Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Just Can't Quit Yahoo
itwbennett writes "Back in October, rumors surfaced (and then quickly subsided) that Microsoft was considering another bid to purchase Yahoo. Now the rumors are back, and this time Microsoft is said to be in talks with other prospective buyers about some kind of partnership to acquire the troubled Internet company."
Perhaps I can buy Yahoo. On second thought, that's probably too steep.
Yahoo does have some value to Microsoft. Its news, weather, and finance services are widely used. Users of those services overlap with Microsoft's customer base, and are good advertising targets for the things Microsoft sells.
This stems from the fact that they signed an NDA with Yahoo?
Apple is the company that should buy them, and use iOS & Lion to do w/ them what WP7 does w/ Bing and Android does w/ Google. That's the only buyer that makes sense. Otherwise, which Yahoo! services are so valuable to make it worth adding another redundant search engine to the ones they already have? Hotjobs? Yahoo! Groups? Which ones?
Microsoft would just be buying Yahoo's users.
Which is a shame, because yahoo voice chat was the best trolling on the internet. There was a bug where, if you got ignored, you could simply leave the room and come back. Those who ignored you couldn't see your posts, but they could hear your audio.
My drunken friends and I spent many a night trolling the Christian chat rooms with pornographic recordings. Here's how we'd do it:
First, every Christian chat room had its own resident loudmouth who would spout bible verses all night without relinquishing the mic. We would get him off by starting a feedback loop, placing our microphone directly in front of our speakers, causing the feedback to be fed through the windbag's speakers into his mic. The feedback would be so horrible that the guy would get off the mic.
Next, with our mic at our speakers, we would play pornographic audio snippets from porn movies. The whole room would be exposed to those awful recordings and stir up into a frenzy of anger and disgust("I have kids in here listening to this with me!") and we would sit back and laugh, porn blaring, as they ignored us one by one. Then, thanks to the aforementioned bug, we'd leave the room and go back in.
The best part was when some asshole tried to grab the mic and wouldn't relinquish it, but he wouldn't turn his speakers down so even if the whole room had ignored us, our porno-audio was still going through his speakers, into his mic, and being fed back into the room. Since he was so desperate to keep control of the mic, he lost either way, and the room was forced to hear pornographic audio.
Finally, they would get smart and turn their speakers off. Then the person on the mic would start singing while the rest of the chat room fumed and ranted around him. It's like when a kid hears something he doesn't want to, cups his hands over his ears, and goes, "la-la-la-la-LAAAAAA."
It was classic.
Cue the fingerpainters coming to pile on the "but it's not Google" bandwagon.
No one cares what brands you like. Facebook may try to teach you otherwise. Doesn't make it true. Same goes for which search engine you use. Nobody cares.
If Microsoft bought Yahoo! would there be a mass exodus of Yahoo! users to Google services? People who just don't want to deal with Microsoft. Plus, hasn't Yahoo! been losing money hand over fist for the last few years. Why spend billions on something which had it's heyday and can't turn a buck?
Given Yahoo's foray into the media business, I seriously wonder what the benefit to Microsoft is?
Somehow I don't see Microsoft getting into the media business and while their online services have been hit-and-miss in the past, it isn't like Yahoo is going to bring anything of value to their online platform.
If you look at their quarterly reports Yahoo is quite profitable actually, and they are still the third most used website on the internet. In terms of user minutes they trail only slightly behind Facebook (#1) and Google (#2).
Additionally, their patents have separate value that can be quite powerful if used offensively, as all the smartphone manufacturers are doing now.
Yahoo! should merge with Ask, AOL, and Lycos. They could call themselves That 90's Web Company.
...it's all about the patents that Yahoo! owns.
A co-worker of mine is leaving to join Yahoo on Monday. He was told yesterday that within three months he will be a Microsoft Employee. He is not best pleased as he is an Open Source devotee. He is talking with a lawyer today to see if he can walk out of the contract.
I talked to an Analyst yesterday and he says that MS are getting Yahoo on the cheal. Like $1B cheap. The rest of the money is coming from Microsoft's usual investment partners, Silverlake Capital and a Canadian company(forgot the name at the moment).
I think the model for this is the MS/Nokia deal. From my pals at Nokia, it seems that MS rules in everything but name. Many of the very scandinavian working practices are slated for being consigned to the history books.
Yahoo is interesting because it offers up categories of things, no? I just Google, so I have no clue. Google has more than enough to absorb my time and world.
Watch Google bid it up..lol.
Take the Red Pill.
Partnering with Microsoft is a poisoned chalice. Look what they did to Novell.
I feel the same way... and I'm not even looking to work at Yahoo.. I just need to move my mail away. I'm pissed that Microsoft will have access to my archived mail and know more about me than I do.
