.0.

Re:Very odd

[Khuffie]

It's fun when you're joking around, or if you use it sparingly, but the parent was trying to make a serious point and kept on using M$ like a childish brat, which immediately makes him lose any credibility he would have had.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

So your point was just to bash Microsoft to other people who hate Microsoft and also would be inclined to type "M$"? Thats good discussion there. And it doesn't make people miss the point, it makes what you are saying less credible. Who are you more likely to take seriously when discussing the merits of legalizing marijuana: A huge stoner talking about how he can't wait for April 20th to get all good and smoked up, or a normal person?

The point is it shows you are biased and therefore everything you say should be taken with a grain of salt.

Re:Very odd

[recoiledsnake]

Is this kind of merger a good argument for releasing server side software under the GNU Affero GPL ? If these services were using software licensed under something like the GNU Affero GPL, then a company like Microsoft wouldn't be able to go near them. Uhh. WTF? How will the Affero GPL prevent migration from FreeBSD/PHP to Win2k3/ASP.NET ?

Re:Very odd

[MrNemesis]

I hate getting dangerously close to two Godwin's in a week, but the whole MS/Ballmer/Google thing is increasingly making me think of a certain German's obsession with a Soviet city on the Volga (but that's what you get from erading too many history books). With $45bn being almost all of MS's cash reserve, it stinks of a desperate and obsessive tactical error for the sole purpose of buying mindshare*.

The fact of the matter is, Google started out with the cards stacked against them - miniscule funding, hard drive arrays built from lego, the inability to modify their own consumer operating system monopoly to point their bundled internet browser at their own search engines/portals - and yet within a few short years google was a household name, and is now the de facto synonym for "looking something up on the internet". It's the kind of success that Ballmer can only dream of - a vastly better product than anything else that was out at the time (fast and lean, IIRC an alien concept in search engines at the time), in the right place at the right moment to catch the new "internet boom" that MS had famously underestimated. If I was the CEO of (supposedly) the worlds' leading technology firm, such upstart behaviour would piss me off too.

As it is, I suspect the deal will be approved (the shareholders will love it and I can't see the ineffectual monpoly police battin gan eyelid over this "because MS isn't a monopoly on the internet") but I don't think it's going to do MS much good in the long run. Yet another brand run into the ground.

* Yes, I'm aware that the Y! purchase would net many other gains (such as the oft-mentioned decrease in FOSS contributions from Y!), but mindshare and search hits seem to be the biggest factor here.

Re:Very odd

[Oliver Defacszio]

Yep, Microsoft is fantastically smart. At sales and marketing.

Look around and you'll find that, historically, the front runners in virtually any industry are often more skilled in these two areas than in the actual craft itself. Examples? No problem --

1) GM. Nobody will ever accuse GM of crafting fine cars, yet they ruled the automotive roost for decades because they were very good at selling garbage.
2) SONY consumer electronics. One of the most ubiquitous names at the top of the consumer electronics industry actually builds very, very average products.
3) Motorola mobile phones. Again, perhaps the most ubiquitous name in the industry, but more as a result of marketing than objective quality.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

That or steal ideas, they do that too ;)

Re:Very odd

[CrazyTalk]

I work on the windows live search team, you insensitive clod!

(I really do, although what I do here has nothing to do with search)

Re:Very odd

[Rethcir]

You're so cool for using that dollar sign in M$. I've never seen anyone do that before, never in nigh on 30 years, it's so cool and original. What's next for you friend, juxtaposing capitalized nonsense against pictures of cats?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

"but the parent was trying to make a serious point and kept on using M$ like a childish brat, which immediately makes him lose any credibility he would have had."

Does it? I've accepted that M$ = Microsoft as the standard abbreviation. In fact, it distinguishes the abbreviation from any other meaning that MS could have. But, hey, that's just MHO. I think the only people who get their nose out joint are ones who feel someone is calling their baby ugly.

Re:Very odd

[jafac]

your comment sort of reminds me of the movie Hellraiser; where S&M people go to Hell, and end up liking it, because they enjoy all the sex and pain and torture.

. . . then I tried to imagine what "spammer heaven" would be like.
I'm not sure whether I should call M. Knight Shamalyan or Quentin Tarantino with my idea. . .
(more likely, I should try to animate the corpse of Stanley Kubrick, and see if he'll produce it.)

Re:Very odd

[spitzak]

Why don't you grow up?

The original poster used abbreviations that are in very common use. "M$" is not an insult, it is a quick and easy identifier. The letters "MS" read as "Multiple Sclerosis" to a lot of people, including me. It also a female title, means "Master of Science", "Mississippi", "millisecond", and quite a few other things.

Also the letter 's' is pronounced "ess" which is phonetically very different than "soft", while the $ actually has some typographic similarity to both an s and a t and thus abbreviates the name quite well. I at least don't even notice this and read it out loud as "Microsoft" or "m-soft".

The poster used "MSN" because that is not ambiguous (at least Wikipedia goes right to MSN when you type it in), the fact that the letters "MSN" are literally spoken out loud, and those initials are used right in M$'s own advertising and web pages!

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

"his association with M$ and that M$ was fully aware of the root kit well before it's release and for some odd reason the release of the information about the root kit coincided with the launch of the PS3." (emphasis mine)

Maybe you meant the launch of the Xbox360.

The article about the sony rootkit was posted on Mark Russinovich's blog on October 31 2005, and the Xbox360 was launched on November 11 2005.

Re:Very odd

[oldhack]

Bit sensitive today, are we?

Re:Very odd

[HermMunster]

This was my question also. It will essentially kill this product. Microsoft is not going to take this product and sell it. They will forcefully convert any customer to Microsoft's offering and they will kill the product, period.

They aren't paying $44 billion for zimbra, it's just an added nicety to make the pill go down a bit easier. The end of Zimbra is the end of one product capable of competing on that front.

If we view this form Google's perspective (if they were to buy it) we'd see an advancement of the product. As I suspect, a lot of what Yahoo uses that's open source will be abandoned in favor of using Microsoft's stuff. This will be a rather big blow to open source because Yahoo uses more open source than just Zimbra.

Re:Very odd

[spitzak]

You lose all credibility as soon as you use "M$". It's like calling Linux "Linsux"

No idiot, it would be like calling linux "£x" in some world where 90% of the people writing messages used that abbreviation.

Calling Linux "Linsux" is like calling M$ "Microsucks", which is obviously an insult because it is a waste of typing when the proper name could be written with less keystrokes.

Face it, "M$" is a very useful and quick abbreviation that is not ambiguous. The letters "MS" mean MANY things (try typing them into Wikipedia).

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems so unlikely to ever be allowed by the regulators, yet they're willing to throw billions at it anyway. They must feel confident for some reason.

Seriously?!!!!!! You must be from the EU because I can't remember the last time any regulatory body in the U.S. saw a merger it didn't like.

Re:Very odd

[rtb61]

At least you notice thatd, finally seriously why don't you M$, that's right M$ give up your infantile, marketdroid name calling. The M$, that's right M$, have been harping on about those initals for the past year, because they feel it damages their brand name. Yeah sure the bullshit worked on digg were the M$ marketdroids could use their numbers, but it's a nonsense elsewhere.

I use MSN because I recognise it as such and I use M$ for the same reason for me MS will always be http://www.msaustralia.org.au/ so just finally get over it already. You sound like some uptight, lame, sociopath, marketdroid, really the mom's basement stuff is so old and pathetic try something a little more creative fro a change. As for giving it up M$ over M$'s dead and rotting carcass.

As for any points I make, wake up to yourself, I am here for fun, not because I am some lame arse loser getting paid to post.

Re:Very odd

[Scudsucker]

Liberal Dems are for big government

Good thing you brought that up, I was afraid I'd get through this thread without seeing any right wing talking points.

Re:Very odd

[Scudsucker]

And how is Google going to face more competition from one huge company as opposed to two large companies?

Re:Very odd

[Walkiry]

>No idiot, it would be like calling linux "£x" in some world where 90% of the people writing messages used that abbreviation.

By "world" you mean "extremely tiny group of basement dwellers," right?

>Face it, "M$" is a very useful and quick abbreviation that is not ambiguous. The letters "MS" mean MANY things (try typing them into Wikipedia).

That's why, when one intends to use abbreviations, it's useful to simply specify it after the first use of the non-abbreviated word, like this:

"I don't like Microsoft (MS). I think MS does very bad products and they have built themselves a bad reputation. Not only that, MS also smells. Yeah. Death to MS!"

Regardless, even using MS outright wouldn't have been the ambiguous problem you so stupidly try to paint. It's called context, and it's very handy to solve such ambiguities. Saying "I don't think buying Yahoo is going to be very good for MS" as a comment answering an article on Microsoft buying Yahoo is not going to confuse anyone who's not stupid. If you need to see "M$" instead of "MS" in a comment here to know they're talking about Microsoft and not, say, Mass Spectrometry, then the only idiot here is you.

Re:Very odd

[heinousjay]

Face it, 'M$' is immature and puerile and frankly, stupid. The fact that you have a skewed view of the popularity of the abbreviation doesn't change its basic childishness.

Re:Very odd

[stuboogie]

I think you have a NOT gate in your logic stream somewhere.

Try reading his post again.

Re:Very odd

[UnknowingFool]

Funny how when Google buys out Doubleclick or IBM complains about MS buying votes for OOXML, MS whines about how those companies are being anti-competitive. When MS tries to buy a direct competitor, it's just business.

Re:Very odd

[bughunter]

Microsoft is smart. They did not get where they are by being idiots.

Yes, and the same can be accurately said for Dick Cheney.

It's not about the intelligence stat. It's about the alignment stat.

Re:Very odd

[hairyfeet]

And if you are wanting a short version for Microsoft, just use MSFT. Everyone knows what it is, and it doesn't stink of trolls and fanboys. Just my 2c,YMMV.

Re:Very odd

[donweel]

M$

Re:Very odd

[marcosdumay]

"...using right tools for job without caring about what OS it runs (mostly FreeBSD)..."

That made me realise that the GP didn't mention Hotmail.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

me too.

Re:Very odd

[Daniel Phillips]

it would be like calling linux "£x" in some world where 90% of the people writing messages used that abbreviation. Calling Linux "Linsux" is like calling M$ "Microsucks" Thanks for saying that. M$ is funny because of the allusion to basic variable$. It's beyond me why Microsofties get so upset about it.

Re:Very odd

[Achromatic1978]

Insightful my ass.

We've been carping on about the rising share of Firefox. Good for us. At the same time, MSNs hit counts have been rising. I guess that's because MSFT "forces" us to use it through MSIE, right, even though IE usage has been declining, wait, uhh, what?

Face facts, your bitterness aside, MSN is not the third most visited website on the planet because of "IE, shortcuts and ads in the OS". Aside from anything else, "shortcuts and ads"? The last time I saw an short for MSN installed on my desktop by the OS was Windows 98.

Re:Very odd

[Spazntwich]

I'm not so sure being a "childish brat" invalidates someone's points. Are ad hominems acceptable debate strategy on slashdot now?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, you sound like a bitter kid living in his mom's basement

Are you referring to the command center?

Re:Very odd

[magus_melchior]

In other words, you're saying that MSFT is buying Yahoo! to kill off competing technologies and salvage/leverage existing compatible ones.

Which does make sense, after all, since there are several OSS technologies supported by or used by Yahoo!.

Re:Very odd

[Blakey Rat]

Yahoo's power and success comes from multi platform awareness, using right tools for job without caring about what OS it runs (mostly FreeBSD), giving the same service to everyone with a recent browser regardless of OS, being open to all developers even including competitors...

Speaking as a Mac user a few years ago, Yahoo wasn't better than any other company at giving Mac users access to their products. (At least the ones that weren't entirely web-based.) For example, it used to be a complete crapshoot whether a particular Yahoo Game would run on a Mac or not, and if it didn't run their help file summarized to "tough crap."

In short, can you back that statement up? I don't see Yahoo as being any more or less multiplatform friendly than MS or Google. (Possibly less than Google.)

Re:Very odd

[Jack9]

How does anti-trust apply to this at all when you ignore the elephant in the room, named Google? Be serious.

Re:Very odd

[DarthJohn]

Not saying they can pull it off, but...

Sounds like you're saying "Well, they haven't taken over the whole world yet, might as well let them have the bits they don't have already."

Like others have said, the internet is different, Microsoft's tactics haven't worked there yet.

I would tend to agree with you, that letting them expand into a market they aren't currently that successful in, and where they will have stiff competition, might not be a bad thing. I keep going back to "they've got so much and don't behave with what they've got, why allow them to take more?"

Re:Very odd

[Chapter80]

As I understand it, Microsoft's actual bid was much lower. But then eBay snuck in shipping and handling.

Re:Very odd

[itsdapead]

So what's your point? Most companies start by buying some existing work; very few invent something completely new. Dell didn't invent the PC, nor did Compaq, nor did HP.

Nor did IBM/Microsoft for that matter!

Apple didn't invent the windowing GUI.

Apple didn't invent very much at all in terms of big, generic developments - however, what they did do in several cases (GUI, mice, laser printers, MP3 Players, small form-factor computers, local area networking...) was take some existing idea that was "bubbling under", make it easy to use and very pretty, add a pinch of Steve's fairy dust and do a bloody good job of marketing it.

What they (and some of the others you mention) don't rely on to the same extent as MS is letting some other schmuck make a big commercial success of something - then buying them out with a few billion in change that they find down the back of Bill's sofa.

However, Microsoft did produce a damned good BASIC for PETs and TRS 80 that let you program these new microcomputer thingies without learning assembler.

Re:Very odd

[Stanistani]

Please stop using the M$ abbreviation. Its childishness drags down the intended level of your post into 'troll' range. Besides, to be consistent then you would need to use 'M$N' and 'P$3' as well.

Regards, $tani$tani

Re:Very odd

[cayenne8]

"I think its mostly an attempt for him to show his power. Now someone send him to here [showyourpower.net] instead. However, it would create really interesting battle with Google. They're both becoming really large competitors now."

I know MS is trying to buy Yahoo to compete with Google, but, I'm wondering...can they?

I mean, back in the day, I never used Yahoo to search...it was horrible compared with what was back in the day..I'd try AltaVista or what have you..but, Yahoo just didn't see to be a real 'search engine'. And today with Google present, I don't know anyone that uses anything BUT google to search.

Sure I have an old yahoo email acct...that I really only use to register for things online, and let it get spammed, but, aside from some email, who the hell uses Yahoo much for searching?

How would this acquisition help MS exactly?

Re:Very odd

[HardCase]

Microsoft is smart. They did not get where they are by being idiots.

Yes, and the same can be accurately said for Dick Cheney.

There has to be a corollary to Godwin's Law here...

Re:Very odd

[JavaLord]

Of cros they do! Evey night heavn with the ladeis you can have too if you purchaise soft Cililiaolois!!! Only 49c a pill!

Hmm. If Microsoft buys Yahoo!, they can name it Ya-soft? Not only will they have another search engine, but they'll have a built in name to corner the hip-hop viagra market! It could be the FUBU of flaccid penis medicine. Boy, that Ballmer is brilliant.

Re:Very odd

[Khuffie]

Yes, because in a topic about Microsoft, on a site like Slashdot, someone seeing the letters MS might think it means Multiple Sclerosis, Master of Science or Mississippi. Yup, that totally makes sense, and the parent used M$ to stop the confusion people might suffer unfairly, rather than be childish.

Also, for the record, millisecond is ms, not MS.

Re:Very odd

[betotenorio]

Your are right, BIG FAT Europe and Privacy Groups stand against the Redmond monopoly attempts see: http://www.itvendorsdirectory.ca/Online-Resources/europe-and-privacy-groups-biggest-challenges-for-the-potential-microsoft-yahoo-deal.html

Re:Very odd

[nerdup]

so why would the same management team do any better with Yahoo

Answer: Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!

Re:Very odd

[Dunkirk]

My all time fave was the Tandy "Trash 80," which was actually a pretty decent home computer back in the day.

Re:Very odd

[lilfields]

Uhm, back in the day Yahoo used Google's search index... As much as we joke about Yahoo being nothing compared to Google they get around 2 Billion page views a month, which greatly overpowers Google...if Microsoft can monetize Yahoo properly, well it would be a steal for Microsoft. Meanwhile Google's stock is down 8% today last I checked on the back of missing their earnings and this announcement...Microsoft blew away their earnings, they must be doing something right. Yahoo isn't just a search engine, it's more like the revised AOL...there are talks that Google might look to buy AOL after this move by Microsoft.

Re:Very odd

[eheldreth]

The question is, how long until MS feels compelled to screw up Yahoo like Hotmail? The chair of Balmer compels you!!!!!!!

Re:Very odd

[mbourgon]

"Microsoft did invent a lot too."

I'm sure it's changed (okay, I _hope_ it's changed), but there was a discussion _years_ ago about what Microsoft had actually invented (this was around when Cleartype came out), and the answer was: a particular type of two-way door hinge.

Re:Very odd

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

I'm not so sure being a "childish brat" invalidates someone's points. Are ad hominems acceptable debate strategy on slashdot now?

They are, and always have been. Credibility and bias are absolutely essential in debate.

Debate is about more than just formal logical arguments, you know.

Re:Very odd

[meadowsoft]

Microsoft buys Yahoo. Microsoft gets share of AT&T. Microsoft controls only (legal) data network for iPhone. Microsoft controls iPhone?

And this will certainly pass regulation, since even "do no evil" megacorporations like Google need competition from "do most evil" megacorporations like Microsoft.

Re:Very odd

[DiLLeMaN]

"If they think Yahoo is worth $46B to them, I'm inclined to believe it."

That means you're also inclined to believe that Vista is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Blindly believing Microsoft, or even just inclining to it, is not a smart thing to do, IMO.

Re:Very odd

[spitzak]

it would be like calling linux "£x" in some world where 90% of the people writing messages used that abbreviation.

By "world" you mean "extremely tiny group of basement dwellers," right?

No, stupid. By "some world" I meant a fictional world, so that I could apply an analogy to the real world.

Re:Very odd

[spitzak]

I really am still amazed that somebody considers "M$" an insult. "Microsuck" is an insult. Big difference, I think. For one thing it is obvious that whoever typed that spent some time and did not abbreviate.

I will stand by my argument that "M$" is a useful non-ambiguous abbreviation. Is an MS useful for getting a job at M$? Does M$ have a facility in MS? M$ uses MS for measuring time?

Re:Very odd

[spitzak]

I did not think of that. I only know Basic from long ago, is the $ at the end and not at the start?

In any case, I cannot understand why this gets the Microsofties upset so much. Hey, they are free to call Linux "£x", or call open source "O$$" if they want. Do it enough so that it is well-established and easy-to-read as "M$" is. And lets see if that really upsets people. Of course it wont.

Re:Very odd

[encoderer]

Google buy AOL?

No way. Not going to happen. Who are these "talks" between? You and who else?

Seriously, though, WHY would GOOGLE purchase AOL?

Re:Very odd

[mysticgoat]

M$ fails in the add market You've used Excel too?

This seems to be a feature of Excel 2007.

I'm required to introduce someone who is going to present a miniworkshop on using Office-07 (pronounced "Oh fuss ought seven") at our staff meeting later this month. So I thought I'd check on whether the 65535 bug had been fixed yet, using one of the Vista workstations with Office-07 on it.

The answer is: paying out 850 monthly stipends of $77.10 each will cost us, not $65,535.00 like it would have with Excel 2003, and not $100,000.00 like it used to with Excel 2007 a few short weeks ago, but now the incredibly low cost of $0.00. In fact, payouts between $77.00 and $77.90 would all cost us exactly nothing.

And the above zero-sum game is stable for perhaps 15 minutes before all those answers change to something else.

We will be recommending to all our staff that they continue to use Excel 2003 until we tell them that Excel 2007 is working correctly.

Re:Very odd

[Dan Ost]

Besides, what else is Microsoft to do with its HUGE store of cash? Pay a dividend?

Last time I looked, MS pays 11 cents a share dividend. That's about a billion dollars each time. Don't know how often they pay a dividend, though.

Re:Very odd

[paving-slab]

Face it, 'M$' is immature and puerile and frankly, stupid.

I agree, they are.

Re:Very odd

[catxk]

This doesn't give us anything close to a monopoly? It's a direct move from a no good oligopoly to an even worse duopoly. How that isn't "anywhere" close to a monopoly is beyond my reach...

Re:Very odd

[vistic]

Just accept that it's a personal pet peeve of yours, and that that alone is not a good enough reason to whine about it and tell someone to stop typing the way they want to type.

It's your pet peeve, so it's your problem that you need to deal with, personally.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

False - Yahoo, like Hotmail, ported 99% of its operation away from FreeBSD as soon as BSD's obsolescence began to seriously get in the way of progress.

Re:Very odd

[Khuffie]

It's not a personal pet peeve of mine, but of quite a few people. If the Linux community wants to be taken seriously by those not within it, they need to stop their childish behaviour. No one's going to take people claiming that Linux is better than Windows if they say things like M$ in the same sentence.

Re:Very odd

[greenbird]

Not that I'm defending MS for it, but it's easy to expect as much when a software company expands into the services market. Both Google and Yahoo have been services companies from the beginning.

Microsoft, OTOH, started as a software company. Their business model, like that of any other software company, relies on getting people to use that software.

Just a nit pick but Microsoft's business model relies on getting people to buy their software. Through various methods, given their control of certain software markets, a significant number of people buy their products and then don't even use what they bought (or in many cases realize they paid for it).

And the key factor here, I think, is that business model is going the way of the music CD and movie DVD. The business model of software companies should be service companies these days. That's one reason most software you buy sucks so bad. It's sold to you by high pressure, lying, cheating marketing and sales people who's only goal is to make the sale and will violate any morales to achieve that goal. If keeping the customer happy was the goal your products would be much higher quality. I think (hope) people are starting to realize this shift in the market. Microsoft's goal is to sell you something and they could care less about you once they have your money. The product they sell you sucks so bad thier primary pitch for selling you the next one is to alleviate the suffering from the last piece of crap they sold you. Google's business model is based on making you happy ever day and they make products with this focus in mind.

Re:Very odd

[arse maker]

Do you offer to pay 44 billion dollars for something you dont REALLY want?

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

MSN is already in the DSL business. You can't buy Qwest DSL, where I live, without MSN unless you want to pay more. I told them I didn't want it, and did't need the MSN email. I couldn't get just a vanilla DSL connection to the Internet unless I wanted to pay more. I am positive MSN has absolutely nothing to do with my DSL connection other than Microsoft cut a deal with Qwest to shove their service down their customers throats.

Kind of reminded me of trying to buy a PC without Windows installed where computer makers would charge you more for a system without Windows.

Re:Very odd

[Tom]

But neither the #2 nor the #3 appear to be on the verge of destruction, different from, say Netscape in the browser market from years back. And the purpose of the regulators isn't to let #2 and #3 merge so #1 becomes #2. Only if disallowing the merger would mean that one of the #2 or #3 go away can I imagine them to agree on such a deal.

Re:Very odd

[Reality Master 201]

Are ad hominems acceptable debate strategy on slashdot now?

Are you fucking serious?

Re:Very odd

[shma]

Except the EU hasn't approved the Google-Doubleclick deal yet.

Re:Very odd

[dhavleak]

I checked Live.com the day it was announced. When it bitched about not using IE (when I tried to login my passport account) , I never visited it back. Dude, live.com has been multi-browser since day one. The passport sign-in page is a common one no matter which site you are signing in from -- and has always worked with just about every browser out there -- it's just a simple user/password login page.

They can't live with the fact that there is a thing called HTML standard, TCPIP standard and Internet is platform neutral from beginning. IE8 builds are already passing ACID 2. Windows' TCP/IP stack is completely standards compliant (they used BSD's stack).

They use every opportunity to alienate other OS/Browser users. Dude, they invited the FF guys to redmond to prep. firefox for Vista changes. The FF devs had very positive things to say about the experience.

Ok, now that we're done with all the MS-bashing points:

Yes: yahoo's search engine has never been that great. live.com however is a pretty good search engine. The problem for MS? Nobody uses it, therefore they can't monetize it. Same case for all MS's online properties -- they've worked really hard on making a good search engine, but they can't monetize shit until they actually start getting user clicks. That's what this acquisition is about.

It's not going to be easy. It's going to take serious balls and serious hard work to execute. MS's online branding is woefully bad, so they need to have the sense to defer to Yahoo's strategy on that. There are many things that can go wrong. But none of them are for the reasons you stated.

Oh, and this is a *good* thing for us. Just as MS's (previously) unchallenged stake in desktop OSes was a bad thing, Google's unchallenged stake in search is a bad thing.

Re:Very odd

[Colz Grigor]

Sounding like a childish brat doesn't invalidate points. It's just that some people don't like to read messages that were apparently written by childish brats and so... they don't. Is making a valid point that is left unread better or worse than making an invalid point?

Re:Very odd

[xouumalperxe]

By "world" you mean "extremely tiny group of basement dwellers," right?

If you'd taken 10 seconds, you'd have figured out that he meant "if some imaginary people were to abbreviate Linux to Lx much in the same way we actually do abbreviate Microsoft to MS". He was making a simple point that M$ is a derogative way to get at microsoft through their "profit above all else" attitude and establishing a possible parallel to Linux if it were seen that way, whereas Linsux is more akin to Microshaft, Microsucks or some other way of mangling Microsoft into a derogatory term that implies their products (or, in fact, the company as a whole) are crap.

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft Bids $44.6 Billion For Yahoo
Posted by kdawson on Friday February 01, @09:01AM
from the big-deal dept.

*snip*

        * Read More...
        * 666 comments

First I saw of this article. I don't think it's just spammers that aren't headed to heaven...

Re:Very odd

[UncleDavid]

When MS first took over they found they needed lots more servers than the old platform because windows and IIS was comparitively much less efficient

You have that exactly backwards.

Re:Very odd

[Facetious]

Whoa there, fanboy. I've watched msft for a very long time. They tried and tried and tried to push above $30/share, and finally did last quarter, only to slide right back down: http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:MSFT

Yes, Google is/was overvalued, but to conclude msft is doing something right when there is so much evidence to the contrary screams, "Hey, look at my stock portfolio!"

Re:Very odd

[GaryPatterson]

Yep, Microsoft is fantastically smart. At sales and marketing.

They may have *been* smart, but currently they're showing little sign of that. The marketing for Vista is non-existent and what little there has been has clearly failed to counter the perception of a buggy mass of pain and UAC pop-ups. The Zune is another case in point (squirting? seriously?), and the XB360's red ring of death is almost impossible to spin out of. Yes, all three products are pretty nice in their own right and all are perfectly usable, but the Microsoft marketing team seem either to be missing in action these days.

Contrast to Apple who really are fantastically good at marketing. Look at the hype around the iPhone compared to Windows-based phones. Microsoft managed to get Ballmer on TV to basically lie about the iPhone and that was the best they could do to counter Apple's hype. On a purely marketing level, Microsoft failed utterly to dent the bubble of their competitor's hype. Look at the perception of Apple products versus the perception of Microsoft products. Hell, look at the perception of open source products like Firefox, Linux and Apache compared to their Microsoft counterparts.

I reckon the Microsoft marketing team is dead. What skill they had has long since left and now they're down to interns and a couple of janitors.

Re:Very odd

[nguy]

- Apple did invent lots of stuff in the GUI arena. Have you seen Smalltalk 80 and how Lisa is different from that?

Except that the Lisa was largely a copy of Xerox's office systems, not of Smalltalk-80. And, unfortunately, it was a bad copy: Apple copied most of the appearance, but they did a lousy job on the software engineering. And that's Apple's m. o. to this day: they copy other people's products, package it well, but they rarely come up with anything original, and their software engineering sucks.

Re:Very odd

[NotZed]

Why not stop posting this crap every time someone poses M$ in stories about this highly offensive company (to many) and leave everyone alone. People can make up their own mind, you don't need to force your opinion on them.

All you do is look like a childish anal retarded wanker who needs to mix with people more and realise that everyone is entitled to their own ideas and ways of expressing them.

Re:Very odd

[Scherf]

I happen to have a veto if people are hired at my company or not. If I find a post in a forum by a candiate who refers to Microsoft as M$ I'm going to make my bosses not hire him because he's not able to make unbiased decisions regarding technology (".NET SUCKS LOL LIKE BILLG DOES ROFL"). I might be wrong about this about 10 percent of the time, but it's worth it because we are hiring less idiots that way.

I just want to say: There are a lot of people who find that whole "M$" thing very stupid. It's not just one little "pet peeve" of one guy.

IMHO & YMMV

Re:Very odd

[zrq]

How will the Affero GPL prevent migration from FreeBSD/PHP to Win2k3/ASP.NET ?

I don't know. That is why I'm asking.

Or more accurately, if one of the next 'big ideas' in web services is implemented by a start-up company using Affero GPL licensed server software - would it affect the way the big players behaved ?

It might be that none of them want to become involved, so no sale.

It might be that the big players are only paying big money not because they actually want the service, but because they don't want their competitor to have it. In which case, Boogle might not be interested because TinySoft wouldn't be able to buy it anyway.

Or, one of the big players may decide to buy it, keep the ideas and concepts, rip up all the code and replace it with their own.

Or, just possibly, it is such a 'big idea' with so much momentum, that one of the big players decides they just have to have it, and are prepared to live with the terms of the license. Which might make things very interesting.

Re:Very odd

[Spazntwich]

Dismissing any legitimate argument due to its presentation is arrogant and intellectually dishonest.

Re:Very odd

[arotenbe]

Are ad hominems acceptable debate strategy on slashdot now? You act like something has changed.

Re:Very odd

[somersault]

Either that or Micro-ho! , your little friend that is always ready to help you get down and dirty.

Re:Very odd

[spundun]

...but the whole MS/Ballmer/Google thing is increasingly making me think of a certain German's obsession with a Soviet city on the Volga... If you are thinking of the same man as I am then he was Austrian.

Re:Very odd

[shoemilk]

I haven't owned a computer with a MS OS on it in over 6 years (and even then it was a linux dual boot). I despise MS as much as the next /.er, but I have to agree with the other posters, "M$" is dead. When you use it, even rock solid points lose validity because they come out biased.

All human languages have a thing called context. In an article about Microsoft doing something, it's ok to abbreviate Microsoft as MS because that's the topic. It doesn't really matter how many other things it could mean because by context, it means Microsoft.

I really wanted to make this post as civil as possible, because anything else would just make you angrier. So please, when you read this post, remain calm and collected, thinki about the points I've made and if you disagree, please let me know in a civilized manner.

Re:Very odd

[griego]

Yeah, I could see how someone reading comments on a story about Microsoft mistaking "MS" for, say, multiple sclerosis.

Re:Very odd

[velen]

Make Yahoo! services IE only. Make Silverlight mandatory. ... I will take my puny 20$ a year contribution to Yahoo Mail Plus elsewhere if this goes through. I just loathe the attitude of Microsoft when it comes to interoperability and the internet.