Doesn't Yahoo delete your mail a few months after you do it?
If the reference is that Microsoft wants to sodomize Yahoo ala Jake Gyllenhaal's gay cowboy character then sir I offer you a hearty golf clap indeed.
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
If a competitor picks up Yahoo, can they hurt MS by killing certain partnerships that MS has built with Yahoo? I see links not only with search, but also with IM clients and services such as Match.com.
Please refer to the Crusades and Inquisition.
Post.
Also yahoo isnt that bad of a company. I get the feeling that they think it will add some more "not google" market share.
And thats fine by me.
I'd prefer it to also be "not Microsoft".
How about mass-killings of civilians Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan by Christians? Should we let Christians get on with it?
Of course not - but I expect you are talking about fighting Muslim terrorists who started it, which should be allowed.
Inquisition I agree with you, although it was something the Spaniards did after reconquering their country from the Muslims. But as far as the Crusades go, the reason they started was that Muslims were busy attacking Christian pilgrims to Palestine, and massacreing them - most of them unprovoked. It was only after them that the Christians started their attempts to take back the Holy land, and out of 12 crusades, only about 2 or 3 of them actually came anywhere near Palestine. The second Crusade, for instance, ended up being hijacked into a war against the Byzantines.
The equivalent of the crusades would be if say 'Christian' troops had captured Mecca & Medina, and then made it a policy to massacre Haj pilgrims trying to get there. In such a situation, Muslims would be justified if they were to start wars to take back those 2 cities. That's what the Christians tried to do (unsuccessfully) for Bethlehem & Jerusalem
Are you retarded or just trying to look as if?
The GGP insinuated that the jewish and "christ"ian religions have no violent past. Now, taking into account that "christ"ian atrocities have continued roughly until 600-500 years ago, and islam is roughly 600 years younger than "christ"ianity, give the muslims a few centuries to become civilized, k?
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Every time Microsoft tries to buy Yahoo and then changes it's mind, Yahoo's stock value plunges. Do this enough times and eventually they can pick up Yahoo for pocket change.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I am not sure what you are saying here. That murder and killing is alight because the Crusaders and Inquisition did it in medieval times (so we could start doing it again ourselves), or that everyone should get a turn at being murderous and uncivilised so that we should just let the Muslims get on with it?
Are you retarded or just trying to look as if?
The GGP insinuated that the jewish and "christ"ian religions have no violent past. Now, taking into account that "christ"ian atrocities have continued roughly until 600-500 years ago, and islam is roughly 600 years younger than "christ"ianity, give the muslims a few centuries to become civilized, k?
OK so you are going with the second option of saying that the Muslims should have a turn at being murderous uncivilised barbarians. Personally I son't think it retarded to hope that freedom and tolerance should be extended to everyone, but seeing that this is your opinion can I ask how far we should permit this barbarism for the next couple of centuries. Should we just let them kill non Muslims for their belief in Muslim countries? Or should we also allow them to commit honour killings within the Muslim community in the West? Or do you want to go the whole hog in letting them be barbarians and allow them to fly planes into our buildings and set off bombs in our streets and on trains and just say "well its only fair because of the Crusades?"
Post.
Also yahoo isnt that bad of a company. I get the feeling that they think it will add some more "not google" market share.
And thats fine by me.
I'd prefer it to also be "not Microsoft".
At this stage, "not Google" is as important as "not Apple" and rather more important than "not Microsoft".
Microsoft were/are evil (I've lost track) because they had a monopoly, it wasn't the fact that Microsoft were evil and just happened to have a monopoly on desktop OS as well.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
OK so you are going with the second option of saying that the Muslims should have a turn at being murderous uncivilised barbarians.
And you've gone with the first option of actually being retarded - christian style.
Nowhere did I say they should be allowed that. I only think christians and jews should stop being so sanctimonious having (not even really completely) just only become "civilised". And stop shoving their way of life down everyone's throats.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Sure, and I'm sure Jooooos & Xtians have all the baggage like honor killings, FGMs, jihad violence against infidels, beheadings, conviction of raped women on adultery charges, and a whole lot more! One more of the 'there are no differences' bullshi'ite!
The vast majority of Muslims do not believe in or support those things. It's like saying that all Christians are fundamentalist nutjobs who think the world is 6000 years old and homosexuality is a sin that should be punished by stoning because it says it in the Bible somewhere.
The supernatural elements of Islam are virtually identical with Christianity anyway. Again, it depends how literally you want to take them, but if you believe in a single omnipotent god, whether you call him God or Allah is irrelevant.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
I expect you are talking about fighting Muslim terrorists who started it, which should be allowed.