Re:Very odd

[Colz Grigor]

Welcome to SlashDot. Funny, with an ID of 208070 I would have guessed you'd have already figured how this place works...

Re:Very odd

[Anonymous Coward]

I like to refer to Linux as Loonix then I have to check myself when CC'ing my venerable open sores colleagues at work regarding issues with their broken Loonix based mail platform.

Re:Very odd

[Spazntwich]

I'm a tragic perpetual idealist. I know how this place works, but that won't keep me from pointing out hypocrisy and stupidity where I see it. :o

Re:Very odd

[Walkiry]

>No, stupid. By "some world" I meant a fictional world, so that I could apply an analogy to the real world.

Except that in the real world noone but the basement dwellers use the "M$" abbreviation. So apparently the whole point of your post was fictional.

And you have quite handily ignored the rest of the post by replying to something that wasn't even the main point of it. Well done, retard.

Re:Very odd

[Walkiry]

Except that 90% of the world doesn't abbreviate Microsoft to MS... most people actually go and type whole words. Quicktype instant-message abbreviature typing is still (luckily) mostly restricted to instant messages and basement dwellers.

Re:Very odd

[ImpShial]

That would be a reasonable reply, except that I'm anything BUT a right-winger. I'm was using generalities, and I don't truck with either party. If you noticed, I made a negative comment about both parties. I think your left-wing defensiveness is turned on a little high.

Re:Very odd

[Yvan256]

You can BOTH have a rising marketshare for Firefox AND an increase in MSN pageviews.

The total number of computer users is not static, people buy computers every day. This isn't the 90's where mostly technical people used the 'net. That MSN default webpage in Windows/IE is still pointing people to MSN, and Windows/IE is still what sells the most, especially to those entering a store and just asking "I want a computer" (thinking that Macs aren't for them and not ever having heard the word "linux", except from geeks).

Re:Very odd

[Yvan256]

Note to self: never post anything related to statistics before coffee.

Re:Very odd

[vuffi_raa]

Seeing as how AT&T and Yahoo! are so in bed together already, is this a way for Microsoft to get into the Telco/Wireless market? Ballmer may be looking to use the Yahoo! brand name to sell the MSN product, but not scrap MSN in the least. that's what I wonder about- since I had sbc and sbc became sbc/yahoo and sbc was bought by at&t - at&t/yahoo is my provider, now after at&t has become a public utility and the sole line provider if my broadband becomes at&t/microsoft does that make microsoft beholden to the public trust?
Also if at&t in the wireless market bleeds to at&t/microsoft do you get- "the iphone presented by microsoft"?
On the other side dish services are provided bundled with at&t/yahoo, so does that put microsoft in that mix? will we end up with microsoft satellite tv services? That could be really cool or really scary.

Re:Very odd

[analyzediz]

And how does this differ from other companies? (Google included)

Re:Very odd

[Gene_K123]

1. Microsoft has deep, deep pockets (i.e. hordes of cash, then add Yahoo's total to that). 2. Dedicated and very concentrated effort focused upon what Google does right (essentially what Internet users like)with the idea of duplicating then improving those features. Same thing with features Google has which are not especially attractive (i.e. type in a search term and get a zillion results when most of us will never check more than 10-15). Despite what most of us think, everybody's Internet search software can use some improvement. Type in a search term like "computer virus protection software" and you will get what you want, but you also get individual searches on EACH individual word in that phrase with many results which make absolutely no sense in terms of relevance. My sole point is that a bunch of bandwidth is being consumed which limits everybody. Do I have an answer, no. 3. Google needs competition.

Re:Very odd

[step_right_up]

They might feel a bit of success migrating Hotmail to Windows servers from FreeBSD. Since Netcraft shows search.yahoo.com are all FreeBSD servers run by Nakatomi Corporation, this might be considered hitting another home run with another online service deemed valuable. Lets hope microsoft isn't just looking to blow the roof and abscond with $600,000,000 in barer-bonds.

Re:Very odd

[speculatrix]

citation?

Re:Very odd

[obeythefist]

Well yes... it's just the same as the open source community. You want your package to be better, so you just find some implementation that's great that someone else already did, and you hook it in (assuming your licenses are compatible).

The corporate world works the same way, but the things you need aren't free as in beer/speech, but cost $44.6 billion.

Anyone got a spare $44.7 billion? We could outbid Microsoft for a joke.

Re:Very odd

[Scudsucker]

That would be a reasonable reply, except that I'm anything BUT a right-winger.

Doesn't matter. A right wing talking point is a right wing talking point, even it comes from the lips of Noam Chomsky.

If you noticed, I made a negative comment about both parties.

My last name isn't Klien or Broder, so I'm not impressed by your attempts at "balance".

I think your left-wing defensiveness is turned on a little high.

Just calling a spade a spade.

Re:Very odd

[orclevegam]

Yes, Google is/was overvalued, but to conclude msft is doing something right when there is so much evidence to the contrary screams, "Hey, look at my stock portfolio!" That was kind of my reaction as well. He's doing an investment analysis based on a limited set of stock data while ignoring the technical and market analysis. That being said, I don't think Yahoo is as dead as some people think. Among the technically inclined it's definitely DOA, but then again so was AOL for a long time and they're still around (and dieing very very slowly). I've seen an awful lot of computers lately that have those nasty yahoo toolbars installed (a lot of spyware comes with them for some reason), and part of that install process usually changes the homepage (and search page) to be Yahoo. That's an awful lot of people that are using Yahoo because it's the default on their system and they really just don't care what search engine they use. I think Yahoos core market shares a definite overlap with the AOL core market.

If Yahoo was smart, they'd do some market segment analysis (should be easy, most of their users are already loaded down with spyware, just bundle the analysis software with some free screensavers or something), figure out some useful statistics and go pitch ad space that might appeal to non-tech companies. I'm sure things like American Idol would get more clicks per view on Yahoo then they would on Google for the simple reason that most Yahoo users are dumber then Google users.

Re:Very odd

[Risen888]

Oh yeah? Well, if the non-Linux community wants to be taken seriously by those within it, they need to stop using the phrase "If the Linux community wants to be taken seriously..."

Re:Very odd

[ImpShial]

You're actually quite the impressive name-dropper.

Re:Very odd

[Scudsucker]

Your ability to miss the point is what is truly impressive.

nice to see

[mgabrys_sf]

Microsoft supporting Silicon Valley firms (yahoo/facebook) rather than trying to obliterate them outright (netscape). Of course you could argue that they want to demolish Google with all of the above grab-assing, but since Google is now a "VERB" - I'm skeptical at their chances.

Re:nice to see

[Anonymous Coward]

But that's just it. It doesn't really seem like Microsoft is supporting them; that puts a pretty naively positive spin on this. This sounds to me like assimilation. Like a previous poster said, since they're throwing billions at it, even though its so unlikely, they're definitely doing this for personal benefit.

Re:nice to see

[Kamokazi]

Yahoo is generally quite a bit more prominent than Google in Asia, and there are quite a few people there. Microsoft has a lot of money to throw around, and if they can make Google insignificant over there, that limits the markets Google can grow in and may pose some serious problems. But it'll take some time before we see any significant marketshare changes I think, and anything can happen. Microsoft might have the big money, but you never want to underestimate Google.

Re:nice to see

[SoulRider]

Microsoft may have the big money, but Google has the big brains. This ought to be interesting.

Re:nice to see

[nbharatvarma]

I cannot comment on the entirety of Asia, but I am an Indian and from a state called Andhra Pradesh (Hyderabad, in case you have heard of it). We speak a language called 'Telugu' here. I doubt if more than 1 or 2 percent of the world has heard of it.
The amount of Internet penetration here is very very less, apart from Hyderabad. Google is so popular that it is part of our songs [Like Bollywood, which are Hindi films, we have our own industry of sorts with Telugu films and yes they all have songs].
When a movie song has Google in it, it is because the average movie-goer knows what it is.
Google has become a part of our language. The same with some other regional languages include the National language Hindi.

Re:nice to see

[stevencbrown]

You're Indian?

You Took Eeerrrr Jeeeebbbbs!

Re:nice to see

[drachenstern]

Thank you for sharing, that was nice information to learn about a different culture.

Re:nice to see

[oldhack]

Hyderabad and "Hi-tech city" is pretty well known as the Indian software boom town second only to Bangalore, at least to those familiar with software/business oursourcing sector. "Google" has become part of English language and maybe it's ubiquitous in India because English is at least partially familiar to many Indians.

Re:nice to see

[quincunx55555]

I've heard of Telugu! I have no idea where I've heard of it though. You're probably the second person I've heard mention it.

Re:nice to see

[Phoe6]

But the Indian songs also have Microsoft and Bill Gates in it. Average person in where in the world, knows Bill Gates and wants to be one too. How would you take this?

Re:nice to see

[initialE]

And in Japan Yahoo has Hard Gay Razor Ramon as spokesman. A clear winner already.

Re:nice to see

[shutdown -p now]

Don't assume that all MS devs are coder monkeys. There are some very sharp people over there, particularly so in Microsoft Research. A cursory glance at MSDN blogs will clearly show this if you know the keywords to look. For a single sample, consider this guy from the C# compiler dev team.

Re:nice to see

[zsau]

To most Americans and Australians, "Asia" defacto excludes the subcontinent and the Middle East, and most probably will completely forget about the existence of Central Asia. So the OP was probably referring to East and South East Asia. I gather this doesn't apply to the British. (If it helps, "Asia" originally referred to a small province in what's now Turkey back in Roman times.)

Re:nice to see

[Anonymous Coward]

The brightess Microsoft programmer is still useless when his chair-throwing boss doesn't approve his ideas.

Re:nice to see

[shutdown -p now]

Once again I'd like to point at Microsoft Research. There are plenty of curious things brewing up there, and occasionally they slip out. A lot of FP-related stuff in C# 3.0 comes from F#, for example.

Re:nice to see

[Kamokazi]

You're absolutely correct. The Middle East and India generally get classified into their own groups, and Russia and the former Soviet republics get grouped in with Europe more than anything else. In a way it's more respectable...we recognize the many distinct cultures that the continent has...but also it shows the typical American ignorance of political geography (You do realize how many people here had to look up where Afghanistan was, right?).

Market Domination

[Anonymous Coward]

"Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition." Is it AltaVista?

FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it dead now?

Re:FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

Not -1Offtopic but +1Funny, MS are attempting to buy the largest FreeBSD installation out there.

Implications for open source

[1sockchuck]

A consolidation of the Microsoft and Yahoo networks could shift a massive amount of infrastructure from open source technologies to Microsoft platforms.Microsoft said that "eliminating redundant infrastructure and duplicative operating costs will improve the financial performance of the combined entity." Yahoo has been a major player in several open soruce projects. Most of Yahoo's infrastructure runs on FreeBSD, and the lead developer of PHP, Rasmus Lerdorf, works as an engineer at Yahoo. Yahoo has also been a major contributor to Hadoop, an open source technology for distributed computing. Data Center Knowledge has more on the infrastructure implications.

Re:Implications for open source

[tclark]

I wonder how that would shake out. A platform migration on that scale would be very expensive and time consuming, and I think it has taken MS years to manage similar, but much smaller transitions when they bought out other companies. Also, I expect that Yahoo has a lot more expertise at running large data centers than MS does.

Re:Implications for open source

[Constantine XVI]

Don't forget they also own Zimbra, an OSS Outlook/Exchange competitor

Re:Implications for open source

[dotancohen]

Actually, I'd bet that the only reason that MS is buying Yahoo is to finally get Rasmus Lerdorf working for them. You know, since they can't exactly get Linus or RMS very easily.

Re:Implications for open source

[afidel]

According to Alexa Yahoo runs the #1 and #17 websites, MS runs the #4, #5, and #18. I would say they both have plenty of experience running large data centers.

Re:Implications for open source

[BVis]

Or, they're looking to tie him down and make him stop working on PHP... since as we all know ASP.NET is a far far superior technology... and a LOT of Yahoo! code is PHP.

Re:Implications for open source

[tclark]

Fair enough - but my understanding, based on what I've heard from people who work for MSN, is that MS is not particularly good at running large data centers. It's not one of their strengths. And I'm speculating that Yahoo may be better at it because data center ops are more central to their business.

Re:Implications for open source

[Ilgaz]

Fair enough - but my understanding, based on what I've heard from people who work for MSN, is that MS is not particularly good at running large data centers. It's not one of their strengths. And I'm speculating that Yahoo may be better at it because data center ops are more central to their business. MS can't dare to say "FreeBSD looks like the right choice for this job" and use FreeBSD. They have also got locked to Windows in a different way.

They removed a perfectly running FreeBSD from Hotmail and installed (first fake than real) Windows instead. You have seen the results.

Re:Implications for open source

[demopolis]

This is precisely why I almost threw up a little. The greatest and in many ways, superior alternative to exchange, possibly handed over to the one who would love nothing more than to kill or pervert it into oblivion.

Re:Implications for open source

[dotancohen]

A few years ago Yahoo accidentally posted their phpinfo() code for a few minutes. I've still got the page saved, but I'm certain that most of it is outdated by now.

Re:Implications for open source

[Skrynesaver]

Zimbra the services company is owned by Yahoo and is probably finished if this deal goes through.

However zimbra the mailserver is open source maybe you could call your fork yimbra! in memory of it's one-time sponsor ;)

The source is there and everyone has the riht to read it, modify it or indeed fork it. After all isn't this the whole feckin' point of free software?

Re:Implications for open source

[Chordonblue]

You and me both man! We've been using Zimbra here for almost two years now and I've had ZERO problems compared to the mess that was Exchange. The thought of having to go back to Exchange now makes me want to huddle into myself in the farthest corner of the room.

On the other hand, Zimbra IS open source. It is possible for the project to go on under different leadership. It's just that the Outlook connector and mobile stuff would need rewriting as this is not OSS.

Re:Implications for open source

[Anonymous Coward]

that's the most tragic point in the whole thing for us FreeBSD-users :(

Re:Implications for open source

[Reverend528]

Microsoft said that "eliminating redundant infrastructure and duplicative operating costs will improve the financial performance of the combined entity."

It makes sense. Microsoft could save a lot of money by replacing their windows servers with Yahoo's BSD infrastructure. It'll improve stability and security, and they won't have to pay all of those expensive windows licensing fees anymore.

Re:Implications for open source

[misleb]

Oh My God. I just remembered that and felt a sinking feeling. Zimbra is our best hope at ditching Groupwise. If Microsoft owned it, I wouldn't risk investing in it.

Re:Implications for open source

[andydread]

I'm afraid not. I hope to god I'm wrong and someone finds a way around the fake open source license. see my other post http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=438692&cid=22261334

Re:Implications for open source

[misleb]

However zimbra the mailserver is open source maybe you could call your fork yimbra! in memory of it's one-time sponsor ;)

The Network Edition has some very important features that make it a real Exchange compteitor such as Outlook integration. Also, I don't think you get the various migration tools when you use the open source edition. While it wouldn't be a total loss if Microsoft killed the Zimbra "services" company, it woudl certainly make me look elsewhere in my quest to replace Groupwise.

-matthew

Re:Implications for open source

[BlackSnake112]

running a website != running a data center A room full of web servers is a very different animal then a room full of data base servers.

Re:Implications for open source

[Yvanhoe]

Mod me funny if you wish, but having a redundant infrastructure, one being an unsuccessful one using MS software and the other being successful and using OSS, the sound business solution would be to keep the successful one. I am sure that even MS management can see that. They didn't buy Yahoo to make it die, they bought it to take over the #1 in the field : Google. Until they do that, they will probably put efficiency before ideology.

Re:Implications for open source

[DogDude]

Running the physical data centers is not really relevant. Any costs involved are really just a drop in the bucket compared to revenue from something like this. Besides, there are plenty of people and companies who can run data centers as large as or larger than Yahoo. If there's a technical glitch, somebody can always be called. I really doubt that small technical concerns like this have any bearing on high level decisions.

Re:Implications for open source

[smallpaul]

You aren't really suggesting that they are making a 44 BILLION dollar acquisition to try and interfere with the work of a single person, are you?

Re:Implications for open source

[waa]

For me it's one word: Zimbra

For several years I have been watching the Zimbra project closely as it has progressed in the hope I could use it to ween my clients off of some other ungodly email software (no, Exchange) and Zimbra looked to be my answer.

When I heard about this deal I almost cried.

Zimbra is a great piece of software. When Yahoo! purchased Zimbra last Fall, I didn't give it too much thought, but now that Microsoft (may) own a great OPEN-SOURCE, web-based email/collaberation product like Zimbra I am sure it will be shelved as part of their desire to "eliminate redundant infrastructure and duplicative operating costs to improve the financial performance of the combined entity."
Good-Bye Zimbra. we hardly knew you.

Re:Implications for open source

[Anonymous Coward]

But, but... I thought that php sucked because it does not have namespaces and is a toy language used by beginning web developers and that only perl can provide the true path to coding enlightenment! You are implying that php has some value and use, how can that be? Sacrilege! You are not of the body!

Re:Implications for open source

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Don't forget they also own Zimbra, an OSS Outlook/Exchange competitor

Zimbra was never really an open source player to begin with. They have an open source crippleware version, partially for street cred and partially so they could help themselves to the postfix/mysql/cyrus underpinnings upon which they built their product.

Anyone who has deployed Zimbra knows that if you want the product to actually be useful you have to buy the closed-source "Network Edition." This is precisely what Microsoft would shut down. Microsoft is eager to kill Exchange competitors. They've done it before -- look at how they immediately shut down the now-defunct Hula project once they began pulling the strings at Novell.

If you want open source email and groupware, you should deploy open source email and groupware. The prime contender in this space right now is Citadel, which is 100 percent GPL. End to end. No exceptions, no tiers, no strings, no gimmicks. Similar in spirit to the Ubuntu Linux distribution, the project's very best work is made available to everyone on the same terms.

Re:Implications for open source

[BVis]

No, just saying that's a possibility is all. As part of a larger movement to kill what they don't own or control.

Re:Implications for open source

[dotancohen]

Well, it was a joke, but I do believe that they would spend that kind of cash to get RMS or Linus Torvalds. Rasmus, no. Of course, we all know that RMS cannot be defeated by ninjas, and Torvalds sleeps with nunchucks.

Re:Implications for open source

[Anonymous Coward]

A few weeks ago a MS office opened in a small office park in Boulder CO (38th and Araphoe area). Then they put a large semi-trailer sized white box in the parking lot. They then put eight large air condition units on top the white box. Looks like an instant data center to me...
Anyone else seen one of these suddenly appear?

Re:Implications for open source

[daem0n1x]

I was using Hotmail when M$ bought it. It stopped working for several days. I read somewhere that it failed because Microsoft moved all the Hotmail infrastructure from Sun platform to IIS over Windows and it couldn't handle the load. They had to restore the previous architecture until they had a decent solution which was 100% Micro$oft.

I dumped my Hotmail account at that time and moved to Yahoo. If M$ buys Yahoo, I will have to dump my Yahoo account also.

Re:Implications for open source

[Ilgaz]

A few weeks ago a MS office opened in a small office park in Boulder CO (38th and Araphoe area). Then they put a large semi-trailer sized white box in the parking lot. They then put eight large air condition units on top the white box. Looks like an instant data center to me...

Anyone else seen one of these suddenly appear? If it is a small do-it-yourself datacenter, it is another example of them not going with "already invented" thing.

If Yahoo (with current management) needed such thing, they would call Sun to lease/buy one of these: http://www.sun.com/products/sunmd/s20/index.jsp . As MS is allergic to that giant Sun Logo and they would fire the first sane guy suggesting "Solaris" ... You get the deal.

Re:Implications for open source

[I_am_the_man]

Most of Yahoo's infrastructure runs on FreeBSD, and the lead developer of PHP, Rasmus Lerdorf, works as an engineer at Yahoo.

Trust me there is way more Linux than FreeBSD.

Microsoft is "innovating" again...

[rinkjustice]

Yahoo confirmed that it has received an unsolicited offer and said that its board would evaluate the proposal, "carefully and promptly in the context of Yahoo's strategic plans and pursue the best course of action to maximize long-term value for shareholders."

Judging by this blurb, I think the answer is going to be a big, fat yes.

Re:Microsoft is "innovating" again...

[WaZiX]

Judging by that blur, the board is just doing what it is supposed to do, which is coincidentally to "maximize long-term value for shareholders".

Basically they're saying that they are doing what they are supposed to do, not sure where you see acceptance in that...

Re:Microsoft is "innovating" again...

[rinkjustice]

It only makes sense that Yahoo would embrace the deal. They've been in a downward spiral for years, and taking the money would be maximizing value for shareholders both in the short and long term.

Re:Microsoft is "innovating" again...

[WaZiX]

That's your take on it, but cannot be derived from what the board said... As to whether this is a good deal or not, I'd have to make a FCF assessment, and even then it would just be an estimate... My guess is that the convergence between MSFTs and Yahoos operations make this acquisition much more lucrative for Microsoft then the real value of Yahoo!, hence the 62% premium, so yeah, I tend to agree with you...

Re:Microsoft is "innovating" again...

[E-Sabbath]

Well, if the proposal suggests the probability of rewriting everything in non-open programs, the amount of waste, number of people who will need to be fired and new hires, or the retraining required is considered... not such a good shareholder value.

Pirate Bay

[rdradar]

Now MS should bid for Pirate Bay aswell!

Re:Pirate Bay

[r_jensen11]

Would all downloads of Windows XP be legal then, since they were linked to from a Microsoft site? I say Windows XP because, well, who here would buy a (now) new computer with XP and then install Vista?

Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[C0deJunkie]

With an astonishing 62% premium price of its current stock price, Microsoft sent this proposal to the Yahoo! Board of Directors. Here's the . Actually, part of the premium price is explainable by the recent sunk of Yahoo! stock.

January 31, 2008

Board of Directors
Yahoo! Inc.
701 First Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Attention: Roy Bostock, Chairman
Attention: Jerry Yang, Chief Executive Officer

Dear Members of the Board:

I am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors of Microsoft to make a proposal for a business combination of Microsoft and Yahoo!. Under our proposal, Microsoft would acquire all of the outstanding shares of Yahoo! common stock for per share consideration of $31 based on Microsoft's closing share price on January 31, 2008, payable in the form of $31 in cash or 0.9509 of a share of Microsoft common stock. Microsoft would provide each Yahoo! shareholder with the ability to choose whether to receive the consideration in cash or Microsoft common stock, subject to pro-ration so that in the aggregate one-half of the Yahoo! common shares will be exchanged for shares of Microsoft common stock and one-half of the Yahoo! common shares will be converted into the right to receive cash. Our proposal is not subject to any financing condition.

Our proposal represents a 62% premium above the closing price of Yahoo! common stock of $19.18 on January 31, 2008. The implied premium for the operating assets of the company clearly is considerably greater when adjusted for the minority, non-controlled assets and cash. By whatever financial measure you use - EBITDA, free cash flow, operating cash flow, net income, or analyst target prices - this proposal represents a compelling value realization event for your shareholders.

We believe that Microsoft common stock represents a very attractive investment opportunity for Yahoo!'s shareholders. Microsoft has generated revenue growth of 15%, earnings growth of 26%, and a return on equity of 35% on average for the last three years. Microsoft's share price has generated shareholder returns of 8% during the last one year period and 28% during the last three year period, significantly outperforming the S&P 500. It is our view that Microsoft has significant potential upside given the continued solid growth in our core businesses, the recent launch of Windows Vista, and other strategic initiatives.

Microsoft's consistent belief has been that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! clearly represents the best way to deliver maximum value to our respective shareholders, as well as create a more efficient and competitive company that would provide greater value and service to our customers. In late 2006 and early 2007, we jointly explored a broad range of ways in which our two companies might work together. These discussions were based on a vision that the online businesses of Microsoft and Yahoo! should be aligned in some way to create a more effective competitor in the online marketplace. We discussed a number of alternatives ranging from commercial partnerships to a merger proposal, which you rejected. While a commercial partnership may have made sense at one time, Microsoft believes that the only alternative now is the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! that we are proposing.

In February 2007, I received a letter from your Chairman indicating the view of the Yahoo! Board that "now is not the right time from the perspective of our shareholders to enter into discus

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[DaveM753]

Hey, Ballmer: I can help with your goal of making "a more efficient" company. Instead of using buzzwords like "this proposal represents a compelling value realization event for your shareholders", you could say something like "this is a good deal for your shareholders."

Eliminating unnecessary, extraneous keystrokes on a corporate scale represents a compelling efficiency realization event for your shareholders.

So there. :P

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Alzheimers]

Scale economics: This combination enables synergies related to scale economics of the advertising platform where today there is only one competitor at scale.

*cough*Google*cough*

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[u38cg]

Depending on the nature of your response, Microsoft reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo!'s shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.

In other words, Microsoft is putting them on notice that they intend to take Yahoo over, and if the board does not agree then it will be a hostile takeover. In other words, if you don't agree, your job is toast :)

No bad thing: Yahoo has been floundering badly for some time (well, ever since Google arrived, if we're honest) and needs some serious work before it has any chance of being an effective competitor to Google.

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

Brief analysis of some key points:

1) Microsoft is indicating that they are challenging Google "Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition. ". However, This statement should apply to Microsoft. Microsoft is the 800lb gorilla yet they are making it sound like they are a bit player and Google is the gorilla - more management doublespeak.

2) Microsoft is indicating they would replace all non-Microsoft at Yahoo with Microsoft technology with phrases like "combination enables synergies related to scale economics". This is great market speak for lay off all that oppose the Microsoft initiatives and move to a common, Microsoft-centric platform.

3) Microsoft wants their search as, I guess, MSN has not been effective: "single search index".

4) Phrases like "eliminating redundant infrastructure and duplicative operating costs" are management speak for layoffs, firing middle management at Yahoo, moving to Microsoft's management and benefit structure, and similar. In my experience through many corporate buyouts, all are very negative to the employees at the company being purchases - Yahoo. However, Microsoft attempts to temper this with "offer significant retention packages to your engineers, key leaders and employees", which is more corporate double-speak.

5) The "exceptional display and search advertising capabilities" sounds like a tighter integration with Microsoft's technology, i.e., Windows and MSIE. Maybe they want to have tighter integration between Vista and their ad revenue stream. Could "new advertising platform capabilities" indicate ad-supported Vista (get a free ad when you log in, when you fire up Office, etc.)?

Overall, it sounds like Microsoft is saying that Yahoo should sell to them because Yahoo didn't meet their goals, the combined company can better challenge Google, and Yahoo has tech that Microsoft needs.

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[RevWaldo]

You left out the post-it note on the letter - "Jeffry, Roy - We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Remember - I know where you all live."

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[AvitarX]

2) Microsoft is indicating they would replace all non-Microsoft at Yahoo with Microsoft technology with phrases like "combination enables synergies related to scale economics". This is great market speak for lay off all that oppose the Microsoft initiatives and move to a common, Microsoft-centric platform.

Hope that goes better than hotmail.com

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

Hotmail.com did ALSO run under FreeBSD ... before they thrashed it with Windows-stuff :(

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, while the statement, "Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition," appears to claim at first glance that acquisition is the cause of Google's dominance (an opiate fiction I'm sure both companies would like to subscribe to), it actually says that Google is only making its position more impregnable through acquisition.

As for "duplicate operating costs" (and by operating costs they of course mean people), I'm kind of on the fence. I mean, my company already outsources payroll and HR. Many medium-sized companies don't even have full-time recruiters. But then again, if my experiences talking to Microsoft management are any indication, almost every non-engineer at the company has the same wide-eyed single-mindedness as AC/DC's Bon Scott, and most of the engineers are, well, dumb. Jeeze. If only they were stupid enough to buy US out for a billion dollars.

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly a 419 scam. Don't respond!

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it funny that I am reading this while watching the Godfather pt 1 for the first time, ever. I can see Ballmer making them an offer that they couldn't refuse. :)

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi! :-)

I see you are writing a takeover letter!

Would you like my help!???

Would you like me find you a chair?!

Yours,
Clippy

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[Anonymous Coward]

Clippy would further simplify wording with the suggestion "We give you money".

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[codemachine]

The letter at least appeared to be sensible until this bit:

It is our view that Microsoft has significant potential upside given the continued solid growth in our core businesses, the recent launch of Windows Vista, and other strategic initiatives.

When their biggest bomb is listed as potential upside, you have to wonder how bad the other strategic initiatives will turn out. Or why they wouldn't list something else, anything else, besides Windows Vista.

Had to love this line too:

This includes synergies across both search and non-search related advertising that will strengthen the value proposition to both advertisers and publishers.

Holy execuspeak Batman!

Re:Letter from Ballmer to Yahoo! Board

[bagsc]

"Realization" has a specific meaning - cashing out.

So This Means...

[flyneye]

So this means people will begin avoiding Yahoo with the same impunity they avoid MSN?
Theoretically Microsoft could buy up anything good about the internet so we can all shut our computers down and settle in w/a trip to the library and a good book.

Re:So This Means...

[rubycodez]

I have at&t/yahoo ADSL, and if bought by Microsoft I'd be pissed, I don't want to pay any money to the Redmond dirtbags.

Re:So This Means...

[Ilgaz]

So this means people will begin avoiding Yahoo with the same impunity they avoid MSN?
Theoretically Microsoft could buy up anything good about the internet so we can all shut our computers down and settle in w/a trip to the library and a good book. I am sure Yahoo already lost a lot of users just because of the rumor/bid. I actually checked if closing/purging Yahoo account is still easy and my account exists there since 1998. Guess why that account was opened first time? Hotmail got acquired by MS and I was one of first to ask if there is a way to close my account ;) Moved to Yahoo the day it was announced.

Re:So This Means...

[flyneye]

Yes,I see,there are casualties in Microsofts war against mankind.

Re:So This Means...

[Angostura]

Don't think you meant to use the word 'impunity' there.

Re:So This Means...

[flyneye]

impunity
n. exemption from punishment.
In Microsofts war against mankind,Bill is taking no prisoners and wants to punish us all.Has somethin' to do with the code he wrote for that crappy 4 bit computer his daddy bought him getting spread far and wide(OMG WAREZ!).

Re:So This Means...

[SgtChaireBourne]

You have to be careful then about which news articles you link to, or vote up, because some are serving ads for the beast. That goes double for sites that are owned by or affiliated with the beast.

Re:So This Means...

[sticks_us]

Hear hear, I've had two yahoo! accounts (one spam, one personal) since 1997 or so--and if this goes through, they're both going bye-bye.

Re:So This Means...

[mgblst]

Already have? Have Yahoo added anything useful in the last few years, to warrant a change in my behaviour? I know they do maps, and people are supposed to use them for their stocks, but everytime I somehow end up on a yahoo page, it looks so cluttered - like they feel the need to fit everything they possible could on the page. No Whitespace allowed.

Re:So This Means...

[totally bogus dude]

Yes, but saying that people can avoid using MSN without being punished, or that they can avoid Yahoo! if it's bought by Microsoft without being punished, isn't a particularly compelling statement.

In fact, I think it may be the opposite of what you're trying to imply.

Re:So This Means...

[Anonymous Coward]

If yahoo's robot starts becoming as abusive as MSNbot then yes, it too will find itself blocked off on my robots.txt file.

Re:So This Means...

[udippel]

I actually checked if closing/purging Yahoo account is still easy and my account exists there since 1998. Guess why that account was opened first time? Hotmail got acquired by MS and I was one of first to ask if there is a way to close my account

Time to pack up, then, and move along. Want a Google invite??

Re:So This Means...

[Rude Turnip]

I abandoned Yahoo when they began helping the Chinese govt. murder their own people.

Re:So This Means...

[geschild]

It could mean exactly that, yes.

It could drive users to Google services in droves, especially if Microsoft F's up Yahoo! services by migrating all the succesful stuff they're buying to the same platform as their own unsuccesful stuff that caused them to have to look outside in the first place.

Come to think of it, I'm quite certain they will do that. Balmers arogance knows no bounds, he all but proved that with the letter to the Yahoo! board.

Oh well, at least it'll cost Microsoft real money to make this happen, unlike most regulatory actions have up until now.

Re:So This Means...

[nschubach]

No no... leave the spam one.

Re:So This Means...

[mini me]

Yahoo have some interesting APIs, but they are all for non-commercial use, and therefore are useless for most applications that would normally be built around them. I understand why they would want to set those limits, however it doesn't foster a community around them with them in place.

Re:So This Means...

[16384]

Hear hear, I've had two yahoo! accounts (one spam, one personal) since 1997 or so--and if this goes through, they're both going bye-bye. Hey, me too! Which alternative would you recomend (Hint: Not google)? I may leave the spam account though.

Re:So This Means...

[Antony-Kyre]

Exactly why this would be awful. I am not happy about Microsoft having bought Hotmail. Imagine what horrible things would occur to Yahoo! if they acquired them.

Re:So This Means...

[marcosdumay]

If Yahoo becomes more like Hotmail, it won't be good enough for a spam address (unless the goal is to receive lots of it).

If MS takes Yahoo!, I'm planning to move my spam address to Gmail.

Re:So This Means...

[jsebrech]

Hotmail got acquired by MS and I was one of first to ask if there is a way to close my account ;)

Why?

Is it an irrational hatred of all things microsoft?

The current hotmail is not actually that bad. The new live ui is pretty sleek, and it works as well in firefox as IE.

Re:So This Means...

[spundun]

So this means people will begin avoiding Yahoo with the same impunity they avoid MSN?
Theoretically Microsoft could buy up anything good about the internet so we can all shut our computers down and settle in w/a trip to the library and a good book.

I disagree, at some point, anti-trust laws will start kicking in, so there has to remain a microsoft-free portion of the internet. It may be a puppet to MS, but lets just hope that that portion also hates MS with the same impunity as a common slashdotter.

Re:So This Means...

[Ilgaz]

Hotmail got acquired by MS and I was one of first to ask if there is a way to close my account ;)

Why?

Is it an irrational hatred of all things microsoft?

The current hotmail is not actually that bad. The new live ui is pretty sleek, and it works as well in firefox as IE. I was using Windows that time, I knew what acquisition by MS means thanks to their hatred to my favorite browser at the time, Netscape.

Later they proved my point over and over while I was using Opera as my favourite browser.

http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2003/02/14/

That is the company we are talking about. They could do this even while they knew they are dealing with a browser vendor. Opera Bork Edition wasn't a meaningless joke. Some say, the cost could be $500M to MS.

You know the most compatible, Web 2.0 like, drag and drop webmail of today which will work in any modern browser, even Kopete running on OS X? AOL Webmail. Speaking about irrational hatred...

Re:So This Means...

[Ilgaz]

s/kopete/konqueror (sorry, if there are 300 things starting with K)

so....

[mahju]

I'm not a MS fanboy, so I have my doubts that they will pull this off well, but...

I can see how this will work (and takes fight to google a bit more). However there will be a load of sites now that will overlap (e.g. Hotmail & Yahoo Mail)... quesiton is, will this mean a lot of consolidation or will they stay diverse and unique???

Re:so....

[harry666t]

I'm not a MS fanboy

Oh No!

Re:so....

[mahju]

> > I'm not a MS fanboy
> Oh No!

Oh yes I am
(hmm starting to go a little panto)

Zimbra

[Albanach]

Slashdot discussed the Yahoo! buyout of Zimbra just a few weeks ago. Now we have the threat of Microsoft buying what is possibly the biggest competitor to Exchange.

I'm pretty sure any regulatory approval would mean them disposing of Zimbra, but it must be a time of frustration and worry to the staff there.

Re:Zimbra

[Constantine XVI]

Just in case you just now got out of the DeLorean, Yahoo bought Zimbra back in September.

Re:Zimbra

[dropadrop]

This was the first thing that came to my mind too. With a lot of companies moving from Exchange to Zimbra Microsoft could easily strangle that first thing after the acquisition.

Is this innovation?

[bogaboga]

I'd like to ask Mr. Ballmer if this [potential acquisition] is part of what it calls innovation. I dislike Yahoo and Microsoft because of what I see as bias in search results and the bloated home pages.

Re:Is this innovation?

[everphilski]

One nice thing about Live.com, at least in my humble opinion, is that people haven't gamed the hell out of it. People have SEO'd the crap out of meaningless pages on google, so within the first five to ten results for any given search, I find crap. I haven't seen that with Live.

I try and mix it up, I still use Google a lot but unless they find a way to get people to stop gaming the system, I think Google will have some problems. Seeing pages filled with banner ads in your first ten results for an engineering or computer science topic is disheartening.

Re:Is this innovation?

[totally bogus dude]

I think this "gaming the search results" thing is a big reason why it's unhealthy to have such a dominant player, and the Hitwise stats that fictionpuss linked to say that Microsoft's share of the US search engine market is less than 6%. I'm not sure if search.msn.com and live.com are basically the same engine or not; it makes sense that they would be, but if not then it implies live.com has an insignificant market share (i.e. they didn't bother listing it).

So I think the reason Live.com's results aren't gamed is because there's so little to gain from it, relative to Google's. It probably also explains why Google's results were so amazing during their early years compared to AltaVista.

Re:Is this innovation?

[ransom1982]

Just thought I would test your theory. Live.com search for Python Google search for Python. Google shows no bad results, Live.com has Python.com $40 signup that links to a porn site. That has been my typical experience. I don't know what tech terms you've been searching for, but Google has always had relevant links for me on the first page.

Re:Is this innovation?

[geekoid]

Huh, I necver see that. Can you give me a typical search criteria you use?

Re:Is this innovation?

[NobleSavage]

Python is a very large porn company. And they have the domain name python.com. It's not just a SEO'ed page. So if your query is just "Python" id expect it to be a relevant result.

Re:Is this innovation?

[Jorgandar]

Its hard to judge content in a systematic way.. i think Google should steal one out of the playbooks of Youtube - let users rate the quality of search results. As more users say "this is a good result", those pages go up. as users say "this is crap" those pages get tossed from the system. just my 2 pennies.

Re:Is this innovation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like your search-fu is weak. I haven't seen a bogus link on a first page of a google search in well over a year.

Re:Is this innovation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeing pages filled with banner ads in your first ten results for an engineering or computer science topic is disheartening

You are a slashdot user and you still see banner ads on the Web? Have you not heard of adblock?

Priceless quote.

[jwietelmann]

From the article:

"Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player, who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition," Microsoft said.

Sound like anyone you know?

Re:Priceless quote.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh wait! I know this one...It's ummm...crap! Not Apple. Not Altavista. It's on the tip of my tongue...

Re:Priceless quote.

[ScentCone]

[Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player, who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition," Microsoft said.]

Sound like anyone you know?

Actually, no. Microsoft has (as so many people here love to point out), a decreasing share of server and desktop users.

Re:Priceless quote.

[Mr. Foogle]

Sound like anyone you know?

IBM?

Re:Priceless quote.

[flapdoddle]

...dominated by one player, who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition

Sound like anyone you know?

Uh, like Nazi Germany in 1942? trying to take Stalingrad?

Using up 85% of their capital on this purchase doesn't leave much room for error - if it doesn't work, Microsoft is going to melt away.

-----

Don't stick a pea up your nose today.

Re:Priceless quote.

[networkassault]

Agreed. Let's not forget, though, that Yahoo is technically a Registrar and an ISP. That could have major implementations in net neutrality. Let's not forget how badly MS bullied the ISPs 10 years ago.

Full text

[Dan100]

Read the full text of the letter to the Yahoo board.

Google beware!

[Anonymous Coward]

An IE with a locked in Yahoo! search engine... that ought to kick Google out of the Windows platform. Take that you new evil Google!

Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[jo42]

What would this mean to Yahoo E-mail? Or Flickr? Or the great web developer toolkits Yahoo has release? Just imagine the migration of all Yahoo services over to Windows Server. Unless they leave it alone, whatever Microsoft does would be the kiss of death to what Yahoo is.

Re:Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[bishiraver]

We use the Yahoo JS library extensively as "sugar" in our client-side library. I'm worried that we may have to actually adhere to decent coding standards and decouple YUI from our codebase with an obfuscation layer! Just in case it dies (or worse - gets taken private and integrated into VS, so only VS users can benefit from the work of the awesome authors that have contributed to it over the past few years).

We don't really use any of its big UI elements, so it's not THAT big of a deal - but it is very useful as sugar for attaching events, dom-related activites, etc..

Re:Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[xeoron]

What would happen if Google bought Microsoft?

Re:Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[Random BedHead Ed]

Microsoft kept their Hotmail services on UNIX for practical reasons. When UNIX stopped answering Hotmail's HTTP requests, it was theorized that Windows Server was still only providing a front end, and the back end was running on the same platform it always used. I'd imagine you'll see no immediate change in Yahoo! services if Microsoft takes over.

Having said that, in the long run Microsoft's traditional business model involves an "Extinguish" step that they're usually faithful in executing. So in two or three years you'd probably see Live search and Yahoo! search run on a single system (Windows-based, maybe?), and Yahoo! mail could see some sort of transition as well. I'd like to think that Microsoft would do a graceful transition for Yahoo! mail to ensure they keep their valuable customer base happy. But then, this is the company that conducted careful OS marketing research and then tried to keep XP users happy by creating seven different editions of Vista, so all bets are off.

("Welcome to Microsoft Yahoo! Mail Basic Edition. Please install the Silverlight ActiveX control to continue...")

Re:Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[protohiro1]

YUI is open source: http://sourceforge.net/projects/yui/

Re:Oh, no, Mr. Bill! Leave my Yahoo! Alone!!

[Robert The Coward]

YUI is open source bsd based license you can fork it all you want. You might not get updates any more from Yahoo but they can never take your existing code away.

Thankyou Microsoft

[arcite]

Now I'll be able to get my Britney Spears fix from one source instead of two.

Its esactly what Monkey Boy sees and

[crovira]

wants to STOP.

The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Ralph Spoilsport]

I have 10 years of email in yahoo. If MS takes over, what then? Will they force everyone into hotmail accounts? I think I'm going to be spending a few hours every night downloading and saving my email off line.

Interesting that - imagine building a business using online apps, only to have your supplier go under and get bought out in some botched effort, and then lose history...

I think there are a number of serious implications in this MS/Yahoo deal. The monopoly aspect is actually the least problematic: the loss of history is a greater problem.

But then, maybe the Feds under a Democratic Admin will say "nuh uh!" and kill the deal...

RS

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I'm going to be spending a few hours every night downloading and saving my email off line.

Huh? If it's *at all* important to you, you should already be keeping offline copies. Yahoo could lose all your email at any time with no redress - and this has happened to many webmail users on a number of occasions.
It's not as if hard drive space costs anything to speak of these days.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[maxume]

http://ypopsemail.com/

(In case you aren't already aware of it or something similar)

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

A good portion of the value of Yahoo! to Microsoft is in their customers. I am pretty sure that they will make all efforts to keep the customers. Throwing away Yahoo! customer's data sounds like the last thing they have in mind. They might be greedy but they're not stupid.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[apathy maybe]

I currently only use Yahoo for email (two accounts since 1998/1999). I currently mainly use Google for search (no email though).

In the event of Microsoft actually buying Yahoo, I'm going to take advantage of that POP3 offer for my email, sort it properly and delete all my emails from my two accounts. I'll continue to use them, but only because there are no real alternatives that I know of (that are free...).

I don't consider Hotmail an alternative, and haven't done since I first examined it back in 1998. As for GMail, I had an account at one stage, didn't use it and now have forgotten the password. I've since used it for a corporate email that I currently, and I dislike it.

Yeh, so if you don't have POP3, I don't know why, but I know that both the .com.au and .co.uk yahoo addresses have it available. (I'm not sure if you have to sign up to receive "special Yahoo emails" (read ads) or not, but I have signed up for these things, and have received about 6 pieces of email from Yahoo in relation to this, in the past 5 years (or more...). It is worth it.)

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Nimey]

Fuck. I've got a Yahoo email account going back to 1999. I had a Hotmail account since 1996 (when it was still independent) but gave it up after Microsoft ruined the service (bad UI, bad spam-filtering, non-blockable official MS spam).

I'd really hate to have to switch to another email provider for my "permanent" email service.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Red Flayer]

But then, maybe the Feds under a Democratic Admin will say "nuh uh!" and kill the deal...

I'm cynical today, but it bears thinking about the fact that the same money that elects Republicans elects Democrats. Yet another reason to support someone besides the ass and elephant.

And here's something to nibble on: anyone who supports Ron Paul supports letting this merger happen, consequences be damned. Because, y'know, the free market will fix the problem... a competitor will rise like Phoenix from the ashes of Yahoo. Not to get off too far on a tangent, but now it appears we're down to two main competitors in the IT world... how long will it be before we are always forced with choosing the lesser of two evils? Is this really the optimal situation? We have it in politics, we're getting it in major IT players.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[jollyreaper]

I have 10 years of email in yahoo. If MS takes over, what then? Will they force everyone into hotmail accounts? I think I'm going to be spending a few hours every night downloading and saving my email off line.

Interesting that - imagine building a business using online apps, only to have your supplier go under and get bought out in some botched effort, and then lose history... Dude, that's the first thing I thought when I heard of "application service providers." For starters, I hated the industry since they couldn't find their own fucking acronym, they had to keep getting everyone confused with the other ASP.

Here's a good example I just found out about, an asp going after doctor's offices. In the last few I've been in, they're still running apps off of ancient LAN's, some are even DOS-based. All they need is a simple client-tracking and medical billing database and there's not been much need to upgrade for the past 20 years. That's no different from the cash registers you see in a lot of stores that are still connecting to some ancient computer in the storeroom and are running dumb terminals up at the register. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. They could conceivably keep running such a system until the hardware is no longer available on the used market.

Now compare that to an asp doing the same thing and there's just loads of trouble.

1. They get bought out by Microsoft or someone and the product is borked. Well, if that happens with stand-alone 3.0 then you just don't bother upgrading to 4.0 when it comes out. If it's an asp, you get upgraded whether you like it or not.

2. Do they really do backups the way they're supposed to? How many times do we hear of big companies who should know better royally screwing the pooch on backups and/or security.

3. What if the company goes out of business? Again, you can keep running stand-alone 3.0 for years after the parent croaks but that isn't happening with asp 3.0.

I just don't understand how nobody else is put off by these real and extraordinary risks.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[PowerEdge]

Spend the 20bucks. Upgrade to a plus account. D/L your email via POP3.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[mgblst]

Does Yahoo Mail have pop access, like Gmail? This makes it very easy to download all your mail.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[jez9999]

Well, Obama is talking a lot about how he wants to promote 'a change' in Washington and support diversity, and stuff (pro net-neutrality). If he got in, quashing this hostile takeover would be a great way to put his money where his mouth is. I have my serious doubts, though. :-(

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[jez9999]

Before Google came along, we were basically down to ONE player in the IT world for many years. Still, it's very depressing to have to put up with the result of US unabridled capitalism like this. I hate seeing all diversity eliminated because of MS's bank account.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[dreamon_b]

I hate this but if M$$ is buying yahoo.. I will have to move my email accounts out of yahoo.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[mw13068]

I have 10 years of email in yahoo.

Are you paying penance for sins in your past life or something?

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Billions of dollars, tens of thousands of jobs, and you're worried about your emails?

And then you further post about how dems will be smart enough to nix this deal to save your emails...

So you've boiled down the entire American government, the election process, a HUGE section of the tech sector and looked at it as it applies you your email.

Forest through the trees anyone?

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[bdjacobson]

I don't know how much email you have, but consider linking your yahoo account to a Gmail account through POP.yahoo.com(?). Yes, you must give google your yahoo password, but it will then query the yahoo server and proceed to download ALL of your yahoo mails and save them in your Gmail account.

---

See, I think this is why people love google so much. Of what marketing use has this feature been before now? Now you can seamlessly migrate all your online emails to another online storage database for free; and you can forgo downloading them to your computer and backing them, etc.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really think that MS would take a brand as well known and popular as Yahoo and shit stuff it under the crappy MSN brand?

Yahoo mail isn't going anywhere.
Flickr is not going to change a bit.
Yahoo finance stays the same.

I know we all think that MS is stupid, but stupid enough to start migrating the Y Mail users over to hotmail??? Not for many many years would these things happen. I bet that outside of search and advertising, you'll see most of Yahoo's services continue to run independently for a long long time.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Thanks - I had forgotten about that. I'll do that and pull it all into mail.app.

RS

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[nmos]

Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. They could conceivably keep running such a system until the hardware is no longer available on the used market.

Sure, until someone decides to change DST or maybe ATF or the state taxing authority starts requiring a new reporting format etc. Updates are more common than you think, even on very old/stable systems.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Scudsucker]

Do you really think that MS would take a brand as well known and popular as Yahoo and shit stuff it under the crappy MSN brand?

Immediately, no of course not. But over time you'd see less and less Yahoo and more and more MSN. I bet within five years Yahoo would be completely Microsoftized, and would remain in token name only. Within ten years, you'd never know Yahoo was a separate company.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[jollyreaper]

Sure, until someone decides to change DST or maybe ATF or the state taxing authority starts requiring a new reporting format etc. Updates are more common than you think, even on very old/stable systems. That's what code escrow is for. The source code is documented and constantly updated in escrow with an attorney. If the company croaks, the code becomes the property of the clients. There's still the question of whether things were documented properly and paying someone to fix things but it's better than nothing. Obviously, losing the vendor is a bad thing but you can afford to run the old system for a few years until you find a new one far more than you could afford doing without it if the asp croaked.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[GRW]

I have mostly stopped using Yahoo! mail because of the lack of IMAP support. Both Gmail and AOL mail have IMAP support. I hate POP3. Using IMAP allows you the choice of using an email client or webmail as well as having the same email available on your laptop as you have on your desktop.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Red Flayer]

On the plus side, the GOOG example shows that eventually competition comes along... the downside is that two competitors are much better at locking out threats to their hegemony than one alone is.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[GRW]

Even better: it has IMAP.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

>Interesting that - imagine building a business using online apps, only to have your supplier
> go under and get bought out in some botched effort, and then lose history...

That is why *any* kind of personal data you value should be stored on your own server (or a trusted friend's)

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[gabrieltss]

Simple do what I did get Ypops and download all your yahoo email and then delete it all and kill your account...

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Anonymous Coward]

Just copy all of your emails to your Inbox, pay $20 to get the premium Yahoo! email account, open a Gmail account, set up pop downloading Yahoo! -> Gmail, and in a few hours/days all of your email will be downloaded into Gmail (which has free POP/IMAP access so you can easily leave if/when you're ready). Now you can cancel the premium Yahoo! email account. Seems a lot easier then doing a little work every night like you suggested...

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Nefarious Wheel]

... I have 10 years of email in yahoo.

Are you paying penance for sins in your past life or something?

Sounds like he wants someone else to pay for sins in their past life...

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Nefarious Wheel]

So you've boiled down the entire American government, the election process, a HUGE section of the tech sector and looked at it as it applies you your email. Forest through the trees anyone?

Better than a forest of dead trees. I'd prefer hot air from email to hot air from poor carbon sequestration practices. You young whippersnappers have no idea how disturbing it was to watch whole floors filled with pallets of copier paper in every office building, just to feed the copiers. This is back when "spam" meant "processed spiced meat in a tin" only. The Haloid process was planet-killing technology, and was only mitigated when email came out to slow the wholesale slaughter of forests. I love email.

Mind you, I've got some pretty sophisticated filters...

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[Ralph Spoilsport]

interesting. I looked - it's only on windows. I'm on a mac...

I'll prolly just spring the $20 to yahoo, get POP set up with it, and then direct mail.app at yahoo and DL everything to my drive.

RS

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[imtheguru]

If you're looking for a practical solution to downloading your emails to an email client, try FreePops or YahooPops. Both work fairly well.

Cheers.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[riseoftheindividual]

And here's something to nibble on: anyone who supports Ron Paul supports letting this merger happen, consequences be damned. Because, y'know, the free market will fix the problem... a competitor will rise like Phoenix from the ashes of Yahoo. Not to get off too far on a tangent, but now it appears we're down to two main competitors in the IT world... how long will it be before we are always forced with choosing the lesser of two evils? Is this really the optimal situation? We have it in politics, we're getting it in major IT players.

I honestly don't get why anyone is bothered by this? Was Yahoo a public service? It was always a company, born in the free market. And the free market has been fixing the problem that is microsoft, in case you haven't been paying attention. We're *up to two main competitors*, up from one before Google's ascendancy. Google, a company born in the free market, has done more to impede the microsoft tech juggernaut than all the actions of all the governments taken against it so far. Not just google, to a lesser degree open source(whose rise has also been driven by the free market).

Do you know why Ron Paul and those of us who happen to agree with the stance of letting the free market solve it believe that way? Because those who rail and whine against it have no viable alternative. Granting the government more power over the markets, when it has consistently abused it's power and been owned by corporate interest is going to achieve what exactly?

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[UnderCoverPenguin]

But then, maybe the Feds under a Democratic Admin will say "nuh uh!" and kill the deal...

Still almost another year of this Republican admin. Plenty of time for M$ to make sure the dealgets approved.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[mgblst]

Are you suggesting that google provide imap access to yahoo email? No, then shut up, moron.

Re:The only thing that matters: EMAIL

[GRW]

No, I was saying that Gmail is better than Yahoo mail because it has IMAP access while Yahoo does not. It is not necessary to be rude.

eliminate the competition... not going to work

[AlvinTheNerd]

Buying out all of the competition does give you more market share, but that isn't going to last. You buy up Yahoo and not everyone is going to go from yahoo to msn. There is a reason people don't use msn even though it is defaulted on most computers. They go out of their way to avoid msn. And even if they take down every major search engine, how long will it be before some new idea comes roaring out of nowhere into dominance? That said, I think Yahoo is outdated. It is built around getting everything from one source, which was popular with dial up as it took so long to search, but not anymore. So I say to the yahoo shareholders, sell sell sell. If you don't, start redesigning or you will loss more money. And long live the all night hackers, dorm room brain storms, and tinkers. Brings whats next. Cus, I can guarantee we will not see much innovation from Microsoft.

And then there were two

[fictionpuss]

Considering that internet search and online advertising are exactly the places they don't dominate, I don't see why regulators would object.

Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary.

Re:And then there were two

[MMC Monster]

There are only two main search engines now.

Do people really use Windows Live Search or MSN search?

On purpose?

Re:And then there were two

[owlnation]

Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary.

What you say makes sense if Google had any true competitors. Niehter MSN nor Yahoo are superior products to Google's search. In fact they are vastly inferior, and have been for 11 years without any significant improvement. Combining them, won't change that in any way.

Google really needs competition. We as Internet users really need Google to have competition. Search does not meet our needs as a product. But that competition is NOT coming from Microyahoo. It's coming -- just as Google did -- from a couple of guys in a basement somewhere with the next big idea.

Re:And then there were two

[Azul]

Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary.

How is that any different from there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor MSN at a paltry 5.33%?

Re:And then there were two

[Captain Splendid]

Do people really use Windows Live Search or MSN search?

On purpose?

Yes and yes, considering it's the default on all Windows boxes. To regular people, a search box==a search box.

Re:And then there were two

[snoyberg]

Google really needs competition. We as Internet users really need Google to have competition. Search does not meet our needs as a product.

Could you please explain where search isn't good enough? Google works well enough for me (and just about everyone I know). I've never really sat back and thought, "Damn, I wish there was some better search engine out there."

Re:And then there were two

[BlackSnake112]

Google has been number 1 since 1997?

Re:And then there were two

[Anonymous Coward]

There are already only two main search engines. As those numbers you linked to suggest, MSN (live) is nothing more than a blip on the radar. Yahoo is a little brighter, but has fallen over the year.

I look at the stats of my sites, MSN/Live account for squat. I don't recall ever seeing Ask. It's mostly Google with a slice of Yahoo and a smattering of others, MSN/Live tossed in with the other non-important fodder.

People who use MSN/Live are not serious about finding what they want or are looking for. Microsoft can only drag Yahoo down to their level, they won't stand for Yahoo being developed and ran using non-MS technologies. They'll make it so Google takes over 90% of the market. I like Google, but I think that's not such a good thing.

Re:And then there were two

[The Frogstar]

If that is the kind of thing US anti-trust rulings are interested in, they never would have allowed the merger of Adobe and Macrovision. Of course, that went through without a hitch, I cant see why this wont.

Re:And then there were two

[paeanblack]

Could you please explain where search isn't good enough? Google works well enough for me (and just about everyone I know). I've never really sat back and thought, "Damn, I wish there was some better search engine out there."

This is when I will be impressed...

http://pics.nerdnirvana.org/d/1406-1/myhouse_google_com.jpg

Re:And then there were two

[thrillseeker]

To regular people, a search box==a search box.

and the new expression in the English language is "to Google it" ...

Re:And then there were two

[u38cg]

It's not really that scary. If you sit back and think for a second, entering the search market takes a couple of servers and some code. Not that hard: what you need are good ideas to ensure good results are returned.

Given the nature of the internet, it is inevitable that we will all use the best and maybe the second best search engines out there. I don't know *anybody* that doesn't use Google - not because Google is the dominant search operator, but because Google is the one that most often returns good results for them. If a poster on here popped up and said xyz search engine is better, I would give it a try, if it worked I would maybe bookmark it and use it again. If it's consistently better, it wins.

Re:And then there were two

[I(rispee_I(reme]

Did you mean Macromedia?

Re:And then there were two

[joss]

You mean yes and no

Re:And then there were two

[CohibaVancouver]

Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary.

But this is really the situation today anyway. For all intents and purposes Google owns online search, eBay owns online Auctions, Amazon owns online book sales etc. etc. etc. No whippersnapper upstart is ever going to take away eBay's market share.

Re:And then there were two

[SethJohnson]

Could you please explain where search isn't good enough? Google works well enough for me (and just about everyone I know).

Complacency does not require that innovations and improvements are impossible. True, Google is awesome compared to its predecessors. But the system is constantly gamed by unscrupulous web 'publishers.' Fake website 'portals' abound in top rankings for lucrative searches, for example.

Also, the results are returned without any kind of organization. You just get a link to a page that contains the keyword you searched on. If your topic has a LOT of content published about it and you don't know what the hell it is, you'll have to wade through a lot of content to figure out what part is relevant to you. For instance, if you are a climate-change research group and got a voice mail from ex-Police front-man, Sting, a Google search on his name wouldn't obviously yield that he hosts a rainforest concert. If you Google'd "Sting" to find out why he's calling you, you'd have no idea. Instead, the search engine could recognize that you'd typed a vague keyword and could provide a Wikipedia-like summary of the overall topic with links organized by sub-topics like: Sting's work with the Police. Sting's solo career. Sting's rainforest concert series. Sting's film career.

I agree with the OP. Without competition, a company with overwhelming marketshare will cease to innovate features that benefit the consumer, and instead with focus on how to more effectively extract revenue from consumers. This is why Microsoft hadn't gotten around to improving IE for years until recently. It's also why the new direction they're taking Office is towards a rental model which doesn't bring awesome new power to the app suite, it just brings awesome new revenue potential to MS.

The status quo never seems like it needs remaking. That's why it's called the status quo.

Seth

Re:And then there were two

[PReDiToR]

If "regular people" don't have the wit to change the search engine in the box they cannot be said to be using the preinstalled option "on purpose", merely by default.

So yes and no as "joss" points out.

Re:And then there were two

[MrNemesis]

Two main search engines? Isn't that a highly competitive market by US DoJ standards? I thought antitrust only kicked in when a company ended up competing with itself and the DoJ acted as a referee?

Re:And then there were two

[PReDiToR]

You should stay in more.

When using a search engine you should be able to find what you are looking for without having to install Greasemonkey to filter out all the Kelkoo and other commercial sites.

You should be able to turn off PageRank easily and just get the best results based on what you typed rather than who paid the most to the search engine or the linkfarm or bloggerverse.

Sometimes Wikipedia isn't the leading authority on what you typed and you'd prefer it to be down in 100th position instead of the guaranteed top 10.

Omitting search results, respelling terms without confirmation, ignoring completely "I only want English" or "pages from the UK only" options, insisting that no matter how many times you don't want SafeSearch on it just will be, cached pages getting messed up, PDF-HTML being about as much use as trying to use Flash in Lynx, ...

Google is just the best there is at the moment, but we could all benefit from a better search engine.

Re:And then there were two

[snoyberg]

Thank you, that was a very informative post on the flaws of Google. I hadn't known/remembered most of those issues, and it's very enlightening. Out of curiosity, do you believe the wikia (I believe I remembered that correctly) would possibly be a good competitor based on this?

Re:And then there were two

[Anonymous Coward]

"Maybe, but the possibility of there only being two main search engines out there, with the next largest competitor Ask.com at a paltry 4.1%, is fairly scary."

That's hardly different than cable or phone providers in many areas. Heck, having a choice from two is a luxury!

Re:And then there were two

[DiLLeMaN]

Which means exactly jack shit. "googling" is done from the search box, as far as n00bs are concerned. Googling can be done using Live. Don't forget that you're talking about people who's OS is "Microsoft Word".

Re:And then there were two

[Dusty101]

Hey, it works for US politics! Oh, wait...

Re:And then there were two

[blob.DK]

It will take Microsoft to accomplish that....

Oh wait.

Write-in

[Stavr0]

YaHotMail

Re:Write-in

[Stavr0]

YaHotMail This was a poll a few moments ago, what happened?