The logical error that Bush and Blair made was to say that because the 9/11 terrorists were Muslim, therefore all Muslims are terrorists, therefore we are entitled to invade Iraq and Afghanistan because they have Muslim governments we don't like with some sort of tenuous link to Al Qaida.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
it is better for Muslim countries to be controlled by a dictator than by an Islamic theocracy.
Yeah, why should they have their own version of democracy, the fucking foreign bastards?
We know best, and it was rather unsporting of the so-called "democratic protesters" in the Arab Spring to get rid of some good friends of the West.
The next thing you know, Johnny Foreigner will be wanting to control his own country's economic resources!
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
OK so you are going with the second option of saying that the Muslims should have a turn at being murderous uncivilised barbarians.
And you've gone with the first option of actually being retarded - christian style.
I can see that not having an answer you resort to insults. You are wrong on all counts here because I am not a Christian.
Nowhere did I say they should be allowed that. I only think christians and jews should stop being so sanctimonious having (not even really completely) just only become "civilised". And stop shoving their way of life down everyone's throats.
Funny way to tell them not to be sanctimonious (which I agree they often are) - by saying that we should "give the muslims a few centuries to become civilized".
If they want to buy a dead horse so much, I can produce one at a much more reasonable price.
The people who commit "honour killings" do so because of tribal cultural traditions which predate Islam and have survived due to poverty and lack of education. Most Muslims from more advanced/civilized countries would condemn them outright.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The people who commit "honour killings" do so because of tribal cultural traditions which predate Islam and have survived due to poverty and lack of education. Most Muslims from more advanced/civilized countries would condemn them outright.
Yes that's why there are dozens of honour killings by Muslims in the UK each year". And before you try the "they're not all Muslim" thing, there have been many dozen Muslim honour killings, one Christian, one Hindu and a few Sikh
So fucking what? Christians are living a lie and are also shitballs.
I think you have that exactly backwards: microsoft had a "monopoly" because they are evil.
Which may or may not be true, but the OP was singling out Muslims.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
They are still trying to beat everyone at their own games instead of coming up with something interesting themselves. An infusion of 273.1 million faithful users from the second largest email provider would help them lock people into their Windows Live! infrastructure (email, phones, OS, cloud services)
In Fascist America, terrorist get bombed by you.
After buying Yahoo, it is rumored that Microsoft plans to buy Myspace, Pets.com, and the patent rights to Betamax.
Proverbs 21:19
Albigensian Crusades, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Crusades. The inquisition, The Spanish Inquisition.....All horrid atrocities that will make you question if the people who really did those things were human beings.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
Oh yeah, when they were at 0% market share they used all their billions in the bank to get to 90% market share. Or was it that they got lucky? I keep forgetting what the current FUD against them is. But then again, I am not an anti-ms troll like you.
"Billions in the bank" does not equal, nor is it a prerequisite for, evil. But then again, I am not an ms shill like you.
i really like my yahoo email address. i would HATE for it to be crapped up my microsoft.
According to a recent survey, 90% of the world's honor killings are done by Muslims. FGM practices do vary, depending on the schools of Islamic jurisprudence that are practiced in different countries. Jihad violence against Infidels - be it Jooooooooooos, Xtians, Hindooooooooooooos, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, et al - happens in most Muslim countries between Morocco and Brunei. Conviction of raped women on adultery charges is routine not only in places like Pakistan & Iran, but even in newly 'democratic' Afghanistan. Religious tolerance is unheard of - e.g. in the Maldives, it's illegal for a citizen of Maldives to be non Muslim. And all the 'Arab spring' movements, even in previously secular countries like Tunisia, have ended up in catapulting Islamic regimes to power, be it by elections, such as in Tunisia, or by revolution, such as in Libya. If a majority of Muslims were opposed to it, like you claim, most Muslim countries would be as free as countries in Europe, and one wouldn't hear about persecution of people such as Copts, Chaldeans, Melkites, et al.
In the Bible, most of the violent passages there are historically descriptive, and not a recommendation for all times. That's different for Muslims, where the overall goals of Islam is to get Islamic law implemented worldwide, so that all Muslims would be supreme and all Infidels would be second class citizens. In other words, Muslims are supposed to follow allah by following the example of Mohammed (something repeatedly stated in the quran), and since most of Mohammed's life (unlike Christ or Moses) was waging wars against Arab pagans & Jews, that is something Muslims follow.
As an exercise, point me to the Christian or Jewish equivalents of Dar-ul-Islam or Dar-ul-Harb.
And yet 91% of the world's honor killings are done by Muslims but not their Infidel neighbors. That includes people on all income levels, and is by no means restricted to the poor amongst them
I am a yahoo mail user and yes since Yahoo partnered with Microsoft my e-mail has been soooooooooooo screwed up.