Re:Write-in

[cordsie]

I think someone put up a poll and an article about the same subject at the same time and pointed them at the same comments page. Now all the poll-specific jokes are going to be confusing and out of context.

The Empire Strikes Back

[QuatermassX]

It was only a matter of time before Microsoft decided to try to get a final regulatory pass from the Bush administration before the inauguration of a less-sympathetic President in 2009.

This deal makes a lot of sense for Microsoft (sort of - I'm assuming Yahoo!'s ad business really is worth the cash), but I can't see how this is at all good for Yahoo! or the marketplace at large.

Is the plan to re-brand everything as Microsoft Live! (keeping the exclamation mark) - thus destroying pretty much the only thing Yahoo! has going for it - brand recognition?

I would be very sad to see Yahoo! and their odd collection of services get subsumed and destroyed in a merger with Microsoft. Yes, I'm assuming much of Yahoo!'s tech portfolio would be wiped away or left to die - this wouldn't be the sort of merger Adobe engineered with Macromedia by a long shot.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[WaZiX]

This deal makes a lot of sense for Microsoft (sort of - I'm assuming Yahoo!'s ad business really is worth the cash), but I can't see how this is at all good for Yahoo! or the marketplace at large. The question is not whether it's a good deal for Yahoo!, the question is whether it's a good deal for Yahoo! shareholders... Anyways, paying a 62% premium on the market value to just let yahoo! die out seems like a pretty bad deal to me, so I very much doubt that Microsoft will just let the Yahoo! brand die out...

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[maccam]

Less sympathetic? John McCain, despite his many positive viewpoints, suggested getting Steve Ballmer as a Cabinet Level technology adviser.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah right, MS would try and use this to get a new image and manipulate that to their own ends.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[AaxelB]

No, you're confused. The GP was talking about Obama.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[Scudsucker]

McCain's only chance of winning is if Hillary gets the Dem nomination. McCain is old, tired, a bigger flip flopper than every Dem ever accused of flip flopping combined, a warmonger when Americans are tired of war and despite his "maverick" image is actually the biggest sellout on the face of the planet. However, Hillary's whole campaign is based on "experience", which McCain blows out of the water. And while the GOP base doesn't like McCain and is depressed this year, Republicans voters will turn out in droves to vote against "Billary". Finally, the press LOVES McCain but HATES the Clintons.

The Dems best candidate to beat the Republicans was Edwards, but the media first ignored him as they focused on Hillary and Obama, and then wrote off his candidacy as soon as possible. So he's now out. I'm confident that Obama could handle McCain with ease, but Hillary would be in real trouble.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[hondo77]

... but I can't see how this is at all good for Yahoo! or the marketplace at large.

The deal is a 62% premium over Yahoo!'s share price as of yesterday. Yahoo! stock has been going down, down, down for quite a while now, with no end in sight so it makes sense for Yahoo! shareholders, like me. I'm not so concerned about the "marketplace at large", whoever that is.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[vistic]

Hear hear... I was actually surprised GP could talk about McCain winning the Presidency like there's no other plausible outcome, without being overcome with such a strong sense of BS that he/she changed their mind before hitting submit.

The post above that which implied a Dem winning, is a bit more likely though.

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[maccam]

No your are confused.

McCain wants Ballmer as ambassador to China. from www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/04/ballmer_for_mccain_administration/

Re:The Empire Strikes Back

[AaxelB]

Um... you're still confused. QuatermassX was implying that the next president would be one of the democratic candidates (I chose to intepret that as Obama, maybe that's what he meant too), and while your point about McCain wasn't invalid or wrong, it was irrelevant.

Farewell Yahoo

[lightperson]

It should be easy enough to remove all bookmarks to Yahoo services. There are very good substitutes around.

Re:Farewell Yahoo

[zrq]

All my bookmarks are in del.icio.us :-(

Del.icio.us was acquired by Yahoo! on December 9, 2005.

All my images are in Flickr :-(

In March 2005, Yahoo! Inc. acquired Ludicorp and Flickr

If I knew they were going to hand over all my data to Microsoft I wouldn't have signed up.
*sigh* time to start looking for alternative services.

Re:Farewell Yahoo

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe it's time to stop being religious about a fucking social bookmarking site.

Internet Explorer

[Anonymous Coward]

Could they just bloody well buy Opera and call it Internet Explorer 8 while their at it??

If you can't make a good web browser, just buy one! Right?

I've been using Opera exclusively for over two years and it's everything Internet Explorer should be, plus more (think, it works in Linux and Mac OS X, has instant-on skins, widgets, etc.). The only time I use another browser is for Windows Update and the occassional Internet Explorer only website. IE7 is OK, but it real pales in comparison to Opera 7/8/9.

Re:Internet Explorer

[lord_rob the only on]

Internet Explorer 1.0 has been bought also ;-). Don't remember ? It was called NSCA Mosaic back then. It was one of the best browser of the market, the other one was Netscape Navigator.

Re:Internet Explorer

[sherpajohn]

No, it was called SpyGlass Mosiac and they wrote it from scratch after licensing the technology and trademarks from NSCA: http://www.ericsink.com/Browser_Wars.html

Missing Option

[cordsie]

The biggest business blunder of the century.

flickr

[suzerain]

Shit, now this means the photos I have on flickr are going to be owned by Microsoft? Oy vey. Can we have a "good photo sharing site" thread now so I can find the alternatives?

Re:flickr

[CheeseTroll]

Well, if you're looking for one that won't be acquired by Microsoft anytime soon, try this one.

Re:flickr

[ushac]

How about... Google Photos? :)

Re:flickr

[downix]

Looks like I know where I'll be taking my photos...

Re:flickr

[3m_w018]

http://smugmug.com/

Re:flickr

[Rageon]

Absolutely. Smugmug is a great site. I've used it for about 3 years now, and absolutely love it. It's like $25 a year, but well worth it. I tried the free sites, and they aren't even close to it in terms of quality. If you're serious of showing off your pictures, give it a shot.

Re:flickr

[zrq]

I had a quick look, got this

Picasa Web Albums does not yet have a dedicated Linux uploader.

Anyone know of a good uploader for Linux ?

Re:flickr

[zrq]

If you're serious of showing off your pictures, give it a shot.

I had a quick look, does it allow you choose a Creative Commons license for the images ?

Re:flickr

[CheeseTroll]

I haven't tried it, myself, but I think the Linux version of Picasa may work.

Re:flickr

[bdjacobson]

Gmail gives you a GB of online photo storage; their service has been useful for what I need; but then again I've never used flickr though.

Re:flickr

[blind biker]

photobucket has been excellent for me, and I am a huge sceptic of anything online. Very satisfied with the bandwidth, unobtrusive inclusion in threads and webpages (you get the picture without commercials - just the picture). I find flickr to be significantly slower.

Re:flickr

[AvitarX]

Picassa runs pretty well in WINE

I don't have a web album, but it really looks like it would work if I logged in.

It installed in WINE with absolutely zero fuss.

Re:flickr

[AvitarX]

I just logged in using my gmail accound and it worked great.\

I am torn between using Picasa2 under WINE, or open source for my photos, it works that well.

Re:flickr

[Anonymous Coward]

I had been using Picasaweb until I hit the 1GB free limit. At that point I looked around for alternatives since if I was going to pay, I should at least see if Picasaweb was competitive. I ended up with smugmug (www.smugmug.com). Very cheap unlimited storage (I think $40/year but don't quote me on that) and a slick interface.

Re:flickr

[zrq]

Picassa runs pretty well in WINE

I'm not looking for another heavy weight image handling application. Got quite a few of those already, and all available GPL or similar. Flickr was cool because they published their webservice API, allowing others to create simple image uploaders or plugins for existing applications.

But for me, Flickr's main attraction was the ability to share images using a Creative Commons license. It means I can use other peoples images as resources in my websites, which in turn encourages me to share some of my images with the community. I haven't see an alternative that promotes Creative Commons in the same way that Flickr does.

I don't use Flickr to show off my images in a web album, I use it to share (attribution, non-commercial) my images with others who have shared their images with the community.
I'm not sure if Microsoft would understand that.

Re:flickr

[rfreedman]

It's not a dedicated uploader, but I've been using F-Spot http://f-spot.org/Features/ to upload to Picasa, and it works very well for me.

Re:flickr

[MarekT]

www.smugmug.com Great site! Easy to use, with a lot of powerful features should you need them. Also they offer a once a year backup on to DVD of your photos. They are also starting video hosting as well.

Re:flickr

[GRW]

F-Spot will export to Picasaweb, Flickr and others. Also there is an addon for Firefox called Firefox Universal Uploader that will do the same function for many sites.

Re:flickr

[EvilRyry]

Seconded. F-spot also works very nice for Gallery2 websites.

Re:flickr

[niceone]

The only sure way to avoid this is to run your own. Gallery2 does pretty much what flikr does (and is open source). You'll need a web server that can run php and some kind of database.

Re:flickr

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. But...

Holy Shit.

Imagine how cool it would be to apply that technology directly to the vast Flickr image catalog.

Re:flickr

[Smenj]

Oy vey. Can we have a "good photo sharing site" thread now so I can find the alternatives?

A friend of mine did a comparison of all the online photo sites. Most of them offer a free trial period (with free prints!), so she gave them all a shot. She submitted the same photo to each site, ordered the prints, and compared the quality. The clear winner was Shutterfly. AFAIK they're the only major photo site that's still independent.

I don't have any of my photos online, so I'm not really qualified to make a recommendation. Just passing on what I heard.

Re:flickr

[phliar]

Maybe Zoomr?

Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anyway

[surfingmarmot]

Google has 77% market share in search while Yahoo has 16% and Microsoft a little under 4%. If Microsoft and Yahoo brands alone can't get any better share than that, I don;t see how a merger is going to help. Mergers make sense for this kind of deal for only major two reasons: 1) increase efficiency or capital for business model that is failing only because of lack of it or 2) to take a strong brand move it in to a new market with new technology. Neither is the case here: both brands are well-known already and in the market. So neither is bringing anything to the other they didn't already have. There is no synergy here--just a combination of two losing armies that will have too many redundant generals and soldiers and are desperate. The market will become more efficient with this "natural" consolidation but I cannot see an increase in competitive position for either of them. In any event, odds are that the EU won't let this pass muster anyway. Maybe even the DOJ will arouse from its deep slumber on this one.

Excellent news!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm SO glad to see two evil empires merge! I knew Yahoo would decline after they wiped out my e-mail account for no reason. I have boycotted them and their affiliates ever since. And considering what Microsoft did to hotmail after they bought them, this sounds like a perfect match!

Kudos to the merger!

Going to Hotmail Hell

[Doc Ruby]

If MS is allowed to buy Yahoo to compete with Google, they will screw up Yahoo as badly as they screwed up Hotmail when they bought that attempt to compete with AOL.

Except this time Google is actually a strong, smart company, not just a stock play built on a mountain of email addresses. So Google will find it easier to compete with both Microsoft and Yahoo.

This merger is a terrible move towards monopoly. Even if this time it's not a Microsoft monopoly growing, but rather Microsoft thinning out competition to move a competitor closer to monopoly when Microsoft loses.

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[MtViewGuy]

Hotmail has been really bad in the past but the current version of Microsoft Live! Hotmail is actually pretty good. I think Microsoft--if they want good PR--should keep Yahoo! running as a separate subsidiary instead of integrating it into Microsoft itself

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[kilgortrout]

With Balmer's ego, what are the chances of that?

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[Doc Ruby]

We're talking about the transition. Hotmail's suckage was all because MS failed, and then belabored, the conversion of Hotmail to Windows. Its recent performance doesn't mean much.

Because Yahoo is a lot more than just email like Hotmail was. So once again MS will fail to convert it properly, trashing it in the process. MS will survive, as its core monopoly won'y be threatened and it can afford to burn $44.6B on Yahoo without producing profits. So eventually Yahoo will return to adequacy, too. By which time Google's continued improvement and increased market share at Yahoo's expense will make MS/Yahoo look like Hotmail today: "Is that all?"

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[Mad Dog Manley]

Is the good part about Live Hotmail the deletion all of your emails if you don't log in for 30 days?

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[Doc Ruby]

Moderation 0
    20% Flamebait
    30% Interesting
    30% Overrated

TrollMods are precisely the people Microsoft counts on to peddle terrible software and business landscapes against everyone's interests but Microsoft's.

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[MtViewGuy]

I've used Google Mail (GMail) and it's actually not really that special in comparison with other online email systems except for the generous circa 2.7 GB of online storage. If they can tweak the interface of Yahoo! Mail just a bit for faster performance it could be a really good online email program.

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[Doc Ruby]

Any tweaks Microsoft made to Yahoo mail would be to fold it into Hotmail/MSN, and/or Outlook/Exchange.

I'd expect Google to compete with that in a way that Yahoo didn't stimulate because Yahoo wasn't a threat to Google, despite its (possibly) superior email system.

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[ZedmanAuk]

Hotmail does not work with Firefox 2.0 on Linux. You get the "classic" limited version, which tells you the Full version works with Firefox 1.5 or better. On Firefox 2 on Windows or the Mac you have the option to switch to the full version, but not on Linux. Here's Microsoft's response:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/hotmail_doesnt_work_with_firefox_2

Re:Going to Hotmail Hell

[ZedmanAuk]

Note that if you switch to the Full version on a Win/Mac Firefox, you will get the full version automatically when you sign in from Linux. You just can't switch to the full version from Linux...

Microsoft's monopoly money...

[QuietLagoon]

... accumulated through the illegal leveraging of their desktop monopoly. Ever wonder where all the money from the over-priced MS Windows and MS Office franchises goes?

Microsoft is looking to put google out of business.

Re:Microsoft's monopoly money...

[Anonymous Coward]

no shit sherlock!

what give it away? maybe the fact that Ballmer vowed to kill google?

What's the date??!?

[NineNine]

I just woke up, and as per my usual habit, I check my email, then Slashdot. I was still groggy, so upon seeing this headline, I thought "Oh shit, it's April 1, already?!?". Then I checked the big news outlets. Wow.

Now we can have a new meme:

[Anonymous Coward]

MICROHOO!

or maybe the more modest

MICROSOFT!

but, wait a moment, they are buying it for MSN, so maybe it should be

MSNHOO!

Or it's just

MSN WHO?

Yahoo Messenger vs. MSN/Windows Live

[Atti K.]

Fine, I guess they'll fix the interworking between the two IM networks too, which doesn't work all the time as it should. Yahoo users will simply be merged into MSN, and Yahoo Messenger will cease to exist. :))

Irony?

[CheckeredFlag]

"Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player, who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition," Microsoft said. "Together, Microsoft and Yahoo can offer a credible alternative."

Am I the only one who sees the ironic humor of this statement?

Microsoft! Yahoo!!

[sm62704]

Most likely everybody and his dog submitted this story right as I was submitting it this morning. I'm trying to see some good news in this, and I think I found it as I was submitting. It's that damned exclamation point! My headline read "Microsoft to buy Yahoo!?

Mr. Ballmer, if you succeed in your takeove of Yahoo! please, for the sake of bloggers and slashdot submitters everywhere (yeah, I know, you can't be too happy with us GNU kids on the block), get rid of that stupid dotcomyuppified exclamation mark.

Before slashdotters comment on the irony of my coining a new word by stringing together old words, it was deliberate.

I just thought of another good thing - maybe Yahoo and Microsoft! Will both go broke. I mean, it's hell here in Springfield (You guys know my ex-wife Satan lives here, right?) and we got a foot of snow last night.

-mcgrew

As a yahoo finance reader

[antifoidulus]

Let me say, "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

Yahoo finance isn't the greatest UI in the world, but they do have some good articles and my bet is that Microsoft will just make it ugly, propietary to IE, and take any sort of depth from the articles......Pretty much like they do with everything else.

Re:As a yahoo finance reader

[sherriw]

Oh, good point! Have you ever been on the MSN finance forums? Framed crap that's what it is. The actual viewable part is like 400 pixels wide. I use FF adblock to block the useless frames! I hope if this goes through, they don't touch Yahoo Finance.

Re:As a yahoo finance reader

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a Microsoft fan, but come on! Vista sure as hell isn't ugly*, and neither is Microsoft.com or Office 2007.

'Proprietary to IE' doesn't really make sense, but I guess you mean they'll lock out or inconvenience users running a non-IE browser. This is frankly nonsense - all of the Microsoft sites I've visited work perfectly well in the various non-MS browsers/operating systems I've used to visit them. Yes, Windows Hotmail Live can be a bit quirky sometimes, and there's no Silverlight for non-MS platforms (yet), but generally speaking, Microsoft's sites are just as compatible as anyone else's.

As for taking away any depth to the articles, I don't spend much time reading MS articles, but of the few I have read (eg. on blogs.msdn.com), I wouldn't describe any as lacking in depth. At least, they're on par with articles written elsewhere.

*on the outside :)

Maybe, maybe not.

[Anonymous Coward]

"A consolidation of the Microsoft and Yahoo networks could shift a massive amount of infrastructure from open source technologies to Microsoft platforms."

Good luck to them with that. Can a web based business be run on Microsoft software? What about all the down-time?

But...why?

[Pojut]

Yahoo is no where NEAR as relevant as it was in the late 90's/early 00's...why would Microsoft want to do this?

The only two reasons I can think of are A. All of the services that Yahoo currently offers, and B. Microsoft's attempt to get more fruit from the advertising tree in their ongoing competition with Google...

What do you all think?

Re:But...why?

[maxume]

They think that they can improve management at Yahoo! to the extent that, over an extended period, they will make more money than the deal is costing them.

It's tangentially about putting Google out of business; not for the emotional satisfaction or to prove they are better, but because Google makes a lot of money, and that is something Microsoft likes to do, so they tend to always be looking for ways to do it.

Re:But...why?

[SQLGuru]

Because now, they can replace the Windows Widget engine in Vista (or Win7) with Konfabulator and actually have some decent widgets......

Layne

Re:But...why?

[Anonymous Coward]

...why would Microsoft want to do this? Yahoo is the #1 most visited site and because they are the only viable search competition to Google. Plus your A and B points. Microsoft's model worked well for them in the late 80s and throughout the 90s, but as time progressed the paradigm shifted and allowed for models like Google and Yahoo to really take a huge chunk of the consumer computing pie. So much that Microsoft tried to catch up in the early 00's. Unfortunately, instead of investing their own money back into R & D they took the route that only Ballmer knows, which is to buy up other companies/services, like Hotmail. MSN Live and all its variation hasn't amounted to much, so now again, instead of investing billions back into making their existing technology better, they simply want to go out and buy out the competition.

If MS somehow manages to bungle up Yahoo like they did with Hotmail (which seems to be the consensus here of what will happen) and everything else, then Google's competition will be eliminated without Google having to lift a finger. I know there are a lot of Google fan boys, but Google having zero competition is a bad, bad thing.

MS needs to get rid of Ballmer and invest those billions back into improving their brand, products and existing services. Not buy out Yahoo.

I contacted the FTC to complain

[div_2n]

I wrote to the FTC to complain because since Yahoo now owns Zimbra, this means that Microsoft will have the ability to kill the only serious competitor to their Exchange platform.

I know about the other solutions, but none are as feature complete IMHO as Zimbra. Two words: Blackberry integration.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[jrumney]

IM is another area of concern. While AIM is still popular in the US, and Korea and Eastern Europe have their own local IM providers doing well, the rest of the world is split almost 50/50 between Yahoo and MSN. Yeah, jabber, gtalk etc exist, but then so did OS/2.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[Anonymous Coward]

True, but Exchange is probably the best MS product and currently more or less holds a monopoly on the office mail/calendering market anyways. It's a good product, and I don't know what any of the offices I worked in would have done without it.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[afidel]

Exchange has nowhere near a monopoly, there's Notes which has about the same number of seats as Exchange and there's Groupwise which still has a fairly large installed base.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[dk90406]

Exchanges has 62% in 2006, while Lotus Notes had 26%. This number has not improved during the last year. So no, not a monopoly, but rapidly becoming so.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[misleb]

Exchange has nowhere near a monopoly, there's Notes which has about the same number of seats as Exchange and there's Groupwise which still has a fairly large installed base.

Yeah, but anyone considering a new installation of either Notes or Groupwise is certifiably insane. Notes because it is... Notes. Last I checked that was a steaming pile of crap at least from a user's perspective. Everyone hates using Notes. And Groupwise because Novell is merely a zombie masquerading as a living company. The college I work for is currently exploring the best escape routes from the sinking ships that are Groupwise and Netware. Zimbra (Network Edition, not Open Souce Edition) WAS our top choice for the Groupwise part, but now I'm going to have to wait and see.

-matthew

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[afidel]

That's based on CAL's, figures I've seen based on active seats are closer to parity. Active seats for Notes grew by 15% last year, impressive growth for any company or product. Since MS counts every core CAL as an Exchange CAL it's not too surprising. In fact most companies that run Notes probably own Exchange (I know we do) but choose to pay for Notes anyways, that says a LOT for Notes doesn't it =) Btw I'm an Exchange certified professional who's earned a good part of my living supporting Exchange at times so it's not like I have some Notes bias.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[dk90406]

Interesting. Now, are we talking about Notes as a Mail client, or Notes as a "other DB's" client? I have seen many companies that have, and use Notes for applications, but Exchange for mail. BTW: I've been using Notes 8 for a few months (also for mail) and it is finally getting very good.

But this is getting off topic ;-)

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[katapult]

Totally agree. Zimbra is a major competitor in features and on price to Exchange. To have Zimbra end up in the hands of Microsoft would be a complete disaster for a great platform and in terms of choice for the users.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Apps: http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/users/mobile.html

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[Blakey Rat]

I wrote to the FTC to complain because since Yahoo now owns Zimbra, this means that Microsoft will have the ability to kill the only serious competitor to their Exchange platform.

I know about the other solutions, but none are as feature complete IMHO as Zimbra. Two words: Blackberry integration.

Uh, Groupwise? Notes?

Ok, given, those two products suck. But IBM has had literally a decade to whip Notes into shape, and they haven't bothered to even try, so you can't really pin that one on MS. I've never seen an installation of Zimbra "in the wild", but I'd be interested in learning more about it.

In any case, before you write the FTC, do your homework. You look like an idiot if you post that the Exchange platform has no competition.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[MightyMartian]

I wouldn't call Exchange a good product. It's probably the best of its type of app, but the rest suck, and Exchange just sucks a little less.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[Anonymous Coward]

It might have taken IBM way too long, but I'll assume you haven't seen the new version of Lotus Notes 8.0? It is built off of eclipse framework and it looks completely revamped. It is also much nicer looking.

Re:I contacted the FTC to complain

[Blakey Rat]

I've been BSed by IBM reps and other people whose livelihoods depend on Lotus Notes projects since version 5.0. "The next version is great! You should try it!" And it never is. IBM's called "wolf" on this one too many times, and I've already filed Notes into my "this product will always be crap" file.

microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP?

[BrunoUsesBBEdit]

Yahoo! is one of the largest consumers of PHP. They employ both Rasmus Lerdorf and Brian France. Will these Developers/Open Source advocates stick around? Will MS keep the existing PHP? Will MS continue to develop new apps in PHP?

If I hadn't left Yahoo! in Feb of 2007, I would leave Yahoo! on principle. But my stock option strike price was $32 and change, so I wouldn't have been sacrificing anything either.

Ballmer to kill Google?

[Ubukool]

At that point, Mr. Ballmer picked up a chair and threw it across the room hitting a table in his office," Lucovosky recounted, adding that Ballmer then launched into a tirade about Google chief executive Eric Schmidt. "I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google." I wonder if they are perhaps related? *wink*

Maybe in the Bizarro Universe

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all that many companies are migrating to Zimbra in the Real World. It's a non issue.

Re:Maybe in the Bizarro Universe

[MECC]

Not all that many companies are migrating to Zimbra in the Real World.

So there's Godwin's law for how long a discussion goes before a nazi reference, is there one for how long a discussion can go before someone cracks open the phrase "real world"?

Let them but it. Think Time Warner and AOL

[dk90406]

No way Yahoo is worth that amount of cash. If Microsoft want to throw so much money after so few assets, let them. I don't se how they will recover the investment, as yahoo is is waaay behind google in indexing, advertising etc.

Re: VO (disclaimer: I used to be a MS Live intern)

[Anonymous Coward]

From what I can tell, Microsoft Live Search (newly revamped last fall) is actually a much better product than Yahoo! Search, at least in the en-us market. I can't speak for the Asian or EU markets. Both Yahoo and Live are still behind Google.

Part of the thinking of the acquisition has to be behind acquiring Yahoo's user base, which according to ComScore accounts for about 20% of internet searches compared to Microsoft's measly 10%. Sometimes, having a good product doesn't mean much if you can't get people to try it. (See Linux, Matroska, Next, Ogg Vorbis, etc)

Auto-forward scripts to export Yahoo mail?

[teamhasnoi]

A couple of years ago I recall seeing some scripts that would go through your Yahoo mailbox, and forward your old email to an account of your choosing. I hardly want to give MS $20 bucks to enable my jumping ship.

Anyone know where these went?

Re:Auto-forward scripts to export Yahoo mail?

[harmonica]

YPOPs! makes Yahoo mail accessible via POP3 (by scraping, I guess).

Re:Auto-forward scripts to export Yahoo mail?

[marcosdumay]

Fetchyahoo will fetch your emails from Yahoo to a local mailbox like fetchmail does to a mailserver.

I don't have a link, but it is available at Debian.

One can always hope...

[Trollovich]

that the incompetence of MS will ruin Yahoo too. I don't consider Yahoo to be a great site overall, it's barely OK, but this doesn't mean it can't get any worse, on the contrary.
So, secretly I'm hoping that if this deal ever makes it, then it will just make MS lose money faster...
After all, when you're company is losing money in a certain market, you buy a company that is _also_ losing money...? Sure, that makes sense.

Is Yahoo the #1 destination?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

One of the links claims yahoo is the number 1 destination in the internet. But on machines where I run the netcraft toolbar, google.com was #1 for a long time. And many variations of google, gmail, were leading yahoo. Dont know where they got the claim yahoo being #1 destination.

Re:Is Yahoo the #1 destination?

[Trollovich]

The 90's called and wanted their #1 internet destination back!

Re:Is Yahoo the #1 destination?

[afidel]

Alexa still has Yahoo as #1, but there are a ton of google sites in the top 50 so collectively they probably outrank Yahoo.com.

Re:Is Yahoo the #1 destination?

[catxk]

No. http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Google+is+the+no+1+internet+destination&word2=Yahoo+is+the+no+1+internet+destination

Says what he means

[SgtChaireBourne]

...Instead of using buzzwords like "this proposal represents a compelling value realization event for your shareholders", you could say something like "this is a good deal for your shareholders."

These MBA types may be all fat and bluster, but often let the truth slip out anyway. Don't read more into his statement than is there. Sure, if you were in charge, you'd be working on deals that would be good for your shareholders.

But that's not what he's about and that's not what this deal is about. "Value realization" is an obfuscated way of saying "extending our desktop monopoly to web searches" and "locking web users into our proprietary protocols and technologies".

Zimbra

[rongage]

Alas, poor Zimbra, we hardly knew you. We will miss you dearly...

Trouble ahead

[smcdow]

Isn't Yahoo pretty much a Unix/Linux/OSS shop?

TFA says

The software giant also said that it has an integration plan to include employees of both companies and intends to offer incentives to retain Yahoo employees.

I can see it now. The first step of the "integration plan" is to replace Yahoo's server stack with MS products.

Yahoo are the good guys

[Dan100]

Yahoo has always been the one of the "big three" I like. They've bought up the only two "web 2.0" startups I use -- Flickr and del.icio.us -- and barely changed them. Yeah, there was a hoohaa over the switch to using Yahoo IDs for Flickr, but that was pretty minor and everyone got over it soon enough. Del.icio.us is completely unchanged. I only used their email briefly but it wasn't total crap (unlike what Hotmail became), and recently got better with a good ajax interface. Yahoo's search might suck but they've always had the right attitude to business. If they're bought by MS, I fear all that will be lost.

Re:Yahoo are the good guys

[owlnation]

And what about eGroups? Utterly destroyed by Yahoo.
Not sure many original Flickr users would concur with your position.
And Yahoo mail? It's slow, bloated, has intrusive ads, and the spam filtering does NOT work at all.

And then, there's the whole China thing...

Sorry, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Yahoo is far more evil than Microsoft. In, fact Yahoo is far more evil than most companies. Their demise is very, very welcome. The fact that MS will be the buyer makes it easier. Not it's easier to direct venom directly at one source.

Now if they could only add eBay into the dotcomglomofdarkness.

Re:Yahoo are the good guys

[maxume]

There is a new iteration of delicious in development/testing:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/09/06/exclusive-screen-shots-and-feature-overview-of-delicious-20-preview/

Its at delicious.com too:

http://preview.delicious.com/

(that second link doesn't really go anywhere useful unless you have been selected for the preview, I haven't...)

So they haven't changed it *yet*.

Re:Yahoo are the good guys

[Dan100]

And what about eGroups? Utterly destroyed by Yahoo.

Can't say I'm familiar with eGroups.

Not sure many original Flickr users would concur with your position.

I was in the first 10,000 users of Flickr and still use it today. The Yahoo buy-out did nothing except give them the money they needed to invest in the service.

My games!!!

[peipas]

There is lots of overlap of services that regulators probably wouldn't even consider. What about my Yahoo Games?? It's been essentially unchanged for the last ten years and the games were written right, still providing the same level of entertainment in straightforward multiplayer Internet gaming.

How likely is this to coexist with MSN Games? There's enough overlap that there's no way it would remain unchanged if it does not stay discrete. Ugh.

Re:My games!!!

[Vexorian]

This would get horrible if they begin replacing Java with silverlight for their games. Also imagine hotmail - yahoo mail merger and a lot of terrible things that would happen to us yahoo users, it would be very sad that the authorities approve this.

How are they paying for it?

[downix]

According to their latest SEC filing, microsoft only has about $18 billion in cash and easily liquidated stocks (almost all their own) available. For them to do this, they would have to issue new stocks, which would then dilute all ownership value, then when the yahoo folk offload their stock in a hurry, cause the whole thing to plummet like a rock which would in turn turn Microsofts operating cash into monopoly money, likely giving them at beast indigestion, at worst crippling the company...

Great idea, I give it a double thumbs up!

Re:How are they paying for it?

[Phurge]

Thanks for the peanut finance update son. Does your mum know you're on /.?

Sell, sell !!

[OneSmartFellow]

That's it, you have all the proof you need. Microsoft is admitting they can't make any money from their monopoly position in the OS arena, or from any of their amazingly over-priced, yet still incredibly crappy software, so they have to turn to advertising revenue. And, of course, they are playing catch-up yet again, having missed not only 'the whole internet thing', and then losing the search engine wars.

I'm not wringing my hands with glee, but I will say, I'm not at all sad to see this development.

Not 44.6 billions, just 44600 millions...

[leonbloy]

... here (Argentina). When you use the word "Billion" for a global audience, please be aware that is means different things in different countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales

Re:Not 44.6 billions, just 44600 millions...

[Anonymous Coward]

Outrageous! How dare an American company make a mention of $44.6 Billion and use their own definition of billion for another American company.

I'll call the global money police now.

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[u38cg]

Online search and advertising are two areas it is very hard to justify regulatory interference for. The cost of entry to the market is sufficiently low (a bunch of servers, some code monkeys, and a handful of innovative ideas) that even if a monopoly situation is reached, the monopoly will have to maintain competitive pricing or they will be faced with a swarm of smart Silicon Valley startups.

Zimbra

[Lodewijk]

After the acquisition by Yahoo of the open source Zimbra suite, one of the best contenders to Exchange may come the MS' hands. This is surely bad news for competition, free software and the freedom of mankind.

Monopoly Abuse

[pembo13]

Doesn't this exactly meet the definition of monopoly abuse? Leveraging ones total dominance in one area and wealth achieved by it to enter into another?

What about Rogers ISP subscribers in Canada?

[Dorkmaster Flek]

Rogers combined with Yahoo! to launch "Rogers Yahoo! Hi-speed Internet" in 2004 up here in Canada. My @rogers.com email address is now checked through Yahoo's web mail interface. If MS buys Yahoo, what happens to this relationship?

Related to 700 MHZ Spectrum Auction?

[cheesethegreat]

Google manages to achieve the open standard on the new network which it has been gunning for, allowing it to put into action plans and hardware/software sales which it has no doubt been designing and planning for months. The next day, Microsoft (a major software competitor for mobile devices) bids on Yahoo (a major internet portal competitor versus Google).

Everyone who thinks this is a coincidence, please raise your hand.

*looks around*

Huh...nobody did.

I for one...

[Zarf]

I for one... welcome our new yodeling software overlords.

Re:I for one...

[PDHoss]

Can you yodel and throw chairs at the same time? I might pay to see that.

That's why it's called R & D

[Anonymous Coward]

Rob & Duplicate!

Hmmm.....

[8127972]

In this story:

http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/299523

Ballmer makes this comment:

" Signalling Microsoft doesn't intend to take no for an answer, Ballmer wrote that the company "reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo's shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.""

My question is how many chairs does that involve?

Re:Hmmm.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ballmer makes this comment:

" Signalling Microsoft doesn't intend to take no for an answer, Ballmer wrote that the company "reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo's shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.""

I am surprised Ballmer can say all that. I'd have guessed that he would say "Shareholders, shareholders, shareholders, shareholders."

Re:Hmmm.....

[pklinken]

I guess he wants to be a chairman

The answer is simple:

[smittyoneeach]

The regulators say: "Yeah, you can do that, but you have to promise that the next version of Windows runs on a FreeBSD chassis, with a built-in 'iron lung' to virtualize all the legacy crap that lends so much 'personality' to your releases. IOW, follow Apple, like you always have."

DoCoMo meet MiYaCo

[Zarf]

So just like NTT DoCoMo which takes the first two letters of each word for the abbreviation... Microsoft plus Yahoo Corporation should be MiYaCo ... or maybe Yahoo Microsoft Corporation should be YaMiCo!

simple calculation

[owlnation]

evil + evil = evil raised to the power of evil

Re:simple calculation

[old_bloke]

surely evil ^ evil

Re:simple calculation

[greyhoundpoe]

evil + evil = evil raised to the power of evil So evil = 2?

...sort of anticlimactic...

Re:simple calculation

[bitingduck]

surely evil ^ evil And it would be named an "anti-googol"?

Re:simple calculation

[barry_the_bogan]

Only if evil = 2

So how do I download all my email?

[Keith_Beef]

I want to get ten years' worth of email off Yahoo and to my local hard drive so I can ditch the service if the MS buyout goes through...

I tried searching teh Intarweb, but Yahoo's search engine just found me pages about "Yahoo Mail hot tips".

B.

Re:So how do I download all my email?

[vwjeff]

Just set up an email client to connect to your Yahoo account. Make sure it is set to download to the local machine and keep the mail on the server.

Re:So how do I download all my email?

[value_added]

I want to get ten years' worth of email off Yahoo and to my local hard drive so I can ditch the service if the MS buyout goes through

Using fetchmail and procmail? A simple 3-line procmail recipe could forward the mail to user@gmail.com, for example. Equally short and simple recipes could sort your mail into different folders.

If you're using Windows, you can download the email using your favourite email client using POP3 (forwarding all the mesesages to Gmail, if desired) would also work fine. Better yet, install Cygwin and use the first approach.

As a final note, it's worth pointing out that the possibility of such a changeover, irrespective of whether it happens, is a strong argument in favour of maintaining your email storage. A bit more work, perhaps, but more satisfying in the end.

Re:So how do I download all my email?

[ablair]

I have over a decade of email on YahooMail too. Many people will probably be thinking of pulling their email, photos, documents, and other files off Yahoo! services while they still can, if this takeover goes through in the second half 2008. Here's how to download your Yahoo! Mail (assuming you are *not* using their POP mail service):

1. Log into Yahoo! Mail, then go to Options > Archive Messages

2. Choose the mail folder you wish to archive; Yahoo will calculate size and time required to download

3. Hit Download. It will download as a .zip archive.

Very easy; I assume this will change and only MS will only offer to download to Outlook or some other such crap if Microsoft takes Yahoo! over :-( As of right now, Yahoo! POP mail users can easily download email (with option to remove from server) to the following clients:

• Microsoft Outlook 2002 (XP) and 2003
• Microsoft Outlook 98 and 2000
• Microsoft Outlook Express
• Microsoft Outlook Express for Macintosh
• IncrediMail 618 and higher
• Eudora 5.1 and higher
• Netscape Mail 7.0
• Netscape Mail 6.2
• Netscape Messenger 4.5
• Macintosh Mail client (OS X 10.5)

Expect supported clients to change if the takeover goes through.

You may likewise still download or remove your items from Flickr, Y!Briefcase, Y!Video, Y!Personals, Y!360, Geocities, and a number of other properties farily easily. Y!HelpCentral has details on each.

Customers of Y!WebHosting and Y!Domains can transfer their web hosting and domain registrar easily.

Users of Y!Shopping, MyYahoo!, Y!Autos, Y!RealEstate, Y!Travel, Y!Profiles, Y!Sports, Y!Finance, Y!Music, Y!Movies, Y!News, Y!Games, and Y!PublisherNetwork will likely have to abandon personalized pages/portals/profiles rather than porting it to a different service. It is unclear how users of Y!BusinessEmail, HotJobs, Y!MerchantSolutions, Y!Store (to name a few) can be expected to transition to other serive providers.

Re:So how do I download all my email?

[OneFix]

Try this extension with Thunderbird.

Love vs. Hate

[ablair]

For a heavy internet user like me, this news comes as a crisis of conscience. Having been a loyal Yahoo! Mail user for over a decade (the world's largest webmail service), and having so much of my online presence on Yahoo's comprehensive services - Contacts, Flickr, online document storage, Messenger, Y!Finance, Groups, (the list is endless) - I am obvioulsy deeply loyal to an independent Yahoo! ...But one reason that I've allowed Yahoo! to gradually become such an important part of my life is that it's NOT Microsoft. The same sentiments are felt by millions: will loyalty to a very useful Yahoo! be enough to overcome our distaste for Microsoft and the inevitable changes a takeover will entail? This is not insignificant nor a "religious platform issue" - note how Hotmail has fallen from #1 spot in email users after the MS takeover, for example. Yahoo! webmail alone reportedly accounts for 255 million of the world's 543 million webmail accounts, and webmail is only one of a vast range of internet & open source items Yahoo! is involved in.

Yahoo News itself is reporting this as a hostile takeover, but seemingly with Microsoft willing to pay such a large premium, one that will be hard to resist. It's interesting that Microsoft is willing to use up almost all of it's cash reserves for this takeover, largely sacrificing it's flexibility to make strategic investments in the future. But from the perspective of Yahoo! users the more important question is whether a MS takeover will turn Yahoo! into tepid porridge? And will the long, slow decline of Microsoft now drag Yahoo! down too?

Re:Love vs. Hate

[Foolicious]

The same sentiments are felt by millions Are you certain? I mean, just because you feel one way doesn't mean that everyone does. Perhaps millions of people use Yahoo stuff because it's good or they're locked into it (pain to switch mails) or they don't know any better. But are millions of people using Yahoo stuff just to "rebel", if you will, against Microsoft? I don't know, but I don't think so.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[SoulRider]

Just remember, hotmail was the leading web based email service until MS got a hold of them.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[geekoid]

Well, it's won't be yahoo! as you know it for more then a couple of years, so start leaving now.
Unless MS breaks there pattern and stays hands off.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[hermit_tries_virtual]

"I am obvioulsy deeply loyal to an independent Yahoo! - ablair

Do not worry my friend, I have it on good word that Yahoo will offer you a FULL refund on ALL of your basic services!!!

Re:Love vs. Hate

[MMC Monster]

It's interesting that Microsoft is willing to use up almost all of it's cash reserves for this takeover, largely sacrificing it's flexibility to make strategic investments in the future.
Maybe they'll buy the shares using software licenses?

Re:Love vs. Hate

[MagicBox]

I could not help but notice this:

But one reason that I've allowed Yahoo! to gradually become such an important part of my life is that it's NOT Microsoft

It is incredible what the world would look like, if we applied this logic to everything else in our life. The depression drugs would be selling at an all time high, and psychologists would surely be in short supply. How much worry, how much concern, how much of your life does it take you to think about this to a point where you make it part of your life to avoid a specific company, Microsoft in this case. How much useless HATE breeds inside of you? Cosumes you? Live your life as it comes man....in the end when it's all said and done, you'll find out that it was all bull shit. Don't be a fucking follower. Listen to your brain for once and do what you want to.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[ablair]

The only online property that has more users than Yahoo! is Google, and that is because of Google's excellent search engine. The numbers are so large (hundreds of millions) that if even only a small percentage of Yahoo! users were concerned with Microsoft changing Yahoo - such as integrating Passport or dumping open source & open standards for proprietary standrds - that it would account to millions of users.

More importantly, look at Yahoo! and Microsoft's track records regarding online users - Yahoo! has continually grown their online user base since inception and continues to do so, while most of the online properties MS has taken over (eg. Hotmail) usually have significantly less success after their takeover. It's not a conscious effort to "rebel" against Microsoft by any means, it's that MS has a history of managing their new properties poorly, especially considering their huge advantage of leveraging their desktop monopoly to herd new users to these properties. They have less success not because people "rebel" as a religious platform issue, but because better options are soon available elsewhere (innovations slow or stop after an MS takeover, the inevitable changes become cumbersome, etc etc) and internet users by and large realise this. This is where the real concern is for the majority of Yahoo! users.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[crush]

For me the immediate worry is that Yahoo's developers will be pulled off neat projects like YUI. Yes, it's BSD licensed so it'd be possible for other people to continue it, but Yahoo! have hired some awesome people and allowed them to do good work in this area. I'd hate it if Microsoft got to kill off a good department because it competed with Silverlight or whatever .NET crap they way to push tomorrow.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[kripkenstein]

Yahoo News itself is reporting this as a hostile takeover It is very close to being a hostile takeover at this point. In Microsoft's letter to Yahoo!, Ballmer says

In light of the significance of this proposal to your shareholders and ours, as well as the potential for selective disclosures, our intention is to publicly release the text of this letter tomorrow morning.
[...]
Depending on the nature of your response, Microsoft reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo!'s shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal. In other words, Microsoft is offering the Yahoo! board a deal, while saying, "if you don't like it, we'll go straight to the shareholders, we don't need your approval." That's a pretty plain threat of a hostile takeover. Very classy. Well, respect and manners were never Microsoft's strong suit, not as a company and certainly not of Ballmer either.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[misleb]

The depression drugs would be selling at an all time high

Sadly, they already are. Just thinking about that fact makes me want to pop a Prozac.

-matthew

Re:Love vs. Hate

[thrillseeker]

Listen to your brain for once and do what you want to.

Sounds like he is - you seem to be one to want him to do something else.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[ablair]

It is incredible what the world would look like, if we applied this logic to everything else in our life. [...] How much worry, how much concern, how much of your life does it take you to think about this to a point where you make it part of your life to avoid a specific company, Microsoft in this case.

Not much. I just avoid it where I can, that's all. Just like I don't like vanilla, so I tend to avoid vanilla foods & French vanilla coffee, etc. Neither has really affected me that much, and I definitely do what I want to do. In fact I avoid them both because that's exactly what I want to do.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[CrazyTalk]

Sad about yahoo leaving, and looking for a MS alternative? Let me introduce you to this new-fangled up and comer:

Re:Love vs. Hate

[hercubus]

I am obvioulsy deeply loyal to an independent Yahoo!

i started moving away from Yahoo when they started taking payments for guaranteed delivery of spam, err, "customer outreach emails." i was a little disheartened just last night by Yahoo! spam in my box - at the time i could hear a little voice saying "time to move on monkey-boy" and that voice is louder today (and more snarky)

as you pointed out, it is an exercize of conscience. when dealing with any business, at what point does one complain to the management? ask for a refund? vote with one's feet? if the deal goes through i'll close down my Yahoo accounts ASAP. i've experimented with offerings from Google, another online service that helps me "Get Things Done" (like 'em enough to pay 'em) and then again heaven knows how many alternatives we all have both online and elsewhere

i don't want to do business with Microsoft. i would feel the same if WalMart bought Yahoo. i believe i'm protecting my karma (Cosmic, not ./) somewhat by distancing myself. millions of people will continue with MSYahoo and that's cool too - it's not a lot of bad karma, just a smudge. maybe a bit of a stain. not quite a puddle of black evil :^)

good luck with your crisis

Re:Love vs. Hate

[Anonymous Coward]

What would you recommend to do as a loyal Yahoo! user after knowing MS will eventually own it?

For us people who prefer not to use MS stuff, do you suggest a non-MS site where to move after it is said MS already owns Yahoo! ?

There still must be a way out...

Re:Love vs. Hate

[Blakey Rat]

But one reason that I've allowed Yahoo! to gradually become such an important part of my life is that it's NOT Microsoft. The same sentiments are felt by millions

Do you honestly believe you speak for "millions?" I think that's a form of mental illness... or perhaps just really sloppy writing.

Look, I'll give you "hundreds" and maybe "thousands", but "millions" is ridiculous. And you should also take into effect the hundreds of thousands of people who will cheer on this acquisition for whatever reason.

And will the long, slow decline of Microsoft now drag Yahoo! down too?

Releasing a OS product that not everybody in the universe loves means Microsoft is in a "long, slow decline?" You read too much Slashdot, buddy. Microsoft's doing as good, or better, then they ever had.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[porcupine8]

It's really not that hard. For example, I don't shop at Wal-Mart. This takes nearly no effort on my part, literally, because not going to a store takes no effort. I don't even know/worry about what kind of low prices I'm missing, because I don't even go there to find out. I just shop elsewhere and pretend the Wal-Mart near me doesn't exist.

Listen to your brain for once and do what you want to.

But not if it involves boycotting a company whose practices you don't agree with!

Re:Love vs. Hate

[The Angry Mick]

Live your life as it comes man....in the end when it's all said and done, you'll find out that it was all bull shit. Don't be a fucking follower. Listen to your brain for once and do what you want to.

Sound to me like that is exactly what he is trying to do. One of the wonders of a free market is that a consumer can choose whether or not he prefers one company's products over the other. This fellow prefers Yahoo! over Microsoft. Don't confuse his preference for one as "hate" for the other.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[HazMathew]

Long slow decline of MSFT? What the hell are you talking about? Yahoo has been hurting a LOT more than MSFT in the last few years. Both MSFT and Yahoo are strong companies. You're romantic love for Yahoo while cute has completely biased this post.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[porcupine8]

I'll be very disappointed, too. It'll be annoying enough to move my 9-year email address over to gmail. But I also use sites like yp.yahoo.com, tv.yahoo.com, movies.yahoo.com, weather.yahoo.com - I know there are alternatives to all of these, but that's not nearly as convenient as having them all together. Does google offer anything like those? I've found that whenever I have any kind of specific non-web-content search like that, Yahoo has a page for it. I can practically just type in "whatineed.yahoo.com" and it'll work. What's the best alternative?

Re:Love vs. Hate

[cmacb]

But from the perspective of Yahoo! users the more important question is whether a MS takeover will turn Yahoo! into tepid porridge? And will the long, slow decline of Microsoft now drag Yahoo! down too?

I certainly hope (and think) so!

I was a loyal and early user of both Yahoo and Microsoft products. There is nothing like a loyal user scorned.

Microsoft's version to version bloat, buggyness, and most of all, attempts to lock one product inextricably to another, plus their habit of acquiring other companies who's products I used, only to simply discontinue them or render them unrecognizable -- all of this, finally, drove me away in disgust. I gave up my career in order to avoid having to deal with MS crap.

What puzzles me is how you (and others) cannot see that Yahoo is made in the same mold as Microsoft already.

I've been (unfortunately) involved in some Yahoo Groups for a long while and countless times have had to explain the tortured process for an outsider to sign up for Yahoo Groups, involving them not only giving up (or faking) a lot of personal information, but also agreeing to take a Yahoo e-mail address as part of the process. How many of the claimed bazzillion Yahoo e-mail addresses are (as I suspect) mostly unused? I'd guess a lot. I had one guy tell me he never could remember his Yahoo sign-on, so every time he wanted to check the messages in the group he would just sign up for Yahoo all over again. They stuff is so crappy it makes me sick to even think about it.

Do you use Flickr without paying the premium fee? I can't imagine why anyone would. They keep everything you upload, but hide all but the last 200 picture from you. This is the most retarded scheme I've ever heard of. They must have the largest collection of unaccessible information on Earth! To help them out I just continue to upload files. I keep the pictures I actually want to view on Google. Flickr has had a lot of service outages, and for me is often painfully slow. Is it any wonder?

How can you stand all the stupid animated graphics that Yahoo throws at you? Half my screen real-estate and 90 percent of my bandwidth is used up with this silly junk when I go to a Yahoo page.

I know only one or two people who use Yahoo as their primary e-mail account, and maybe not coincidentally these are the people who don't seem to have their e-mail act totally together, don't respond to important messages, can't keep their CCs and BCCs straight, and since they are universally Windows users, are often having serious computer problems anyway ("Sorry, I haven't been able to check my e-mail in three weeks, my computer keeps locking up, got any ideas?").

These two companies are a match made in heaven. I wish them the greatest of happiness, and I hope they alienate a few billion more users along the way so that the rest of us can stop playing the role of free tech support for them.

Re:Love vs. Hate

[Cesar R.]

Well a couple of friends and I will be rebel against Y! if M$ "buy" it... Now we are not millions yet but i don't think the millions will come to slashdot to count like us =P

Re: Heaven

[TaoPhoenix]

Just ask Meatloaf:

Good mail goes to Heaven ; Spam mail goes everywhere.

Fate of Flickr?

[MisterSquid]

If this deal goes through, expect to hear a gigantic sucking sound coming from the direction of Flickr.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[Chabil Ha']

That was my first thought. They can have the portal, the ad business, but PLEASE! excise Flickr from the deal...I'm kinda sorta glad that I haven't based my photo collection with them, but their service has been really nice for sharing photos with other people. Guess it's time to go some other place to host my photos...

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[MrNemesis]

Are you kidding? A Silverlight-only, ActiveX-only-upload Flickr would absolutely *rock*! I can't think of a better way to gain marketshare.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[LucidLion]

Have you tried picasa?

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[JavaLord]

Are you kidding? A Silverlight-only, ActiveX-only-upload Flickr would absolutely *rock*! I can't think of a better way to gain marketshare.

The real key would be to make it IE 7 only. That way people would only experience Flickr with a top notch browser, thus enhancing the Flickr brand!

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[Chabil Ha']

One of the glaring features missing from Picasa is the ability to tag. I have GBs of photos and to even use Picasa for my home (non-web) use, the inability to tag is pathetic, at best. I have taken a look at Adobe Photo Album 3.2. The UI seems easy enough for the wife to use, my only concern being that it only works on Windows and should I decide to leap to the Mac platform when XP isn't viable for my wife's use, I can't take that database with me because it is a Windows only application.

Anyone know of any user friendly, non-web, multi-platform tagging software?

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[trosenbl]

Hello.

I work at Microsoft. I am interested in your business ideas. Your ideas clearly demonstrate an in-depth understanding of our marketing and branding focus.

Please swing by Microsoft HQ anytime next week and we will chat.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[MrNemesis]

This is getting ridiculous - you haven't even made it Zune-only or Xbox360 only, and I didn't even see you de-anti-incentivise something once. I think the person who says he's from MS offering you a job might be an impersonator - you clearly have too much interest in delivering a usable product.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[naxx]

Doh! I just paid for a 2-yrs renewel on Flickr.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[marcosdumay]

"The real key would be to make it IE 7 only."

They can also use all those new Vista features that the press insist on not talking about. That way, the users will get all the experience of the modern browser on the only modern operational system.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[hollywoodb]

http://picasaweb.google.com/

Integrated with the Picasa software, or you can use it like I do, which is entirely via its web interface to upload & organize pics. 1GB of storage.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Are you kidding? A Silverlight-only, ActiveX-only-upload Flickr would absolutely *rock*! I can't think of a better way to gain marketshare.

Done.

Yep, it's Microsoft alright. Requires an ActiveX plugin, and requires Javashit to be enabled just to click the "Try It" link.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[maxume]

Not multi-platform, it stomps on makernotes, and even requires .net3, but a decent gui:

http://itagsoftware.com/download.php

The tags end up in the iptc and XMP headers, not a database. It isn't a big deal to get them out with something like Exiftool:

http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/

and I think iPhoto even understands them.

(Exiftool has great support for makernotes, so something like iTag->IPTC-in-damaged-photo->Exiftool->Undamaged-photo should be possible)

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[recharged95]

Flickr will be a wedge--I know a lot of folks hate the Y! AJAX framework, but even Google uses their specs (RSS Schema) for search results last I recalled.

I'd rather have google buy Y!, but that would be a true monopoly.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[superflippy]

Right now, I am so pissed off that I bought a 2 year pro account just two days ago. There's $47 down the tubes!

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, Microsoft's internal bureaucracy isn't efficient enough to destroy Flickr in two years.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[DiLLeMaN]

Adobe Lightroom. It's not free, it's not OS, and it might be more than you're asking for, but nothing comes close to it. Think of iPhoto, add some tools for properly editing and ordering your snaps: fantastic colour correction, RAW support that equals Photoshop's, a crop/rotate tool that puts everything else out there to shame, tagging that works, full support of EXIF and IPTC, the ability to order by date, shoot, folder or whatever, non-destructive editing (modifications are saved as a list of changes to the original, into an XML file), exports to web (flash or HTML, both customizable) and so on and so forth. It's available for Macs and Windows.

Again, it might be overkill, but OTOH, most options are easy enough to use for non-professionals, so you mind end up actually using them -- improving your pictures.

I can't recommend it enough.

Re:Fate of Flickr?

[MrNemesis]

Heck, Opera didn't even let me get as far as clicking on the javascript link. Shame, Photosynth looked cool in the demo. Guess that's another MS-only tech I'll fail to give a shit about.

As an aside, MS:if you can't get a grip on Google, at least get a grip on standards. It's a start, at least. Opera, you rule. Firefox, you almost rule. Microsoft? EPOCH FAIL

Burn Baby Burn

[clckwrk]

I hope this goes through as it will just bleed M$ of it's cash reserves. This happens and we rid ourselves of two old dinosaur companies. With analysts saying that Y! is worth more broken up, and M$ taking a beating in it's various markets, what could be the possible outcome?

1. Buy Y!
2. ???
3. Profit.

Probably not.

clckwrk
https://blog.n-rd.com/

What's the alternative

[kulnor]

Well, I've been using my.yahoo.com as my home news portal for years but if this merger happens I will likely go somewhere else. problem is what are the alternatives? MSN is a big no no, AOL is out of the question and google has nothing that nearly competes with it. Any suggestion? Same goes for streaming music: who competes with Yahoo! Music Unlimited?

Irony kills

[Anonymous Coward]

"Today, the market is increasingly dominated by one player, who is consolidating its dominance through acquisition," Microsoft said.

Ironic, isn't it?

Should've been doing that already

[r_jensen11]

I have 10 years of email in yahoo. If MS takes over, what then? Will they force everyone into hotmail accounts? I think I'm going to be spending a few hours every night downloading and saving my email off line. With all the comments regarding the Charter fiasco, I thought the vast majority of /. said that they already do regularly back up their email. At least, that's what I understood from all the chastising going on.

I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Microsoft... isnt google, isnt yahoo, isnt apple...

What is Microsoft? When will they stop trying to be everyone else, and start fixing their own identity? Or do they think they can just buy cool?

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[mgblst]

Microsoft make a large amount of money, from their businesses, especially Windows and Office. Now they can either invest that money in the bank for small returns, or portfolios for larger returns, or in other businesses for possible gigantic returns. The last is the logical option, for any business to do. If you don't do that, you are basically giving up, and saying we can't figure out a way to make any more money.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ceoyoyo]

Yes. They tried to be cool on their own and it didn't work.

Microsoft is a business, particularly now. Google/Yahoo/Apple are businesses yes, but they're also personal crusades by their founders. Remember what happened to Apple when it's founder left? And how quickly it turned around when Steve came back?

It doesn't seem that pure businesses can be cool.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

But what is it about Microsoft, that prevents them from being successful? They've tried to be Yahoo, they've tried to be google, and they've tried to be Apple.

Why must they buy Yahoo? Wont they just ruin it? :)

Microsoft has copied all of these companies and has failed horribly at their own attempts. What prevents Microsoft from being successful as Google? I know... Google ;)

But seriously... Why cant microsoft out cool the competition ever? :)

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ceoyoyo]

Microsoft is an outdated dinosaur. They were incredibly successful when they were young and sharp, and they're STILL very successful catering to businesses. They fail miserably when they try and compete with young companies driven by the passion of their founders, and they ruin those companies when they buy them up.

Catering to businesses works just great if you're a big business. If you want to become popular with the people though, particularly the younger types who make or break anything that happens on the web, you've got to have more than just good management.

Take a look at any attempt by Microsoft for an example. How about the Zune? It's arguably technically superior to the iPods it competed against, and backed by an 800 pound gorilla, but it didn't do well. Why not? Because it's a piece of consumer technology. It is NOT something the hip CEO always wanted for himself.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Zune Software is garbage. Media player is garbage too. iTunes is garbage, but it functions effortlessly and manages your music automatically. It also has a remember position option for mp3s / AACs that may be radio shows or books etc. Its nice to resume playback on long files like those.

Microsoft is gimped its Zune with bad software.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ceoyoyo]

Actually I quite like iTunes on the Mac. I hear it's not so good on Windows though. I am a little confused about how you say it's garbage and then use words like effortlessly to describe it, in the same sentence.

You make my point. MS constantly screws up products in (to them) little ways that turn out to be deal breakers to their customers. Apple doesn't (as much), because Steve Jobs actually USES the products, because they're things he has an interest in. You can bet Ballmer didn't go ride the subway to test out the squirting idea, and so he didn't realize that it's pretty much useless because of the DRM. That's because Ballmer doesn't have the slightest interest in music players, except for how much money they can potentially make.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

iTunes is garbage performance wise... Feature wise, its excellent. Thats it is what i meant. That is why the Zune failed. Its software was horrible, and well Microsoft just isnt cool :)

I need a quadcore qx6700 just to get itunes to run smoothly on windows. Apple purposely writes shitty software for windows, just to try and make windows look bad. I find it horribly offensive, and frankly illegal.

Yet i do like my iphone and ipod just fine.

I want to see Steve Jobs arrested for his purposeful neglect to not optimize iTunes for Windows.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ceoyoyo]

Nah, arrest Steve Ballmer for not implementing a Cocoa API in Windows instead.

Yes, both suggestions are ridiculous.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ColdWetDog]

I need a quadcore qx6700 just to get itunes to run smoothly on windows. Apple purposely writes shitty software for windows, just to try and make windows look bad. I find it horribly offensive, and frankly illegal.

Just what in the hell are you trying to use Itunes for? An operating system? A text editor?

I've run it on various Windows boxes from my dual proc 3 Ghz Xeon to an old P4 laptop - It starts up Ok, the UI responds reasonably fast, making playlists is easy and quick.

It's not as smooth as on OS X, but it's not awful. Now, if your confusing Itunes for Quicktime, then we can talk.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

It scrolls like shit in Vista 32 and Vista 64. On my QX6700 its useable. On my AMD 3500, it is unusable.

It was always slow in XP as well, but it did scroll a bit smoother... but iTunes is notorious for being a slow pig.

Re:I guess no one uses Live.com :)

[ColdWetDog]

That's odd. On all of my XP boxes, it scrolls OK (maybe you just scroll realfast)?

Assimilated?

[nurb432]

More like 'owned'. Sounds like they are ignoring the fact they were declared a monopoly.

Well, yahoo, it was fun while it lasted.

Re:Assimilated?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh.. another retard with the monopoly shit. Monopolies are not illegal. Go buy some brains...

Re:Assimilated?

[nurb432]

Ummmm, where in my post did i say they are illegal? I don't see it because i didn't say it.

One you are legally declared a monopoly the rules of business change. Acts such as buying out Yahoo! is an example of what they should NOT be allowed to do, as a monopoly.

Next time try actually reading what is said before commenting, and don't make up words that really arent there, out of your apparently limited vocabulary. Or are you lacking in these 'brains' you suggest others go out and purchase?

I guess I need a replacement for YahooGroups

[justthinkit]

Anyone have an alternative?

Re:I guess I need a replacement for YahooGroups

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone have an alternative?

Turn off the computer and go outside for a while?

Re:I guess I need a replacement for YahooGroups

[sherriw]

Yes,

-If you use YahooGroups mainly for chatting with members, posting news and info, set yourself up a free message board hosted for free. A good example is InvisionFree. They have calendar features and you can combine this with some of Google's online document services for sharing info.

-Set up a blog at Blogger.

-Register your own domain name and host your own site. Domains are under $10/yr and solid unix hosting with mysql/php/perl, etc runs under $6/mo. Slap some FOSS up there and you got your own website. Great place to put an online portfolio and resume too...

- There's other options.. but I'm drawing a temporary blank... but if anyone tells you Facebook... run away.

Re:I guess I need a replacement for YahooGroups

[justthinkit]

Thank you for the InvisionFree suggestion. I have 3 mailing lists, sending about 35,000 emails per week. I have used YahooGroups for this for 9 years now and I have assumed their (relative) credibility helped me get my emails past the ubiquitously stupid spam filters.

By the way, and ironically, msn.com blocks invites from YahooGroups. What will they do if they own it?

Goodbye YUI, Hello Silverlight

[jfenwick]

The YUI (Yahoo! User Interface) library, a javascript library with a ton of impressive web eyecandy, has convinced a lot of people around me to not give up on standards compliant websites and start using binary plugins like Flash and Silverlight. If Microsoft buys Yahoo! I suspect this awesome block of free code will be left to languish rather than evolve, as Microsoft will impose a mandatory Silverlight requirement on as much of Yahoo! as they possibly can.

Re:Goodbye YUI, Hello Silverlight

[MrMunkey]

I'm with you. I think that there's a lot to be said about JavaScript, and this could be a big blow to the community. YUI is right up there with Prototype, etc.

very bad for me if it happens

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope the regulators don't allow this. The only affordable DSL options in my area are MSN and Yahoo. :-(

Its all about the IM

[thorkyl]

Think about what people use to IM
Yahoo
MSN Messenger
AOL

This would leave AOL and MSN
1 down 1 to go

Re:Its all about the IM

[Constantine XVI]

You forgot about Google Talk/the Jabber networks (which AOL is considering converting AIM to). There is hope yet.

*cries*

[Anonymous Coward]

So long Flickr. So long del.icio.us. So long Yahoo! mail. So long Zimbra. So long YUI. (That last is really going to hurt.)

So long to all the really smart people who worked on all those great products. At least you know you won't have much trouble finding an alternative home as you flee Microsoft.

:(

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[Herschel Cohen]

Google has always been a spammer heaven for me too. I could similar words, however, I would mean I receive so little spam due to Google's actions it's a haven from spam. Heaven? Does it exist?

Is that what you meant to imply? Or do you mean bogus gmail address sending spam?

Microsoft + Credible ?

[X3J11]

FTA :

"Together, Microsoft and Yahoo can offer a credible alternative."

Is it just me or does the word "credible" lose all meaning when used in a sentence with Microsoft.?

This will be illegal

[kevgaxxana]

that leaves just google as the dominant search engine, creating a monoploy in the market. microsoft, of all people, should now this by now

Re:This will be illegal

[geoffspear]

Umm, exactly what law prevents companies from merging if it would give a third, unrelated company a monopoly? If the deal does create a Google monopoly, it could effectively make some actions by Google illegal, but the deal itself wouldn't be illegal on those grounds.

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[MtViewGuy]

I think because Google owns 70+ percent share of the Internet search engine market, Microsoft adding Yahoo! will pass even EU muster, though I think Microsoft may spin off a small number of Yahoo! subsidiaries to satisfy EU regulators.

Perhaps

[hrieke]

the real reason to buy Yahoo is to kill it.
I can see this in a two prong attack to get to Google.
First, by buying Yahoo, they get access to all of Yahoo's users which will be migrated over to MSN. This will give MS the strength to talk to Madison Ave and have the technology that is good enough.

Second, MS will then offer cut rate advertisement (or perhaps a new click model which is deeply discounted), which will force Google to react or lose market share.
Remember that Google is primarily a advertisement firm with some killer search technology, not a technology firm that also does ads- so to use a Ballmer quote from the past, to kill a company, you "cut out the air supply". Google's air is adverts.

Finally, this will cut into Yahoo's open source projects; just a little benefit for MS, but still, it's there.

To a monopolist, $40b is cheep money for killing 2 birds with one stone.

Now, will it happen?
That's another question.

Re:Perhaps

[RoadWarriorX]

Second, MS will then offer cut rate advertisement (or perhaps a new click model which is deeply discounted), which will force Google to react or lose market share. Remember that Google is primarily a advertisement firm with some killer search technology, not a technology firm that also does ads- so to use a Ballmer quote from the past, to kill a company, you "cut out the air supply". Google's air is adverts.

Bzzz. Wrong. Flawed logic. Technology brings cool applications. Cool applications bring users. Users drive advertising. Not one person I know uses Google for their see their latest "cool ads", then realize that there is some silly search engine there. Google's "air" is search technology by it's own admission. It is the consumer base using a product or service, and through clever and non-interfering advertising gives profitability. Without customers using a product, click model nets zero revenue.

If Yahoo is integrated into Microsoft as tightly as I think it would be, then I agree with you that Yahoo is dead. MSN is already be a better portal than Yahoo anyway, IMO. I don't use either on a regular basis, so take that what it is worth. However, I think that Microsoft will have sunk 44 billion into something that gives them little competitive advantage. There no technology advantage, no advantage for consumers, and little net financial advantage even with a boost in advertising.

Re:Perhaps

[everphilski]

Bzzz. Wrong. Flawed logic. Technology brings cool applications. Cool applications bring users. Users drive advertising. Not one person I know uses Google for their see their latest "cool ads", then realize that there is some silly search engine there.

Here's a hit of the cluestick for you: Google is responsible to shareholders. Internet search does not generate revenue. Ads do. So they lace their search with ads, they sell ads to anyone that will buy them ... hell, they purchase Doubleclick to get more ads.

DING DING DING DING DING!!!!

Re:Perhaps

[AnotherDaveB]

Second, MS will then offer cut rate advertisement (or perhaps a new click model which is deeply discounted), which will force Google to react or lose market share. Remember that Google is primarily a advertisement firm with some killer search technology, not a technology firm that also does ads- so to use a Ballmer quote from the past, to kill a company, you "cut out the air supply". Google's air is adverts.

Advertising with Google Adwords is already cheap.

The main competitive advantage Adwords has over competitors is that its adverts reach more people, and so get more results.

Microsoft/Yahoo would need to attract advertisers, to attract publishers (Google Adsense), to attract advertisers. Tricky.

Re:Perhaps

[RoadWarriorX]

You can take you clue stick back, because you obviously did not understand by post. Let me send you a big "duh" right back at you. No one denies that ads are needed to generate revenue. Anyone who runs a website already knows this.

The point is that no one visits a site for the advertising. They visit a site for some sort value. Ads devalue a site. People hate them. No doubt in my mind that there are a necessary thing if your service is free. So, imagine if Google slacked off by not improving their search quality, for the sake of increasing the bottom line. They may be able to get away with it once, but after a while people will notice. The hypothetical buzz on the net about "how Google search sucks" will be circulating, and people will start looking for a better site. So, a dwindling number of eyeballs see the precious ads, profit drops, then you become... Yahoo. Ripe for acquisition.

Make customers happy, period. Neither Yahoo nor Microsoft does this well.

Re:Perhaps

[hrieke]

Ah, but MY point being that if MS offers companies advertising for less money, or offers web sites more money for carrying their ads- or some combination of the two, then Google has a problem.

Does it matter to the website owners if Google gives better ads or if MS pays more for worse ads? Remember that Google's ads run in a lot more places than just on Google's servers. And while search is nice (hell, the company that I work for just bought two Enterprise Search Engines), it doesn't drive me to any of the web sites that I have bookmarked.

Re:Perhaps

[RoadWarriorX]

Ah, but MY point being that if MS offers companies advertising for less money, or offers web sites more money for carrying their ads- or some combination of the two, then Google has a problem.

Well, I suppose this is true, if you were strictly looking at Adsense. Undercutting is surely a valid business tactic in that context. But that eats into the profit, if there is any when the smoke clears. I personally do not see much return on investment for a Microsoft Yahoo!, and some people agree.

On top of that, Google will compete. So, they drop prices and give out more too. With even odds, Google will probably still win because they have better Internet products, IMO.

Microsoft is over their heads. They seem to be very desperate to me, because they are behaving like a spoiled child who wants to hog all of the toys, but does not have enough means to play with all of them. If I was their daddy, I would tell them to sit down, shut-up, and built me a god-damn operating system that does not require me to buy a whole new computer.

Re:Perhaps

[everphilski]

Then you, my friend, have been duped. Hook, line and sinker.

Forget Search ...It's Services & Advertising

[ablair]

The press & people here seem to think this is no big deal because MS Search is pathetic and Yahoo Search is nowhere as popular as it used to be, at a distant #2 in the market. But who cares about Search? The real value in this deal for Microsoft is in the armada of Yahoo! services and online advertising properties. 88% of Yahoo! revenues come from marketing services; it's also the world's largest webmail service (one of may services). It is involved in a vast range or internet technologies, standards groups, open source projects, and more. The list of important internet technologies, projects and markets Yahoo! is involved in is long and attractive. For Microsoft, this is definitely a strategic acqusition and is reflected in how much they are willing to pay to get it.

Winners: Microsoft, Y!shareholders.
Losers: Yahoo!, Y!users, the internet, open source, competition.

Do something Send a message to Yahoo

[bitbiter]

Well we talk all the time on here about the power of the user. Lets find out if we have any? Prob. not but it's worth a try. Lets flood their feedback forum with messages to let them know how we (the users) feel about the idea of having Microsoft as the new keeper of our email and other data. Here is a link to the feedback. http://feedback.help.yahoo.com/feedback.php?.src=FP&.done=http://www.yahoo.com Let's see if we really can make a differance.

Re:Do something Send a message to Yahoo

[dwye]

Lets flood their feedback forum with messages to let them know how we (the users) feel about the idea of having Microsoft as the new keeper of our email and other data.

You send a message to low level employees, telling them that shareholders should avoid the 1/3 of current share price premium? If Yahoo! doesn't accept that rich an offer, unless they can somehow get MS to raise it even higher, the board members will be sued by the vast majority of the Yahoo stockholders.

Send a message to various antitrust departments (US, if you are American, EU if European), and maybe to the top two campaigns of either major party so that the next administration might be "disenclined to acquiess," to quote Capt. Barbossa. Buy MS stock, so you can legitimately (as in: have legal standing) bitch about the huge premium, or check if any mutual funds that you own or have your IRA/401K/whetever in have MS shares, and send them a message that they should send MS a message).

PS, do not use email' no one will care. Use telegrams or real letters.

This is bad on many levels

[mlwmohawk]

OK, Yahoo isn't a small company. This isn't like other acquisitions MS has made. This is more like a Compaq buying DEC. Think about it, Yahoo is sort of losing against Google. So Microsoft is buying a faltering competitor to (a) merge income and (2) reduce the competition by one player.

That makes the game Microsoft vs Google.

Now, can Microsoft really take on Yahoo without destroying it? Will it be like when Compaq bought DEC? Or will it work? Yahoo is all FreeBSD, the engineers there HATE and laugh at Microsoft and its products. I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.

There is something different going on here. FAST, Fast Search and Transfer, previous owners of www.alltheweb.com, a search engine competitor to google in the late 1990s split from its search engine business which it sold to overture, which was bought by Yahoo. Microsoft is currently in the process of buying FAST, and next on the agenda is Yahoo. Bringing back together, the two halves of the old company.

It may be a coincidence, but it is curious. Why would Microsoft buy technology that it arguably already has or could build cheaper? What is it they are out to get? Are there patents or other "intellectual property" owned collectively by the two parts of FAST that they can use to sue Google?

Also, Yahoo is a HUGE open source user/contributor. A purchase by Microsoft will almost certainly reduce the number and amount of contribution to the open source environment.

Lastlt, isn't this *exactly* what the Sherman act was designed to prevent?

Re:This is bad on many levels

[StreetStealth]

The Sherman act? It's just a damn piece of paper!

Re:This is bad on many levels

[wan-fu]

Over the last few years, Yahoo! has turned into a media company while their technology investments have lagged behind. This is easily evident in their slow improvement on search capability and their being the last major player in the system to switch to an auction model that accounts for clickthroughs (Panama).

Microsoft would not buy Yahoo! for the technology. The important parts are market share, reach, users, content, and data. Some of the applications are useful, but nothing Microsoft wouldn't be able to do on its own.

For this reason, this won't be like many other acquisitions where the technology is absorbed into the company and then the product ceases to exist. The key parts of this are the Yahoo! brand, its users, and a lot of the reason those users exist are because of the applications they use. I don't foresee any of those applications going away anytime soon.

As for engineers leaving Yahoo! The worst will probably be if some of the key researchers/engineers leave, but as I mentioned before, Yahoo! really isn't a great technology company anymore. This would not be a huge loss.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Fast Search and Transfer is also a big user of open source programs and mostly a unix shop. The supported platforms for their main product are Linux, Solaris, HP, AIX and Windows. Almost all big customer-installations use Linux. MS is not only buying patents and technology, they're also converting a Unix/Linux company and its many customers to Windows.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Hanners1979]

I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.

I know this is a typo, yet is still sounds so right with regard to a Microsoft take over...

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Alomex]

Why would Microsoft buy technology that it arguably already has or could build cheaper?

Microsoft has tried for over ten years to develop a decent search engine without success. They also failed miserably at developing the new, advanced, start from scratch version of their OS (i.e. Vista).

So exactly how can one assume they already have the technology or can build it cheaper?

p.s. I've seen this overconfidence firsthand in Redmond where the thinking is that they can develop anything they want. This might be true for simple straightforward apps (even if massive) such as word processors and web browsers, but it is not so for complex, state-of-the-art code such as an OS or a search engine. You wouldn't happen to work there by any chance?

Re:This is bad on many levels

[mlwmohawk]

You wouldn't happen to work there by any chance?

I have been offer a job at Microsoft several times, looking back maybe I should have taken it for a few years for the cash, but no, I don't work there.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[whisper_jeff]

I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.

Yes, moral will be low and people will leave Yahoo! because there will be massive(!) layoffs as Microsoft eliminates duplicated jobs and, when duplicated jobs are eliminated, the lost position almost always comes from the bought company, not the buying company. I suspect Yahoo!'s workforce are all in the process of polishing up their resumes. At least, I hope they are...

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Alomex]

The only decent OS that has ever come out of Redmond is the NT kernel, which quite tellingly was developed by an outsider. Microsoft culture is to grab smart kids straight out of college, and turn them into generalists by moving them around the company. This works great for simple apps, as it keeps people interested but it is a disaster for complicated projects which require high levels of expertise, e.g. think of all the knowledge that the Linux head honchos have acquired over the years.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[mlwmohawk]

because there will be massive(!) layoffs as Microsoft eliminates duplicated jobs

I mean in addition to those jobs. The key players at Yahoo, whom Microsoft would want to keep, will leave.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[bertramwooster]

Yahoo is all FreeBSD, the engineers there HATE and laugh at Microsoft and its products. I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.

Not only morals, but morale will also sink. :-)

Re:This is bad on many levels

[mlwmohawk]

morale vs moral doh! Stupid spell checker didn't know what I meant! Its not my fault!

Re:This is bad on many levels

[eth1]

Yahoo is all FreeBSD, the engineers there HATE and laugh at Microsoft and its products. I know for a fact that moral will sink and people will leave Yahoo.

I wonder what would happen if MS did buy Y!, and tried to migrate to MS systems, and 90% of the engineers (having previously arranged things) simply said, "No." MS couldn't really fire them all without really screwing things up.

It would be funny, anyway...

Re:This is bad on many levels

[mlwmohawk]

I wonder what would happen if MS did buy Y!, and tried to migrate to MS systems, and 90% of the engineers (having previously arranged things) simply said, "No." MS couldn't really fire them all without really screwing things up.

Even if they did not say "no," but instead worked less enthusiastically, which is quite understandable if you are forced to work on Windows coming from a BSD background.

It will be a lot of work. Yahoo uses a lot of PHP and perl, and while these work on windows, they are certainly not optimized for it. Yahoo has been working on reducing its server load to cut operational costs and power usage. Moving to Windows will certainly increase costs and make the Yahoo "product" much less profitable.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Anonymous Coward]

> Now, can Microsoft really take on Yahoo without destroying it?

But in some respects, Yahoo is already self-destructing - hense the predicament they are in. It seems that Yahoo has gone in too many directions that don't bring in revenue. A common problem/downside that seems to be propagated by too many tech driven special projects. That is, too many "cool" tech projects. When left unchecked, the same energy that can promote innovation and genuine excitement can also be it's undoing.

Yahoo has definitely been a haven for the "anything-but-Microsoft" programmer. Their disdain is quite real and they actually take pride in it. It's becoming more apparent that this is a play to get the "customer list" that Yahoo owns. This technology is secondary - in their mind. I mean they already have that right? (i.e. Windows Servers, etc...). So if this goes through, they better to get to love Visual Studio.

The open source question will be interesting. I wouldn't doubt that what ever code or IP developed under the Yahoo roof has Yahoo IP claims to it. Thus what is Yahoo's now is Microsoft's later....

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Mia'cova]

Um. You might want to do some fact-checking. Vista was not built from scratch. The shipping code base started with the forking of windows server 2003. The bulk of the development occurred after the windows team shipped XP SP2 in Aug 2004 and shifted their focus to the new OS. I think you underestimate the amount of time it would take to develop a modern full-feature OS from scratch.

Why would you make such strong impressions of a world-wide microsoft culture of 80,000 people based on whatever you saw in redmond? Or that of the mid/upper management you've probably never met?

And as far as the tech they arguably already have... what properties does Yahoo have that Microsoft doesn't have a fairly strong competitor to? Perhaps I just don't know the yahoo brand as well as you do but flickr stands out as being about the only major bullet on the list? So from the consumer standpoint, it does seem like MS is making this purchase for the technology. Instead, they're probably after the market-share and engineering talent. I don't know the advertising market well enough to know what's in their platform that isn't in the MS/aQuantive-developed platforms.

Besides, if there was rampant overconfidence, why would MS buy anything at all?

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess it's probably a joke but while most devs at MS use visual studio, there's obviously no requirement and many use other tools. Devs are pretty well free to use whatever software they'd like, at least amongst the free stuff. If you wanted to buy a license to something, obviously you wouldn't be doing that without a business case. And it's probably a tough sell replace VS for personal preference.

Re:This is bad on many levels

[Alomex]

Why would you make such strong impressions of a world-wide microsoft culture of 80,000 people based on whatever you saw in redmond? Or that of the mid/upper management you've probably never met?

I met with a cross cut of the entire organization, from recent hires to direct reports to Ballmer (Ballmer was out of town otherwise it would have included him to). At a later date I also met with some of the SQL Server and Vista key players, who gave a candid impression of the development process inside Microsoft.

what properties does Yahoo have that Microsoft doesn't have a fairly strong competitor to?

Mainly the search engine.

Instead, they're probably after the market-share and engineering talent.

To a large extent I agree. That is part of my point. Microsoft is short in engineering talent. They have a large stable of very talented people who are experts in developing straightforward apps, but when it comes to things like OS and operating systems they are not so good. Usually their best minds in those areas are not home grown but brought in from outside.

Re:Zimbra - Did they screw themselves

[andydread]

The Zimbra faux open source license (ZPL) now the (YPL) a perversion of the Apache license prohibits the removal of their logo from the source in the form of an "Attribution Clause" This logo is trademarked. Yahoo now owns the trademarks and now perhaps Microsoft will on a successful purchase of Yahoo. This begs the question. Can Zimbra be forked? I think the answer is no. Because you cannot remove the logo as the license states and MS will presumably now own the trademarks and all rights to that code. If this is the case then it would seem as if the Zimbra people are out on their ears. without their code or trademarks.

True open source aka free software preserves the right to fork. With badgeware you are prohibited from removing the trademarks and logos from the source. Hence you cannot fork it. This is BAD. If they remove the logo requirement from their license and leave the attribution requirement then that would be no problem because customers could still fork and maintain attribution to the originators which is what the GPL allows anyway. Zimbra chose to screw the customer by using an true open source license (Apache License) and corrupting it by forcing you not to remove the trademarked logo. So as to prevent forking and therefore prevent free market competition that open source fosters. This is why true OPEN source software like Debian and Linux and any GPL sw cannot be bought away from freedom and the free market.

As one that has deployed it in a few sites this is really disturbing to me. A tough lesson to learn and this will be the last time I get bitten by faux open source licenses.

WTF

[Anonymous Coward]

mysql = 1 billion
yahoo = 44 billion
trolltech ~ 100 million. lol.

what a difference

That's pretty brazen

[aztektum]

Just a over month after this

Let me guess, ~40 billion for Yahoo! and the rest of their cash to pay off regulators? Otherwise I can't see how a convicted monopolist could get approval.

Anything but loyal!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Of course the US Administration wont bat an eyelid they love monoplies (at least loyal ones) but the EU will most likely baulk at the idea."

Bill Gates (like Warren Buffett) have been anything but loyal to the "US Administration" (e.g. the Bush Administration so the statement is completely at odds with the facts.

But of course this is a fact-free zone.

(Not that I think this would be a good deal for Yahoo shareholders or competition in the marketplace, but I know that Ask.com would love to be the #3 competitor instead of the #4).

Microsoft Loo!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they could combine the Microsoft Live! and Yahoo! brands to make the Microsoft Loo! brand.

Ballmer is a fucking bully

[geekoid]

and always has been. And none too sharp, either.

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[jomegat]

Maybe both. I never receive spam on my gmail account, but last week on a forum I help admin I finally broke down and banned all new user registrations using gmail addresses. That cut spammer registrations by about 90%. It may have cut into legitimate registrations too, but that was a price I was willing to pay.

Knee Jerk Reaction

[Guanine]

1. Can anyone imagine how this purchase could possibly work? I can only see the finances of the two companies united... not the brands themselves.
2. There are probably a bunch of boardroom guys drooling over "synergistic cross-brand opportunities" right now. Bleugh.
3. At least this story wasn't submitted by "I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property". If he's so great, bring him on as an editor already.

Re:Knee Jerk Reaction

[geekoid]

I just want to find out who that guy is so I can follow him around and copy all his work. If I am lucky he's working on a book or some music.

I suspect he is Zonk.

Re:Knee Jerk Reaction

[F452]

Re #3, no kidding. I've been looking for some mention of him (or her?) and how they seem to be driving the slashdot story bus. Not that the Imaginary Property stories are bad -- they're actually just the kinds of things I'm interested in. But why the special treatment/status/access? I'd rather just follow that guy's blog if he had one.

Easy for the search engine... but groups

[Chrisq]

I belong to some yahoo groups, and I think that in most cases the leaders won't move them. I could set up my own rivals (where ... are Google any better) but the chances are that I would end up talking to myself. What worries me is that they may rewrite them all using silverlight, OOXML attachments and so on so that to get the "full browsing experience" you need Internet Explorer and Windows. Perhaps Google are better after all.

SO lets see

[geekoid]

Does that mean the butterfly guy will now support an afro?

"YAHOOOOOoo..grglgrgl Developers Developers Developers!"

"Do you, Yahoo?" No any more.

This would be sad

[CopaceticOpus]

Yahoo has earned a good deal of respect from coders in recent years. They do a lot of great open source work, such as the excellent YUI. Things like this have made me a fan of the company.

Their corporate philosophy as well as the practical aspect of what software they choose to run are not at all congruent with Microsoft. (FreeBSD, PHP, etc.) Microsoft is going to have to make big changes - that's how they do business - and it's going to worsen Yahoo's technologies and piss off many of their employees.

A much better idea would be for IBM to buy Yahoo. Their open source mindset would be a much better fit, and Yahoo's search and email technology would be a nice addition to IBM.

I'm confused...

[Crazyscottie]

Reminds me of the Sony root kit debacle, the blogger who released the information about the root kit, his association with M$ and that M$ was fully aware of the root kit well before it's release and for some odd reason the release of the information about the root kit coincided with the launch of the PS3.

The Sony rootkit debacle began in October 2005. The PS3 was released in November 2006. How, exactly, did these two events coincide?

Re:I'm confused...

[Pollardito]

i remember it differently too. it wasn't the rootkit information that was released with the PS3, it was a rumor that the PS3 was going to lock games to the first console that played them (i.e. no used games, no loaning games, no replacing your console) that was released at the same time as the XBox 360. the rumor came completely out of nowhere at just the moment that there was a drive to get people not to wait a year to make their game console choice.

Re:I'm confused...

[MooseTick]

"The Sony rootkit debacle began in October 2005. The PS3 was released in November 2006. How, exactly, did these two events coincide?"

On a scale spanning all of time, 13 months is but a whisper.

Re:I'm confused...

[Anonymous Coward]

November is after October. Duh!

YaMi

[smittyoneeach]

I voted for YaMicro, but they should just shorten it to YaMi, and then have some soothing New-Age start-up music.
That would so !rock.

Don't forget the AT&T-aspect

[VindictivePantz]

On the surface, MSFT gains search market share, key web services like Flickr, del.icio.us, Yahoo!'s news services, mail footprint, etc., but the dark horse here is Yahoo!'s deal with AT&T.

I am a DSL subscriber w/ AT&T, which is bundled as "AT&T Yahoo!" What does MSFT gain from that? - not really much other than the types of services mentioned above as well as a captive userbase (something MSFT desperately needs :P )

They do gain better integration and footprint with AT&T Uverse - VOIP, IP Video. MSFT is already partnering with AT&T on much of their effort, and the services are tightly integrated with AT&T Yahoo!. A Yahoo! buy/merge would further cement the relationship and increase MSFT's hooks into the entertainment/Internet space - something Google is rumored to be after as well.

If you like, sure

[nagora]

Yahoo has never done anything of note in the 10 or so years since I heard of it. It has a crap search engine and, er...I can't think of anything else. $44B for that? Why not?

TWW

Re:If you like, sure

[phoebusQ]

Yahoo is a major competitor in the Internet advertising space, one of the only competitors to Google on search, the owner of multiple great "Web 2.0"-style services like Flickr, and the producer of some of the best modern, standards-based web development tools like the YUI, as well as a pioneer in open web service APIs.

While the advertising issue is likely Microsoft's main objective, purchasing Yahoo will also move the company much more into the "modern" web-space. Microsoft was late to the original web-party, and they'd probably like to avoid repeating that mistake, especially as their primary businesses begin to lose some of their strength (operating systems and the like).

Re:If you like, sure

[nagora]

Yahoo is a major competitor in the Internet advertising space, one of the only competitors to Google on search, the owner of multiple great "Web 2.0"-style services like Flickr, and the producer of some of the best modern, standards-based web development tools like the YUI, as well as a pioneer in open web service APIs.

Like I said: a crappy search engine and nothing else. (open web service APIs?! Give me a break).

Microsoft was late to the original web-party

Yahoo were early and didn't know what to do when they got there; they've survived on luck and being first to the party for years; now they're done.

$44Bn for a share in the Emperor's New Web-2.0? MS is losing it.

TWW

Omens bad, they are

[Wylfing]

When you scramble up the letters in Microsoft and Yahoo it spells Hot Roomy Fiasco. That can't be good.

Wait, it can also spell Ciao, Frosty Homo. That's not so good either.

Re:Omens bad, they are

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent. Lots of good ones here -- from the first anagram generator I found, top of the list is:

Crayfish Moo Too
Fiasco Homo Tyro
Fiasco Homo Troy
Fiasco Homy Root
Fiasco Hot Roomy
Fiasco Tho Roomy
Scarify Homo Too
Scarify Ooh Moot
Scarify Oho Moot
Scarify Hoot Moo
Chamois Roof Toy
Achoo Mortify So
Achoo Motif Rosy
Achoo Firm Sooty
Achoo Fist Roomy
Achoo Sift Roomy
Achoo Fits Roomy
Achoo Roof Misty
Achoo Foots Miry
Achoos Fit Roomy
Achoos Foot Miry
Cahoots If Roomy

Re:Omens bad, they are

[GuNgA-DiN]

My favorites:

Mafioso Torch Yo
Foray Sitcom Ooh
Fiasco Oh My Root
Chaos Firm Too Yo

New Server Platform Test?

[Gazzonyx]

EEk! As I was reading your reply, I remembered how Microsoft played off the hotmail thing as how great their new server platform was (2K, IIRC), when in fact it was a disaster. The fact that they pulled it off is really just showing that they have good people in their upper tech tier who only come out when they need the Big Guns, IMHO.

Anyways, who thinks that Yahoo is going to be a testbed for the next Microsoft Server platform? Longhorn, I believe - I don't follow Microsofts technologies too closely since there are too many, and only half of them seem to make it to production... the rest are broken up, renamed and reimplemented in a way that you're not really sure which application is a subset of which application or where it integrates. They get to test out a wide scale deployment without wrecking their own infrastructure, and as a side bonus, these things never go smoothly anyways, so no one will really think too much of it. Maybe I'm just paranoid, but if they haven't thought of this, I'd have to wonder why not - I probably would in their position.

Re:New Server Platform Test?

[Doc Ruby]

The fact that they pulled it off is really just showing that they have good people in their upper tech tier who only come out when they need the Big Guns, IMHO.

What it shows is that if you're Microsoft, you can afford to leave the Unix/Linux servers running for another year or so making you look bad while you redesign the OS from the inside to eventually at least claim you replaced them with Windows.

Which shows that if you're anyone else, you can't afford to do it - as if you could revise Windows' proprietary code to work anyway.

And which shows me that since it's already too late to revise Vista, or even "Windows 7" whatver that will be, by testing it on Yahoo, the whole adventure will be a catastrophe. Which will be spun as a win for MSN. And therefore will be.

But will really be a win for Google. Because Google still won't actually suck, and will spend its time and money growing instead of collapsing along with a mutual competitor.

Re:New Server Platform Test?

[Gazzonyx]

No doubt as to all your points, I run Slackware where it matters... It Just Works. However, the proprietary world can't afford to look stupid; they've got to prove themselves. The rest of us (Apple servers included, even though they're somewhat proprietary, although BSD derived) don't have anything to prove - our uptime does the talking. A microsoft box with a high uptime is either an unpatched disaster waiting to happen, or a honeypot.

However, I think that you write off Microsofts ability to shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to "too late to rewrite"; they'll come to the same conclusion and then try to carry over the parts of the code base that they think kinda' work (smb, anyone? It's come to the point where they're afraid to touch that subsystem!), kill any non-essential feature and then get it mostly right by service pack 2 or 4, by which time they'll be in extended support.

Yahoo! News calls microsoft's bid "Hostile"

[BrunoUsesBBEdit]

Microsoft unveils hostile bid for Yahoo at 44.6 bln dlrs

Okay, so it is an AFP story, but still it's interesting that this is how Yahoo! News reports it.

Re:Yahoo! News calls microsoft's bid "Hostile"

[BrunoUsesBBEdit]

Remember, AFP (Agence France-Presse) is the news agency that brought us the Yahoo-Katrina-Finding-Looting-Racism firestorm.

Breakup value of Yahoo

[Animats]

Last week, the "breakups" column in the Wall Street Journal suggested that Yahoo be broken up and sell off or outsource their search operation to Microsoft. The WSJ columnist thought that YHOO shareholder value could be increased 60% that way. I can see Microsoft wanting Yahoo's search and ad operations. But what will Microsoft do with the rest of Yahoo?

$44 billion is overpaying, too. Yahoo is profitable and made about $750 million in 2006. But they made $1.8 billion in 2005, and the trend is down, as is their stock. The number for 2007 should be around $600 million. The company is probably worth only about $9-$12 billion, figuring that a P/E of 15-20 is reasonable for a company that isn't growing.

Spam

[Anonymous Coward]

This is so wierd. Three days ago, I got the following email:

Message-ID: 1799601c86495$9e763530$98a2fea9@jodybdbiryucdk
Date: Fri, May 4, 2007 21:50:23 +0600
Subject: Stock breaker report
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437

No Looking back on M&S minerals Symbol-MSFT

Up 4 consecutive days for over 40% in profits and record volume

Read the PR, the good news keeps coming.

Add MSFT to your Radar and watch it like a hawk.

This company is going to $340.

even if it hits half of projected forcast it would be a phenomenal 1000%
profit.

No other stock can deliver that in times like this

Get in on MSFT

M&S minerals INC.

De ja vu, and shooting themselves in the foot?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have 10 years of email in yahoo. If MS takes over, what then? Will they force everyone into hotmail accounts?

They've done it before. Hotmail as we knew it is gone, replaced by the bloated / unpopular Microsoft Windows Live Mail. There has been some complaints about the forced 'upgrade.' Many users have switched to Yahoo's email system to escape the M$ running theme of acquiring and destroying decent product. Guess they didn't run to the right place. Once they try forcing Yahoo users into Live Mail, where will they go?

Hello, Gmail!

Microsoft!

[Anonymous Coward]

^^ New name (with the exclamation)

Yahoo stockholders - Take The Cash!

[capnkr]

I looked up MS' cash reserve amount, and the number I found was $49 Billion.

So, if all the Yahoo folks would take cash instead of MS stock, that would leave MS with only ~$4.5 Billion in reserve.

*Only* ~$4.5 Billion.

(Sheesh...)

So then... we get SCO to sue 'em!!!

You know that by now Darl et al have got to be hungry for some limelight and shillpress like they had in the good ol' days, so they'll do it... ;) :D

What to call it?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about "RicherThanYou" - so have a laugh then go back to work in your cube - lol.

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[Ilgaz]

I report spams I receive since the day spamcop.net exists. Even Koreans started to do something about spam reports they receive while Google does nothing at all.

I am not a newbie to the internet, I don't really care if spam sent has @gmail from address, the thing is, there are people on Google mail uses Google's @gmail and sends actual spam from Google mail, Google does nothing about it.

Some Google servers actually made into Yahoo bulk mailing filter. With that massive datacenter, they don't offer "This is spam" for search results, Google Groups has become the most notorious spam source of Usenet, Blogger doesn't allow spam reports, I can continue on and on but we are discussing the only reliable alternative to Google being purchased by MS now...

Re:Zimbra - Did they screw themselves

[Albanach]

While I agree this is an unhelpful restriction and not exactly in the spirit of open source, I'm not sure it would prevent development even after a takeover.

IANAL but I understand trademark law is there to protect a company from others passing off as them. That wouldn't be the case here - you have a license to use those trademarks in Zimbra, to modify the program and to redistribute the resulting works.

You wouldn't at any time be passing off, as you're using the software under license.

Maybe there's a lawyer on here who can clarify this a bit further?

Can We Save Zimbra?

[kripkenstein]

This is precisely why I almost threw up a little. The greatest and in many ways, superior alternative to exchange [- Zimbra], possibly handed over to the one who would love nothing more than to kill or pervert it into oblivion. Me as well. We need to act on this, and fast - grab a copy of the latest source code, since it might not be available for long.

There is a hitch here, though: since September, Yahoo! appears to have switched Zimbra from Mozilla Public License / Zimbra Public License to something called Yahoo Public License... which is not very good. It says, in fact, that essentially if Yahoo decides someone is not fulfilling the license, they can revoke it. That means that Microsoft will have a kill switch on all Zimbra installations, if I understand it correctly.

Does anyone have a copy of the last version of Zimbra which was MPL/ZPL, before the move to YPL?

Re:Can We Save Zimbra?

[tylersimon]

Not much point in getting the source to the latest version of Zimbra anyway. All the really good stuff like Outlook\Blackberry integration is not and has never been open source (of any description).

How about ...

[canwaf]

Microhooey?

As a long-time Yahoo! user...

[hallux-s]

(over a dozen years) I would just like to say "NOOOOOOOO!!!!!"

slashdot runs on MS Vista

[hostyle]

Slashdot has detected an incoming news submission.

If you started this action, continue.

        [Continue] [Cancel]

User Account Control helps stop unauthorized changes to your news stories.

Question - Why is EU approval needed?

[thirty-seven]

Why do EU regulators get any say over whether Microsoft can purchase Yahoo? Does, say, Canada also have the right to block Microsoft from purchasing Yahoo? Could the US block BMW from purchasing Daimler?

This is based on the assumption that Microsoft and Yahoo are both incorporated in the United States.

Note: I am not a U.S. person, nor do I have a US-rocks, EU-sucks attitude.

Re:Question - Why is EU approval needed?

[jas79]

because they do business in the EU and they have subsidiaries in the EU.

Re:Question - Why is EU approval needed?

[Anonymous Coward]

They can, because Microsoft does business in the EU, and has to obey the laws in places where it does business.

I preferred...

[grahamd0]

"Together, Microsoft and Yahoo can offer a credible alternative."

I liked it better as "Join me and together we'll rule the galaxy as father and son!"

Next thing you know, they'll have Netscape shooting first.

I wouldn't pay 50 cents for Yahoo

[afabbro]

$45 billion? I would not pay $45 billion for Yahoo. I wouldn't pay 50 cents for Yahoo. Does anyone still use Yahoo? Yes, sure, some people use it for their home page, but really, for this to make sense, Yahoo would have to throw off $9 billion a year in profit (using a ballpark 20%). Yahoo doesn't make anything like that. I didn't even look and I know it's true. And of course, Yahoo has zero growth prospects.

"In a conference call Friday morning, Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer indicated he won.t take no for an answer after Yahoo rebuffed takeover overtures a year ago."

Sweet! A $45 billion dead asset and lots of headaches on Microsoft's hands. For those of us who aren't Microsoft fans, this is great news.

Flickr deletes anti-Microsoft threads

[quinnanya]

As of a half hour ago, there were multiple anti-Microsoft threads in the help forum and elsewhere. Now they're nowhere to be found...

Really?

[ergo98]

I think some moderators are confused about the scoring -- you are supposed to apply a -1 for every instance of "M$". Given that the above has a full NINE (9) of them (we get the point - you're caught in a 1998 time warp where you think M$ is at all humorous/insightful/interesting), clearly it should be testing Slashdot's minimum karma.

Reminds me of the Sony root kit debacle, the blogger who released the information about the root kit, his association with M$ and that M$ was fully aware of the root kit well before it's release and for some odd reason the release of the information about the root kit coincided with the launch of the PS3.

This just blows me away. Yes, Microsoft, in concert with some nefarious blogger, is to blame for "$ony" taking over people's PC with a rootkit.

And that's ignoring that your conspiratorial "$ony the victim" timeline is just completely wrong.

Re:Really?

[NoOneInParticular]

'$ony' is not funny, as it's not a legal identifier in whatever would be the Sony equivalent of Basic.

Re:Really?

[Daniel Phillips]

This just blows me away. Yes, Microsoft, in concert with some nefarious blogger... You mean this blogger?

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[OxFF52]

The DOJ won't halt this deal because Google has the market share. In fact, the very thing that has plagued Microsoft in the past (monopolistic practices) will actually play into their favor this time because they are in fact the underdog in this scenario. Thus, the merger would theoretically INCREASE competition.

The problem is that Microsoft has a HUGE effort on their hands in trying to consolidate the MSN, Yahoo, and Live portals into one seamless user interface that would entice Google users to not only try the new service, but also abandon Google. Don't forget that it takes USERS to win over advertisers... and users are fickle people. Just look what's happening in the Facebook / MySpace area (speaking of acquisitions ;-).

Using history as a lesson, this is just standard protocol for Microsoft. Buy, then bury the competition (SQL Server, Access, Excel, XBox, the list goes on). Unfortunately, this practice is going to KILL Microsoft because it will only confuse and alienate users who can switch to competition at the drop of a hat... which means a continued loss of advertising revenue. Having spent their entire cash reserves with no other cash flow than their Office products, how long do you think it will last?

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[dwye]

If I hadn't left Yahoo! in Feb of 2007, I would leave Yahoo! on principle. But my stock option strike price was $32 and change, so I wouldn't have been sacrificing anything either.

You realize that the $44 offer makes those options now worth a good bit? Even if antitrust considerations eventually stop the deal (unlikely, as MS doesn't really compete at Yahoo's level with them, any more than if they had decided to buy Ford or GM), arbitragers will raise the price quite a bit before it is withdrawn. Sorry, but staying another year would have made you a lot of money, so you DID end up sacrificing a lot (as a percentage of the options' values, at least).

shareholder interest != consumer interest

[asky]

This acquisition may in fact be in the best interest of Yahoo! shareholders, given the premium. But I'm pretty sure it's not in the long-term interest of consumers at large. They will be given a more monolithic, more complex, more buggy platform which fewer and fewer innovators will be able to compete with.

Regulators may think that Microsoft does not dominate in search and on-line advertising, but this would simply bolster the Windows monopoly. By the time regulators figure out that something is amiss, it will take years and many more decimated corporate entities to get it fixed.

XBOX Live + Yahoo!

[e03179]

I think Yahoo! could make the whole XBOX Live experience a lot better. I'd like to be able to play Yahoo! Games mini-games on my XBOX 360. I'd like access to Yahoo!'s TV, movie, and music content. It would be cool to be able to access my Flickr account through XBOX Live and share images with my friends.

Get Their Javascript Libraries Now!!!

[mpapet]

BSD licensed for now. We all know these will die the minute Microsoft can stop it.

http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/

Maybe someone who has evaluated/used the libraries can post feedback?

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[Bert64]

If anything, while the combined market share would bring them to 20% in the short term, i think it would drop after that...
A merger would change both sides, and not necessarily for the better thus driving users away... Microsoft would be keen to migrate yahoo's services to run on their technology, a process which would be expensive in terms of manpower and hardware resources, even if they dont need to pay for any of the software (same thing happened with hotmail), and would undoubtedly have teething troubles. They would also be keen to eliminate redundancy to improve efficiency, which could result in things users like getting lost.
Also some there is a lot more anti-microsoft sentiment on the internet than there is anti-yahoo or anti-google, so the merger would undoubtedly drive away some yahoo users right off the bat.

Pot, kettle, very black.

[jotaeleemeese]

The M$ moniker is perfectly legitimate and weakens nobody's position in the slightest.

Arguments are weakened by false or inaccurate premises, writing M$ gives a perfect idea of the bias of the poster without going in long explanations to disclose those biases.

People getting worked out about this are the real childish ones lending far too much significance to this in the judgment of the character of the person who u$e$ it.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Khuffie]

The M$ moniker is perfectly legitimate and weakens nobody's position in the slightest.

Arguments are weakened by false or inaccurate premises, writing M$ gives a perfect idea of the bias of the poster

Durr. Those two statements contradict each other. Yes, writing M$ DOES give a perfect idea of the bias of the poster...that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Blakey Rat]

In what way is "M$" perfectly legitimate?

Look, you have a few choices:
1) You can type Microsoft like a normal non-cretin
2) You can type the stock-ticker abbreviation, MSFT
3) You can type the accepted acronym, MS

All three of those options work. M$ isn't any of them.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[vhogemann]

When you're talking about the Microsft's evil twin from the mirror universe... See, an $ is just a S with a goatee.

The only problem is that M$ actually makes money on OpenSource software and services, and it's founder is a bald and well shaved Robert Stalman, AKA M$ Bob. ;-)

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Daniel Phillips]

The M$ moniker is perfectly legitimate and weakens nobody's position in the slightest.

Arguments are weakened by false or inaccurate premises, writing M$ gives a perfect idea of the bias of the poster Durr. Those two statements contradict each other. Yes, writing M$ DOES give a perfect idea of the bias of the poster...that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them. It is you who are wrong. There is no contradiction between his two statements because he talks about the logical elements of argument (he could have mentioned faulty logic for completeness) and you conflate that with bias. Bias on the part of a judge would be a problem, but bias on the part of someone participating in a debate is wholly irrelevant to the logical correctness of their argument. To put it another way, truth trumps opinion.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[jvkjvk]

The M$ moniker is perfectly legitimate and weakens nobody's position in the slightest.

Arguments are weakened by false or inaccurate premises, writing M$ gives a perfect idea of the bias of the poster Durr. Those two statements contradict each other. Yes, writing M$ DOES give a perfect idea of the bias of the poster...that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them. You are just wrong. Those statements do not contradict each other, you are being illogical.

The GP is quite correct that an actual argument should not be weakened by a textual substitution of this type (proper noun to another "biased" proper noun (n.b. i claim that if it's being used as a proper noun then it certainly is one)). And it does give you a clue as to bias, which will help you decide what parts of the argument are biased in that manner.

Essentially your saying that if one uses M$ that argument in inherently weakened. The use of "M$" does not weaken the argument, one must actually look at the argument to decide if and how it was biased and that is what weakens their position. It does not matter if the person is a blind M$ hater if their arguments are sound.

Using "M$" in an argument only weakens that argument for people like you who appear to be swayed more by the appearance than the substance of the argument, whether you "like" people to use the term "M$" or not. I'd say, in fact, that your blind hatred of people who use "M$" appears to weaken your own logical capacity, as we see in this example.

Is that enough "M$"s?

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Khuffie]

No, it isn't. Bias, by definition, ignores logic and sees only the data one wishes to see to support his opinion/theory/evidence.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[webweave]

...or you can call them Micro Soft as they used to call themselves. ...or you can use the Chinese symbols for tiny and flaccid as they used to use in China.

Just don't call them an innovator.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[greenbird]

Yes, writing M$ DOES give a perfect idea of the bias of the poster...that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them.

Why does it mean he's a blind Microsoft hater? He could very well be a knowledgeable Microsoft hater like the rest of us who have to suffer through the nightmare of Microsoft because they managed to get control of the market despite there being much better alternatives out there that the knowledgeable Microsoft haters have been using for years. The bias is likely for very good, supportable reasons.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Anonymous Coward]

Who fucking cares, shut up and stay on topic.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Daniel Phillips]

Bias, by definition, ignores logic and sees only the data one wishes to see to support his opinion/theory/evidence. Nonsense. By your definition, all trial lawyers ignore logic and so do both the affirmative and negative sides in a debating contest. I do not think that the word logic means what you think it means.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black.

[Daengbo]

Essentially your saying...

No. Essentially, my saying is my sig. ;)

MS and Regulation ...

[jabberwock]

The Irony Award goes to MS attorney Brad Smith.

Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, said "any number of companies might
have an interest" in Yahoo, but added that a Google-Yahoo merger was
"clearly prevented by the antitrust laws." (NYTimes)

That Microsoft's general counsel could suggest with a straight face that it
is the company's position that *anything at all* is clearly prevented by
antitrust laws is one of the funnier things I've read in a while.

Yahoo will fit in nicely

[huckamania]

or maybe I should say 'not so nicely'. Yahoo has stolen as much as any company out there. I remember the ladder system they used for Yahoo games that they decided to replace lock, stock and barrel with their own, eerily similar, ladder system. There are plenty of other examples of Yahoo partnering with a third party all the way until they have their own in place. I'm not saying they're evil, just that they are not without their own moral grey areas.

Re:Yahoo will fit in nicely

[Reziac]

I've heard that Google does the same thing. You come in to pitch your product, and tell them everything they want to know about it; next thing you hear they've implemented their own version.

As to this "acquisition" -- good gods, they want to pay HOW much more than Yahoo stock is worth?? That's utterly nuts. Time to sell my M$ stock.

Re:Yahoo will fit in nicely

[Daengbo]

I actually think that this is part of the maturing MSFT. Surely with 40+B in cash and a flat stock history, they would eventually be a takeover target by someone. That person (more likely, fund) would have to be extremely large, but it might begin to look worth the investment unless MSFT gets rids of the huge cash reserve.

Re:Yahoo will fit in nicely

[huckamania]

Everybody steals and nobody lives in a vacumn, but there's a difference between screwing your partners and screwing your competitors.

I used the ladder system as an example and it certainly isn't the most egregious one for Yahoo. The guys doing the ladder were for certain being greedier then they needed to be.

I think a lot of the accusations of stealing are misplaced. Some times it steaam engines cause it is steam engine time. The GUI, the mouse, email, chat, etc, are always brought up as X steals Y from Z. But Z stole it from A who read about it in a paper by G.

Re:Yahoo will fit in nicely

[Reziac]

Well, that's true -- sometimes it's just "time for" whatever invention, and everyone does it at once. But it's one thing to look around and see what others are doing, then copy it, and another to encourage others to believe you'll pay them for a finished product, get a look at the specs and prototypes they've already developed, and THEN go do it yourself.

Tho as you say, sometimes the initial developer thinks they have the world by the balls, and can demand whatever they want... and that's begging to get the "invite it in for tea, then steal it" treatment.

Pretty complex ecosystem there, full of pitfalls and sharks.

Re:Yahoo will fit in nicely

[Reziac]

That's a good thought too... but I'm wondering just how long the digital economy can be sustained primarily by advertising revenue, before we get another popped bubble. Doesn't seem like most companies are interested in a product anymore, just in marketing someone else's product, for a suitable fee. What happens when NO ONE is *making* a real product?

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[mechsoph]

How big is google's data center? Tell me that's not a barrier.

I have used a yahoo.com email addr for 10+ years

[jafac]

. . . and with their new web mail client (buggy, slow, crashes and hangs my browser), I was already considering dropping their service. At least they let me switch back to the old interface.

But if Microsoft buys them - I will absolutely end my use of this service.

It is a FREE service.

Microsoft can not BUY my "eyeballs".
They can buy Yahoo stock all they want.
But they can't make me stay, as a customer.

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[Anonymous Coward]

Will these Developers/Open Source advocates stick around? Will MS keep the existing PHP? Will MS continue to develop new apps in PHP?
Come back next time for another exciting adventure of CowboyNeal does Slashdot.

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[thrillseeker]

my stock option strike price was $32 and change, so I wouldn't have been sacrificing anything either

Mmmmm ... this is only the initial offer ...

MicroYa

[Anonymous Coward]

So whats the new name going to be? I suggest the following

MicroYah
SoftYah
SoftHoo
MicrosoftYah
Microsofthoo
YahMSoft

Any others names?

Re:MicroYa

[The One and Only]

If they wanted to make it subtle, they could call it "Microsoft!".

Re:Bad move that will be nixed by regulators anywa

[u38cg]

Google's datacentres are huge because they cache all content they suck in and becuase the amount of traffic Google serves is huge. You don't need all that for a startup.

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[BrunoUsesBBEdit]

Last I saw, microsoft was offering $31 per share. The current price is $27.59. Anyway, you'll drive yourself crazy focusing on that kind of history. Ultimately though, I just can't imagine working for a company whose name I refuse to even capitalize. My post really wasn't about me. It was about my teammates whom I greatly respect. I really hate the position they could be placed in.

A Google Counter

[stecoop]

I wonder what it would be like if Google countered and bought Apple under their wing?

Re:A Google Counter

[ErkDemon]

You mean, the mythological AppleGoo?

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[dwye]

OOPS. Just violated the rules, and RTFA, rather than depended on what I heard on TV while dressing.

You would not have made anything, unless the Yahoo! people can get the premium jacked up over its current 62%, in which case they should be drafted by the Federal Government for something. Negotiating skill like that should not be wasted!

How will this affect GOOG stock?

[PRR]

Anyone watching GOOG? (Ironically on Yahoo Finance)

As of hign noon EST it's down about 8.5%

Or Facebook.

[DrYak]

Why would it be impossible for MS to want to get into the DSL business since it's already had Windows Mobile on the market for years now

They might be after Yahoo's relationships with AT&T.
Or they might be after Yahoo's recent bouy out of FaceBook. Look how it functions :
- people progressively adding friends to their list gives you a nice web of groups of friend clustered together, probably sharing common interests.
- users are forced to invite 20 friends to use apps : once again a source of clustering data
- users are forced to give authorisation to apps to have full access to all user data. In addition, without specific setting, the apps also get access to all friends' data : massive privacy concern.
- those apps aren't under control of facebook, their respective authors could freely abuse all this available data as it pleases them.

This is marketing's and advertising's wildest wet dream. Facebook is just a giant data-mining equivalent of a gold mine.
There are just gargantuan wads of cash to be made by whoring the database or appps infrastructure to advertisers and marketeers.

Re:Or Facebook.

[TheLink]

Not all the facebook apps force you to invite 20 friends in order to use them, if you find those rude/evil (like chain letters or ponzie schemes) you should remove them.

"There are just gargantuan wads of cash to be made by whoring the database or appps infrastructure to advertisers and marketeers."

I'm curious - where does all that money come from though? If those people aren't actually buying the stuff you sell...

If it's the NSA sure, might be useful info to have around even if it doesn't make them money :).

How would this even work?

[WebmasterNeal]

I can't see how this would possibly work for either company. Yahoo is the most visited site on the net http://www.quantcast.com/top-sites-1 and is way ahead of msn or any of it's other services. It would almost be in Microsoft's best interest to adopt all of Yahoo's online services rather than throw out Yahoo's or have both at the same time. There are so many users of both brands that they would need to co-exist, probably forever.

The news seems to be too focused on their market share of their search engines. Between Yahoo and Microsoft I think they have many services that are much better than what Google has. I don't think this needs to be an issue of Google has 66% of searches, Yahoo has 20% Microsoft has 10%.

Perhaps the two companies can share their strengths with one another. It seems to relate to the company that I work at where we bought several other competitor companies yet we sell them all still competing against each other. It's a very strange way to do business competing against yourself with all the different brands.

WHY stick with Flickr?

[SethJohnson]

Guess it's time to go some other place to host my photos...

It was time to go some place other than flickr when they instituted the 200 photo limit on free accounts. They also don't advertise that limit up front- you find out about it only after you've got an investment in using their site.

Seth

I Like Windows and Yahoo Search, but Hate This

[Anonymous Coward]

I use Windows (XP) and like it a lot compared to MacOS and *nix. I use Yahoo search because it always, always wins my monthly search contest where I see which search engine gives me the most relevant results for a search that I need for work (I'm a PhD Physicist and search mostly for equipment related to optics for this contest) or pleasure (I'm an aspiring chef and a gamer and I search for a lot of free software tools, and these make up the other half of the contest). Yahoo averages in the last 16 months of running the contest ~6.4 good results in the first 10 results while Google is averaging ~3.3, and Yahoo has an ~81% chance of returning a site that solves my problem in this period while Google has a ~53% chance.

Anyway, I like Yahoo search because for me it provides vastly superior results. If MS buys Yahoo, I can't imagine Yahoo's excellent results surviving. MS search, when I stopped checking it, was about as good as Google at the time. Does anyone know of a search engine that can match Yahoo's result quality? Is this the (possible) end of internet search?

And I Christen thee... MicroHoo

[keirre23hu]

MicroHoo... or is it YahSoft... Im going with MicroHoo... If it happens, wonder will yahoo mail go away... aside from all the serious monopoly concerns, this could be a terrible development. (unless you are microsoft or have microsoft stock)

Re:And I Christen thee... MicroHoo

[Daniel Phillips]

MicroHoo... or is it YahSoft... Im going with MicroHoo. YaSoft ... Yet another software company.

Re:And I Christen thee... MicroHoo

[dave87656]

MicroHoo... or is it YahSoft... Im going with MicroHoo. YaSoft ... Yet another software company. Perhaps "YaSuc" Yet Another Software user's Catastrophy

Re:And I Christen thee... MicroHoo

[Headcase88]

I'll go with YaSoft. Then I can continue to show my brilliance at poking fun of the company by taking advantage of the visual similarities between a money sign and the letter S.

Also: a new PRR + NYC merger failure?

[PRR]

I should also mention the merger between PRR (Pennsylvania Railroad) and NYC (New York Central) in 1968 which turned out to be the most famous merger failure ever at the time. A big reason was the failure of the 2 "cultures" to mesh. (my handle PRR is based on the PA railroad)

Could the same thing.. a failure of corporate cultures MS and Yahoo to mesh ...also doom this if it goes through?

Will MS buy #2 and make it #3 like them?

[JoeCommodore]

Years ago Microsoft said they would be the #1 search engine and set up Microsoft Network using their best and brightest tech staff and the cutting edge of Microsoft technology innovation, they released many new features bought up some services and integrated them and the best they have achieved is #3 and they seem to be stuck there.

Before MS buys something more successful than they are - I think they should do some serious introspection as to why exactly they were not able to achieve such a lofty goal on their own given how much more value they are (in their words) to the customer. If they just buy #2 there's probably a good chance they will sink back to #3 again as they integrate their #3 ideas on a business operating at #2.

I would think if they really wanted to be #2 they should pay Yahoo to 'buy MSN' and let Yahoo figure out what is wrong with their #3 problem and overlay the staff, technology and features that could make MSN #2.

Re:Will MS buy #2 and make it #3 like them?

[El_Oscuro]

An interesting take on this is at BBC. If they screw this one up, oh well...

Re:microsoft to become the largest consumer of PHP

[dwye]

> Last I saw, microsoft was offering $31 per share. The current price is $27.59.

Yes, I actually read the article, and clearly I remembered the wrong prices.

> I really hate the position they could be placed in.

Well, before things go through, they just have to review everything that they did, and note where the prior work can be found, then send it off to the FSF or such, to defend against all the baseless patent claims that will appear. Once it goes through, that would probably violate fiduciary duty, even after they quit, in two weeks plus any accrued vacation time (assuming that they feel as you do about MS, which is quite probable).

wait a moment

[Anonymous Coward]

considering the amount of $44.6 billion, that roughly equals to them being able to give 7 dollars to every single being on the planet. I'd consider that a rather strong marketing campaign.

If it

[PenguinGuy]

goes through, I'll have to dump my Yahoo account and switch over to either Gmail or .Mac. Either one is better than helping Microsuck in trying to destroy the Net.

Re:Zimbra - Did they screw themselves

[drumbug1]

It's important to note that the ZPL doesn't apply to the server, but rather the Web client. The server is under the Mozilla license. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbra#Software_license

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[PReDiToR]

I'm assuming you thought of using a CAPTCHA but couldn't for some reason?
I had one for registrations, but didn't want to put my users through the hassle of doing one every time they logged in. Installing it was a breeze, and it worked well once the registration pages included things like "This is case sensitive" which seems to be noticably missing from most CAPTCHAs.

Goodbye Yahoo! . . .

[TihSon]

I use the Yahoo! financial portal every day. To hear that MS is trying to get it almost makes me cry . . . because years ago I also used Hotmail. Where will Eclipse Trader get it's quotes from now?

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[jomegat]

CAPTCHA's were enabled on day one. The spambots still get by them.

Tell Yahoo What You Think

[Anonymous Coward]

I told Yahoo that I have had a yahoo account for9 years. I have paid for a premium account for the last 6. I told Yahoo that if they sold to MS I would delete my account. You can tell Yahoo something similar by going to their feedback page: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/my/general.html

zimbra deep throat

[Anonymous Coward]

First Hula, then Zimbra!

http://boycottnovell.com/2008/02/01/groupware-snatch-protocol/

Fork before it's too late!

Implications of 2008 US Presidential Race

[Golgafrinchan]

Remember when Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ordered that Microsoft be broken up into 3 separate companies back in 1999? Microsoft appealed the verdict, Bush won the 2000 election, and suddenly the Department of Justice had a strong Republican (i.e., pro-big business) bent. The result is that the original judgment on Microsoft was thrown out, and they instead were served with a comparative slap on the wrist.

I expect something similar to happen here. Right now, the Department of Justice is unlikely to enforce antitrust law too strictly, and so at this point in time I don't expect the DoJ would have a problem with this acquisition. However, if Clinton or Obama wins the presdiency 10 months from now and this acquisition still isn't completed, don't be surprised if the DoJ starts looking at this much more closely and blocks the acquisition.

Re:Implications of 2008 US Presidential Race

[Jack9]

Why would anyone utter the term, anti-trust when talking about an MS/Yahoo merger. Neither come close to control of a market ANYWHERE. Combined, they equal nothing special.

Re:Implications of 2008 US Presidential Race

[NullProg]

** Sigh **

Your reality field needs adjusting.

In September 2001, Microsoft and the DoJ were still battling it out under the auspices of US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who took over from Jackson after the Court of Appeals ruling. Ever since Bush came to power Microsoft's chances had been looking better, and the events of 11 September are thought to have made the DoJ mode amenable to a quick settlement, the Bush administration being keen to avoid an outcome that would put further pressure on the US economy.

- Judge Jackson was a conservative Republican Judge.
August 24, 2001. Two months ago, the federal appeals court here
removed Judge Jackson and chastised him for
discussing the case with reporters. The appeals court
unanimously upheld many of his most important
findings that Microsoft had repeatedly violated the
Sherman Antitrust Act, but it ordered the case to be returned to a new district
judge to reconsider his order to split the company in two.


- Judge Kollar-Kotelly, a seasoned trial court
judge and Clinton appointee to the Federal bench, to
determine how to penalize the company for abusing
its monopoly power in the software business.

- The appeals court replaced Judge Jackson, not Bush or the DoJ.

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/tsearch/judge+thomas+penfield+jackson.htm
http://www.luga.at/mailing-lists/rr/2001/08/msg00012.html

Enjoy,

http://akebono.stanford.edu/yahoo/ no longer works

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when I used to access the Yahoo homepage from http://akebono.stanford.edu/yahoo/ - great days! Every so often, out of nostalgia, I checked that URL to see if it still forwarded to the Yahoo website, and guess what - it always did ... untill now (the last time I did so was as recently as last year (2007)). Does http://akebono.stanford.edu/yahoo/ not forwarding to Yahoo have anything to do with the impending microsoft takeover?

Cue to an Irish Sage in a Tent

[antek9]

"No, Microsoft, that's a shtooopid thing to do! A Shhtooopid thing to do!"

Seriously: Flickr from now on being forced to use Microsoft server technology? Reason enough not to extend my Pro membership account this year.

Re:Very odd and not only odd, but pathetic

[davidsyes]

This could be a nice way to PUNISH microsoft. I'd like see Baidu or Sina (through some hefty government financial backing), anybody -- other than microsoft-- make a bid (collectively) to thwart mshaft.

They are such a large, lumbering, angst-ridden, bully of a company and now that Google is into some aspect of cell phone technology, the never-innovating, always-cloning/embracing-extending-extinguishing company has to show how much of a looser it is by playing catch-up.

Worse, how will microsoft separate itself from all the allegations of AT&T being in bed with the government. Sure, Google, Yahoo! and other search/hosting/ISP entities all are required to be SOMEWHAT tied to the government domestic and overseas intelligence apparatus, but should we all now be just a *little bit* more concerned? Or, just shrug it off? Now, we'll see microsoft asking for immunity from prosecution for all those CIA-mandated back doors installed in windoze. (Not saying there aren't in an Linux-based apps that get submitted but not thoroughly vetted, or that Linux vetters/QA bodies are not in-place agents of government).

This is just msoft admitting it has lost its way, a bully that can't innovate, and has to buy or bribe its way into appeasing analysts, investors, and others.

Of course, US regulators would play the protectionist card as it did when China wanted part of Conoco(?).

But, how many Yahoo! employees really (other than for the money) WANT to be had by microsoft. Sure, msoft says it wants to keep the Yahoo! talent. Hell, it's more like they NEED to keep the talent, otherwise the acquisition would be hollow and in vain. Since ms is not stupid (well, not exactly, or not totally), they will likely build into the retention package some series of clauses that spell out no money will be up-front, and that it will all be based on the acquired employee sticking around for X number of years, reaching some arbitrary productivity level, and made to acquire professional skills which probably will grind down the employee and vaporize the money because it might be spend on courses from which the employee MIGHT benefit in the long term, but will be psychologically ruined by culture clashes.

The letter sent to yahoo!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/microsofts-letter-to-yahoo/ -- I would still say, Yahoo! has stood the times and still has a large user base. Yahoo! has a lot of trust still from people who know its history. and its just some crap that yahoo is sure to ignore.

Silverlight Flickr Silverlight Delicious

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wait until

Microsoft Flickr requires Silverlight
Microsoft Del.icio.us requires Silverlight
Microsoft Zimbra requires Silverlight

All your base!

Re:I have used a yahoo.com email addr for 10+ year

[quincunx55555]

I never clicked the link to "Try our new Yahoo! mail interface". Considering the old interface still exists, have you thoroughly searched for a setting that lets you revert back? I can easily imagine that they wouldn't provide one if they want to ditch the old interface, but it also seems likely that they would allow it and just make it "not obvious".

I'm in the same boat btw regarding having used Yahoo's e-mail for ~10 years. Gmail scares me, but I can't think of any alternatives that will allow me to have a free, web-based, e-mail account that can hold more than 6Mb. Anyone know/use any good alternatives? Maybe that'll be the next Ask Slashdot.

I'd cancel my account in a heartbeat

[GuNgA-DiN]

I've had a Yahoo account since 1997. If they do go forward with this acquisition and Microsoft buys them: I'd cancel my account in a heartbeat!

I refuse to support Microsoft or any of their illegal activities. They are a monopoly and have been violating the antitrust laws for quite some time.

This would be the death knell for Yahoo as we know it.

useless consumers halo xbox delicious flickr

[Anonymous Coward]

Silverlight Del.icio.us and silverlight flickr and silverlight everything!

get your anal cream ready!

and you'll still love it while rubbing penis to halo and xbox!

you hate them but keep buying their shit! you're useless consumers who can't stand for anything!

Ok!

[marcosdumay]

Maybe! Microsoft! Live! could! have! some! SYNERGY!!! with! Yahoo!

In other news...

[pclminion]

In other news, MSFT is down about 6.5% and YHOO is up about 48%. Holy shit.

or del.icio.us?

[Rasputin]

It was bad enough when Yahoo bought flickr and del.icio.us, but Microsoft? Burn it down!

The FreeBSD / MySQL migration will be fun...

[Builder]

...to watch from a great distance!

I remember how many goes it took to get hotmail off of FreeBSD, and I expect Yahoo! to be even harder.

Re:The FreeBSD / MySQL migration will be fun...

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know anyone who worked at Hotmail? Do you know anyone who works at Yahoo? I know people who work at both, and believe me, those sensationalistic "about to collapse under the load" headlines that Slashdot used to post were basically made up out of thin air.

Oh the fact that you think Yahoo is exclusively a FreeBSD / MySQL shop shows you don't know what you're talking about. The admins there who know what they are doing are migrating the place to Linux as fast as they can. All the important projects (i.e., the ones that actually generate revenue) are already converted.

Besides, the implication that today's offerings from MS are technically inferior to FreeBSD and especially MySQL (still a POS after all these years) shows nothing but bias and ignorance.

I love free software and think a lot of it is of very high quality, but come on.

Re:The FreeBSD / MySQL migration will be fun...

[Builder]

I do actually know quite a few people from Yahoo! and some of the consultants who worked on the Hotmail change. Yahoo! might not be completely FreeBSD but a large amount of important stuff is (e.g. the european content management system)

I'm not arguing that the headlines were sensational in the hotmail days, but it did take three tries, two of which they had to back out of before they got moved. That's non-trivial!

So the smart admins at yahoo! are moving to Linux huh? Well then this just changes to
"The Linux/MySQL migration will be fun..."
because it will STILL have to happen :)

Re:The FreeBSD / MySQL migration will be fun...

[Builder]

Oh, one more thing... At no point did I say that
that today's offerings from MS are technically inferior to FreeBSD and especially MySQL so please don't put words in my mouth. I actually hate MySQL and prefer Sybase and Postgresql, and you'll find many comments in my history to support this.

What I was discussing is the complexity involved in migrating any complex system to another operating system and database.

You could be going from the second best platform in the world to the best platform in the world, but if your system is complex, it's going to be hard and things generally go wrong unless very well managed.

Re:Forget Search ...It's Services & Advertisin

[neurojab]

it's also the world's largest webmail service

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember Hotmail being very, very popular before MS bought it out and Microsofted it into obscurity. Lots of people fled for higher ground, which was Yahoo! at the time. If this acquisition takes place, I think it will drastically accelerate the growth of GMail and begin the demise of Yahoo! Mail.

NOO!

[kahrytan]

  Yahoo has the best damn internet portal. iGoogle is worse then MSN or the former Live.com Portals. I hope Yahoo keeps saying no to Microsoft's offers. if Microsoft controls yahoo, i'll leave and find some crappy linux rss feeder to use.

Opportunity for Google

[johkir]

Google could reap huge gains, I feel, if they capitalized on the distrust and hatred of Microsoft, and created a tool to transfer all your emails, photos, buddies, etc. under the Yahoo umbrella to the respective Google umbrella. Yes, we could do a lot of that now, but a nice ALAX page, perhaps with a few clicks would be nice. I'm not a huge Google fan-boy, but I'm at a loss to come up with another Internet company that has everything Yahoo and Google have to offer.

Alt idea - $45 Bn to shareholders

[Anonymous Coward]

Have they evaluated these options:

1. Give $45 Billion to shareholders and/or cancel the issuing of new shares that would have diluted their value. All shareholders are 100% likely to get this.

2. Spend $45 Bn to get Yahoo. Maybe get some 500 million more revenue per year for 5 or 10 years? Maybe in 5 years there will be a big awakening of advertisers that they are not getting much value from their internet advertising and ad revenue drops a lot? Browser extensions make intelligent guesses to erase ads from web pages with 80-95% success? Lots of other easy ways for the yahoo part to lose a lot of value.

Re:Very odd - ambiguous last sentence ...

[Herschel Cohen]

Your experience with Google sounds more akin to mine with Comcast. The latter's claim if it didn't come from one of their accounts they are not interested. Nonetheless, most of those I reported were Phishing attempts to get Comcast passwords, etc. Repeatedly Comcast has shown no interest. Ironically, I learned they had been blocking legitimate email.

My experience with Google had been getting better. For months at a time my junk mail box is filled but I do not see a single one hit my in box. Recently, I have seen about one a month. Nonetheless, upon reporting they disappear immediately. I no longer even bother to look at the supposed email account.

Don't fall into despair, after reporting numerous scams from AOL even they took action. On your gmail account use the net interface and check the item as spam and hit the Report Spam button. In the early days I had considerable spam land in my in box, far more than now.

Install Silverlight now

[PPH]

'Nuff said.

For the sake of innovation...

[ikarous]

I hope this deal will not go through. I use Google's products over Yahoo's as a matter of taste; I find Yahoo's pages too cluttered to be aesthetically pleasing. Be that as it may, the last thing I want to see is Yahoo going under; which, in my humble opinion, is exactly what this deal would amount to in the long run. Microsoft has a long history of buying out innovative companies and products and subsequently turning them into Passport/Live/insert-buzzword-here clones with vastly inferior functionality than their previous iterations. If Microsoft buys Yahoo! and slowly runs it into the ground, slowly replacing Yahoo's key engineers with Microsoft people, what major competitor will be left to offer (real) innovative competition to Google? I respect all the good that Google has done the Internet as a whole, but I am not blind to the fact that the corporation is now a publicly traded company, and thus subject to the whims of shareholders. If Google's most threatening competitor becomes stagnant, or even regressive, how will Google justify research and development costs to its shareholders? Maybe I'm wrong and Microsoft will retain Yahoo!'s management and employees more or less as they are, but I doubt it. I see this deal as injurious to innovation in OS-independent web technologies.

Re:For the sake of innovation...

[www.tech4um.com]

IMO Yahoo is going under as it is, Microsoft is just bailing them out. I think its unfair to assume that everything Microsoft touches will become "uninnovative". Like Google they have talented programmers/engineers as well, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt before they are dismissed so quickly.

Re:For the sake of innovation...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its unfair to assume that everything Microsoft touches will become "uninnovative".

It's neither "unfair", nor an "assumption". It's a statement of the fact of what has happened every time so far.

Like Google they have talented programmers/engineers as well, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt before they are dismissed so quickly.

They've been given far more than their fair share of doubt. 30+ years doesn't count as "quickly".

Missing Option

[skaternum]

Mahoo?

Hint to MSFT

[Junior J. Junior III]

Hey, guys, if you want to take over the internet, buy out all the DNS servers and reject queries from non-Windows hosts. You don't need to buy Yahoo!

Re:Zimbra - Did they screw themselves

[andydread]

I guess if the Zimbra people jump ship they could rewrite webgui and webadmin from the 4.x version however it seems as if the 5.0 is fully under the YPL and the YPL states that if you use the logo in an "unapproved" way the license can be revoked. Ouch. more here

Competition

[PPH]

I hope the Commerce Dept. considers the following:

Most of the conversation has been about reducing the number of search engines from three to two. But for some businesses seeking on-line advertising, this merger will reduce the number of choices from two to one. If you are a business in competition with either Microsoft, one of its 'Channel Partners', lackeys, or other minions, MSN is simply not a viable option. I seriously doubt Microsoft will allow Yahoo to escape its 'One World, One Program' marketing vision.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[mysticgoat]

In what way is "M$" perfectly legitimate?

Look, you have a few choices:

1. You can type Microsoft like a normal non-cretin
2. You can type the stock-ticker abbreviation, MSFT
3. You can type the accepted acronym, MS

All three of those options work. M$ isn't any of them

No. "M$" is a perfectly cromulent disambiguation. Otherwise, we would have trouble distinguishing between
MS==Metric System
MS==Multiple Sclerosis
MS==Mississippi (the state)
MS==Manuscript
MS==Master of Science
And the list goes on and on...

But in contemporary global society, there is only one M$.

Google cannot be undersold

[snowwrestler]

Since their ad network uses an auction mechanism for pricing. If Microsoft tries to set prices lower, the market will just set them even lower on Google. This is one of the "hidden" advantages of their business model. Marketshare (aka "reach") is one of the most important metrics to advertisers, and the Google auction pricing ensures that it cannot be bought from them through a price war.

CEO Eric Schmidt discusses this in this video

Re:Google cannot be undersold

[Breakfast Pants]

I watched the whole thing and he never mentions the auction model they use. Thanks a lot.

O$$

[spitzak]

Actually I think "O$$" could be a very useful abbreviation. It would represent the commercial use of open source. This could be anything from "evil company getting work for free" or "using the term because it is a buzzword", to "company contributing lots of code back because it is in their interest".

I think if any of the silly replies above checked my posting history, I always wrote out "Microsoft" (or "MicroSoft" since it was actually called that back when I started working on computers). However I'm going to go through the extra effort of typing "M$" from now on.

God bless the shareholders of America

[Anonymous Coward]

You greedy fucks. Fuck off. You deserve what you get.

Re:God bless the shareholders of America

[hondo77]

You deserve what you get.

I deserve a 62% boost in my Yahoo stock price?! I'm guessing that's not the insult you were going for.

ATT Yahoo. It's about owning bandwidth

[Fantastic Lad]

I'm not sure if this is so much about email accounts and ad dollars. It might be about Microsoft panicking over Google's growth into the bandwidth providing market. . .

 

ATT Yahoo's Profile

Both ATT and Yahoo are experts in IT technology and telecommunications. ATT Yahoo is the largest telecommunications company in the United s serving the internet access for about 7.8 million DSL subscribers. The company is the number 1 provider of local and long-distance calls in the U.S. together with extensive WI-FI network throughout the United States. It was also ranked as #1 company on the Fortune 500 list which names world's most admired and successful companies.

With its one of the most advanced global backbone networks transferring up to 5.4 petabytes of traffic on a daily basis ATT Yahoo is sure to provide the most reliable DSL Internet service to its customers together with Yahoo!

It's funny. The evolution of the computer started out with contestants trying to see who would sell the most units of hardware. Chips and keyboards and power supplies. Gates realized early on that the hardware wars going to end up being fought on the nickel and dime table, thanks to overseas slave labor and the way retail works. It was inevitable that the software that makes a computer 'think' would become the factor which gave a computer its real power. Taking the example of the living computer, the ape, the software sits upon the computer, making it the mind to the body's brain. But, to follow that analogy, with just basic mind and brain, all you really have is a monkey. --A pretty successful creature in its own right, but without the ability to communicate complicated thoughts quickly and effectively with its neighbors, then the next step up on the evolutionary chain, that of the development of advanced societies, isn't going to happen in a significant way.

Each step up the chain seems to command geometric growth in terms power and wealth. --To look at the silly analogy in another way; Microsoft is the king of the Reptilian and perhaps the Limbic brain of your computer. But the Neo Cortex. . . Well now!

The battle has moved on into the jungles of communication as represented by bandwidth and networking, where the broad powers of civilization come into flower. With Google buying up all the dark fiber in the world, owning dozens of huge data centers in many countries, and bidding now for a slice of the radio broadcast spectrum. . , MS must see that their position in the hierarchy of the computer universe being overshadowed by something new and greater.

I realize that this analogy with the human brain and mind is somewhat abstract and kind of silly, but I find it interesting that the Neocortex and Frontal Lobe is where higher concepts of Morality exist. . .

-FL

Re:Flikr is gonna rock like Hotmail.

[Anonymous Coward]

Free Software Advocacy, The WOW Starts Fucking Now!!

The climate of the age

[symbolset]

I've been a Yahoo user for some years also. I've seen enough of what happens after Microsoft takes over a company to know better than to hope for good things from this.

If it looks like this deal is going to close I'll be moving all of my domains off of Yahoo.

Bluehost is looking pretty good these days. I found them recently and the hosting package is pretty sweet. Maybe that's my new base of operations.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[webmaster404]

Most people on Slashdot knows MS==Microsoft, just as most know /.==Slashdot, while I don't find MS really proper to use outside the internet but here on /. everyone knows what it is.

good!

[nguy]

Let's hope it ends the same way, too.

it's open source

[nguy]

It doesn't matter what Microsoft does; if Zimbra is open source and matters, other people will pick it up.

The most important question

[Anonymous Coward]

Yacrosoft or Microhoo?

Obligatory Simpsons quote

[ganhawk]

MARGE
Homer, Bill Gates is here.

HOMER
Bill Gates?! Millionaire computer nerd Bill Gates! Oh my god. Oh my god. Get out of sight, Marge. I don't want this to look like a two-bit operation.

Marge groans and rolls her eyes. Bill Gates and two "associates" enter.

GATES
Mr. Simpson?

HOMER
You don't look so rich.

GATES
Don't let the haircut fool you, I am exceedingly wealthy.

HOMER
(quietly to Marge) Get a load of the bowl-job, Marge!

GATES
Your Internet ad was brought to my attention, but I can't figure out what, if anything, CompuGlobalHyperMegaNet does, so rather than risk competing with you, I've decided simply to buy you out.

Homer and Marge step aside to talk privately.

HOMER
This is it Marge. I've poured my heart and soul into this business and now it's finally paying off. (covering his mouth) We're rich! Richer than astronauts.

MARGE
Homer quiet. Acquire the deal.

HOMER
(to Gates) I reluctantly accept your proposal!

GATES
Well everyone always does. Buy 'em out, boys!

Bill Gates companions begin to trash the "office".

HOMER
Hey, what the hell's going on!

GATES
Oh, I didn't get rich by writing a lot of checks!

NNOOOOoo!!1111oneonekittens

[OMNIpotusCOM]

I've had Yahoo! mail since '98, been paying them to host my domain since '01, and if the Big M buys them it's just going to fuck everything up. There's a reason Yahoo! mail is better than that MSNhotmail.NET crap. Then you just know they're going to install that frustration detection system on there. "I've noticed that you have only been typing with one hand while checking those messages that have a bunch of pictures and movies attached to them, and it seems that you are becoming frustrated with them. Would you like me to delete them for you?" I hate my life.

Yahoo's Ad Business runs on Open Source

[RexDevious]

When the recent round of Yahoo layoffs came, the only "safe" place to be was in their advertising division; because it's the most reliably profitable.

I've done a lot of work related to that division, and believe me - they've got some pretty big challenges to overcome as it is.

Now, we've all seen in the past that Microsoft is reluctant to run it's "hot" properties on other people's software. Not only would that show that they recognize their software isn't the best choice; but in the case of open source software, they have to develop vary carefully so as not to be in a position where their R&D can't be controlled because it's based on GPL'd tech.

So, if MS tries to convert Yahoo's Ad Servers to a .Net platform - I can pretty much guarantee you that they'll trash it, ruining the most stable part of the company they want to buy. If they don't, they run the risk of trampling their overall "Get everyone to use our closed source software" strategy.

Microsoft may be bad with software, but they're quite good with business strategy. And this offer would be good strategy, if they were really good with software.

My prediction is that if they'll either make the acquisition by trying to rush it through and then regret it when they realize what they really bought, or proceed with due caution and lose the deal.

Either way, the result won't be a MSN/Google Battle of the Titans. It'll remain as it is now, or be an eventual TKO with Google as the winner against a badly crippled MSN/Yahoo mutant (cue flashback of Bart Simpson's attempt to turn a frog into a prince).

I've worked for or with all the companies involved, and as the CTO of an Investment Bank. And even if I only cared about Microsoft's profits and market share - I'd strongly advise them against this deal. The timing is perfect from the "poison pill" and political perspectives, as many here have noted - but the timing is very wrong from a technology perspective.

MS buying Yahoo to increase market share would be like Jimmy Dean buying Amy's Meals Inc. for the same purpose.

This will end badly. Unless you work for Google.

Try Gmail...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously. It keeps getting better.

http://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en/about.html
http://mail.google.com/mail/help/intl/en/about_whatsnew.html

Excerpt from Microsoft's takeover letter....

[SeaFox]

"This is Microsoft. Lower your board of directors. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance if futile!..."

MS?

[Walzmyn]

What does Multiple Sclerosis have to do with Micro$oft?

Google, Sony, IBM, AMD axis

[epine]

Microsoft has been hard at work trying to create a beachhead in the living room. Speaking of Sony, wonder if they have been missing that giant bite out of their backside. You can see Google is concerned about shaping the cell phone industry so as not to become locked-out from those clients. It strikes me that Google would have the same concern about Xbox/YaMShooN. The problem is that Google's motto is "don't do evil" and Sony's motto is "do unto others, before they do unto you". Has their ever been a standard Sony hasn't tried to coop? Wireless USB anyone?

Meanwhile, Sony has acquired that massive half-backside limp, and they would warmly welcome a cash injection, if Google can figure out how to sufficiently distance themselves from Blu-ray DRM hell. Bad, bad, bad for Google to get the reputation of root-kitting its userbase. I wonder whether Google would kick some funds to Sony to ensure a Google-friendly living room?

This might provide enough incentive for as-yet unjoined IBM/AMD to take Cell to the next level, if anyone still believes this technology can outperform. I've long had a suspicion that Cell might actually make a good datacenter platform for the kinds of highly specialized algorithms Google employs.

From Google's perspective, the horrible Blu-ray DRM must strike them as a PR poison pill with regard to entering into a high-profile Sony alliance. But it might make sense with Xbox aligned to the searches of evil.

This could be helpful ...

[ScrewMaster]

if Microsoft buys Yahoo and it works out as well as the AOL / Time Warner merger.

Re:Zimbra - Did they screw themselves

[ZeeTeeKiwi]

The issue is "Can you fork it?". And the answer is probably not. You are required under the terms of the license to maintain the Trademarks that are present in the user interface. The best you could do is fork, call your new project a different name, and run a dual branding effort with your project name and the Zimbra name along side each other. i.e. some sort of "Powered by" or "Based on" section. And thats not really a contender...

what's "blind" about it?

[nguy]

that is, a blind Microsoft hater that takes any opportunity to criticize them.

What makes you think that he is a blind Microsoft hater? Plenty of people have plenty of good reasons to hate Microsoft. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, they have wrecked numerous companies through sleazy business practices, and their software has driven many a user to despair.

The real question is how anybody who isn't blind can still defend the company. You need to be living under a rock (or be paid by Microsoft) in order to still want to shield the company from criticism.

Re:Flikr is gonna rock like Hotmail.

[MrNemesis]

The WOW first started when Stallman stuck two fingers up at a printer driver as said "fuck this, I can do better". From the first "fuck you" it's a downhill struggle.

From tfa

[magical liopleurodon]

Imran Khan of J.P. Morgan Securities thinks that regulators will approve the deal. uhm, ok.....he plays for the J.P. Morgan cricket team?

webcrawler

[TwoHundredOk]

oh where oh where did my webcrawler go. we used to have such fun surfing together. sure it wasn't that accurate, but the random links never got boring.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[shoemilk]

But here's the tricky part, this article is called "Microsoft Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!". It's not called any of the following.
"Metric System Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!"
"Multiple Sclerosis Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!"
"Mississippi (the state) Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!"
"Manuscript Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!"
"Master of Science Bids $44.6 Billion for Yahoo!"
And the list goes on and on...

But in this particular article, there is only one MS.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[BitZtream]

While I do think using M$ to refer to Microsoft became lame and childish in say ... 98? probably sooner, I feel that I must point out ...

If you need help figuring out what MS means, you must have entirely missed the point of reading comprehension and context when you were in school.

The Microsoft Plan

[BitZtream]

1. Buy Yahoo
2. Run it into the ground
3. Claim google is a monopoly since they've screwed up the only remaining seach engine that competes with Google.
4. ??????
5. Profit?

Not sure if thats the way to profit when losing so much cash in the deal ... but it doesn't seem like something they wouldn't try either.

Terrible decision for Microsoft

[roca]

This will be terrible for both Microsoft and Yahoo. MSN and Yahoo were both already on the ropes against Google, the struggle to integrate them will slow them down and make them even more vulnerable. A lot of Yahoo people won't want to work for Microsoft, Google will welcome them with open arms. Microsoft is just desperate for market share; this will be a temporary boost, but after this there is no-one to buy and nowhere to hide.

Madness to their methods (tongue-in-cheek)

[az-saguaro]

Now, now. Before all you naysayers and Slashdot cynics read too much into this, consider that there may be some real madness to their methods. Consider this report, on the front page of my newspaper, retrieved by my time-traveling teletype machine. Reprinted from the Bizarro World Times April 1, 2010 Headline: BALLMER PLAYS FIDDLE AS MICROSOFT BURNS Reported by Peter Perplexed and Wally Whathehelljusthappened Federal investigators with the SEC and FBI, along with Interpol authorities, today released preliminary information about the sudden and dramatic collapse of Microsoft. Investors, employees and customers, still largely in the dark about the sudden seeming evaporation of the company, were none to happy to hear this news, but at least there was a sense of relief that some answers are starting to come through. Employees at all Microsoft campuses worldwide showed up to work today to find their buildings padlocked, the workforce locked out. Customer support at all levels, the phones at all of the corporate offices, and the MS website and MSN are all completely offline. Shareholders seem to have lost their entire investment in Microsoft as the NASDAQ has eliminated the company form the exchange. What happened? How could it happen so suddenly and so thoroughly? Where are the company principals (not to mention their principles)? And even more peculiar, we are starting to receive worldwide reports of their latest operating system, Windows Smokescreen (aka Windows 7) suddenly quitting - wiping hard drives on systems that it is installed on, or otherwise refusing to boot a computer. Here at the Times, we first noted problems when many users started getting the following message: "You do not seem to have the properly signed and verified digital rights to the email and txt files you just created - you are hereby prohibited from using Windows again." Based on the public reporting by the above agencies, plus investigations from multiple news agencies and tech and financial reporters, we believe that the following is an accurate, albeit sketchy recreation of events at the world's largest software vendor, beginning about 2 years ago, leading up to today's dramatic events: January 2008 - Numerous events indicate that MS is aware of the fiasco that is Vista, its latest release of Windows. Regardless that the new OS has a variety of merits, it simply has too many demerits, and it has garnered no loyalty nor market share among home and business users - especially among businesses - meaning a serious interruption of revenue and credibility for the company and its flagship product. MS announces an accelerated schedule for creating and releasing its next proposed Windows OS - version 7. Many are skeptical. February, 2008 - MS announces a hostile takeover bid for Yahoo! No one can understand a legitimate or business-responsible rationale for this move. General opinions take the dim cynical view that this is an expensive but lame attempt to compete with Google, by eliminating the third major player in the online search and advertising market. The offer is made at nearly TWICE the outstanding market capitalization of Yahoo! March, 2008 - Until now, Yahoo! has made no official reply. The unofficial discussion from Yahoo! execs is that the bid is a disgrace, that they will never capitulate to the rapacious so-and-so's at the Evil Empire, that market consolidation is a losing proposition for the public, that the deal will NEVER go through. Nevertheless, market speculation on Yahoo! and MS stock drives up share prices. April, 2008 - Over the past month, the MS bid for Yahoo! has risen another 30%, to a net of nearly $58 B (billion), keeping ahead of the speculative price rises and nominal Yahoo! value. All of the fuzzy warm sentiments about corporate independence, freedom, mom, baseball, and apple pie go by the wayside, as money talks. At a hurried and hastily organized Yahoo! shareholders meeting, the merger-buyout is accepted. May, 2008 - Financial reporters start to speculate why there has not been much discuss

Multi-platform tagging software

[ben there...]

Anyone know of any user friendly, non-web, multi-platform tagging software? ACDSee is by far the most popular. Windows only. I could have sworn it ran on Mac. Guess not. Contrary to its "Pro" name, it does not deal very well with large numbers of images. It's also fairly easy to corrupt its internal FoxPro database.

iMatch is another Windows alternative, for the database-loving geeky types. Not very user friendly, but full-featured metadata capabilities. Again Windows only.

I haven't found one that meets my needs all that well with adequate performance and open-ness to the software and storage format, so I'm working on a Python/wxPython/Sqlite alternative to ACDSee. It will be cross-platform, Windows, Mac, and Linux. It currently has a fast image viewer, a Sqlite backend, and can import an ACD database, but I'm still working on some of the tagging, rating, and EXIF/IPTC features. It will be somewhat similar to ACDSee and Cornice (another wxPython app), but with tagging features intact, and imho a better looking, more native theme. It will likely be dual licensed. I'll probably have a beta within about a month.

So, long story short, there is no great cross-platform image tagging system right at this moment. ;-)

That's one way to frighten me away from ARC

[themusicgod1]

I swear to SERVER that I will under no circumstances even attempt to learn ARC if microsoft gains control of yahoo.

Zimbra is Flushed

[marsaro]

Greetings;

when this deal goes through there will be a great sucking sound; the kind you hear when there is a good dump and flush. Zimbra, and possibly other Opensource projects will hit the can. For all those that went to Zimbra from Exchange there still is CommuniGate Pro and it is free for 5 users...

why cant the Doj be nice to citizens?

[cheekyboy]

You'de think the DOJ would be kinda to common folk, oh you defraud the IRA of $450k, ahh who cares... they will get it back any way as you spend it, it eventually
gets to the IRA, unless you take it out of usa.

Id like to see billion $ fines for corporations, and less than $100 fines for citizens if they copy 10000gig of mp3s.

You're worried? I'm not.

[Monchanger]

I wouldn't say I'm worried about Yahoo's possible fizzling. I used them exclusively as a search engine and directory until I leaned about Google in 2001. Now I won't even send my junk-mail there. My sister even got my mom to shift over from her paid Yahoo mail account to Gmail.

I love Pipes, I just wish Google created it (not a big fan of GME just yet- too steep a learning curve for the general public), so it would do some hard work, rather than the trivial stuff it's currently capable of (Location Extractor just plain sucks). Yahoo isn't competitive anymore in my book- it may serve the unwashed masses well, but I'm unimpressed by their innovation.

Nowadays the word "Yahoo!" reminds me of sudoku and bingo. I think that if the servers are left alone, and with someone creative at Microsoft, they may be able to harness that customer base. But if they try to "upgrade" those games to promote Silverblight, IE8 and Vista we'll all be stepping lightly around a lot of pissed off old ladies.

New name? C'mon.

[smithmc]

The name of the new company would be Microsoft, plain and simple. They might let the old Yahoo call themselves "Microsoft Yahoo" for a while.

Beginning of the end for MS?

[b.honeydew]

Microsoft is taking a helluva risk with this one, I mean jeez how much capital have they got in reserve to do this. They're basically throwing in the towel and saying we can't compete with Google so let's spend all our cash and buy somebody that can. It's completely insane - no one has any thing good to say about this deal. All the Yahoo! users including me are wringing their hands about turning over their online services to MS. I subscribe to some of Y's premium services and they may not be flashy as Google, they do what they're supposed to do without any fuss. I would hate to wake up warning and find out my Yahoo mail now only works in IE. Why can't MS accept they missed the boat on the WWW and focus on their desktop and server business and leave the web to the guys who got there first. There is no way in hell this merger is going to work, and once stockholders get a little nervous and start selling stock, the bottom may fall out on MS stock price. This a desperate attempt by a greedy company to grab the biggest piece of something they can't have, and I sincerely hope they choke on it.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[Anonymous Coward]

You, webmaster404, do not have a perfectly cromulent sense of humor.

Too bad.

Re:Pot, kettle, very black. Or not.

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to missing the point of satire, sarcasm, and farce when you were in school?

yahoosoft

[burfieldstuff]

I bought the domain yahoosoft.co.uk several months ago and tried to park it up on sedo. Anyhow the sedo copywrite monster did not allow it so it has been gathering dust in my fasthosts locker. Last night i thought to myself, wtf i may as well chance it, who will sue me microsoft? yahoo? both? http://www.yahoosoft.co.uk/ is now earning me a few quid as it was intended to do.