Microsoft kicked off a campaign on Friday against the advertising collaboration deal struck between Google and Yahoo!, Reuters reports. Quoting two sources familiar with the matter, the news agency said that just one day after Google agreed to sell ads on Yahoo!’s website Microsoft contacted Washington-based advocacy groups that …
Shoe on the other foot ?
Oh dear my heart bleeds for poor old M$, don't like it do they when Microshafting happens to them :)
This bit made me chuckle
'Microsoft grumbled that the search, advertising and IM deal between its two biggest internet rivals, which was inked last Thursday, would “limit choices for advertisers and publishers” and “destroy a competitive alternative.”'
on the other foot
but of course it is ok if Microsoft buy out Yahoo and do do everything they are claiming as it is them doing it then so that makes it fine.
Talk about the pot...
calling the kettle black!! (Note, this is a TRADITIONAL saying, no racial connotations are intended!)
Now, I'm not suggesting that this hook-up is a 'good thing' by any means, but seriously, BG & Co, you are in NO position to make this kind of comment.
Of course M$ is upset
“destroy a competitive alternative"
"what amounts to a price-fixing agreement"
"consolidate more than 90 per cent of the [...] market"
These are all mainstays of Micro$not's business practices, and are not to be performed by anyone else.
I'd rather see Google and Yahoo! merging, than an M$ takeover. In fact, Google-Yahoo are much more compatible in technology base and mindsets than M$-Yahoo.
All the Google and Yahoo stuff for mobile phones, for example, will run seamlessly with my Blackberry, while the MS stuff (MSN Spaces, specifically) will rebuff me with "OS not compatible" crap. As long as Microsoft doesn't have a big share into the web, you can guarantee that most websites can run on other browsers than IE. I'm pretty sure that if MS takes over Yahoo! they'd use it to push their god-awful Silverlight stuff, that only runs in Windows/IE.
Cry all you want, Ballmer. We don't care anyway.
Nobody can have a monopoly but MS!
Competition is against the Mafia ethic.
And what sauce would you like on your goose, Mr Ballmer..?
I think I like it better as "Yagle!" or Yoogle!?
New Poster Boys for Irony
What could be funnier than Microsoft fussing about the evils of monopolistic practices?
What would be really interesting is to have MS write up a set of remedies that would maintain innovation, competition, and consumer choice in the Googahoo monopoly, but with the (secret) caveat that MS would have to abide by the same remedies, only substituting Windows and Office for Google and Yahoo.
Pretty simple answer to "Was it a good idea?"
If Microsoft doesn't like it, it MUST be a good idea. Generally that is a good truth indicator.
Now if Carl Icahn would take note, we would all be happier!
Poor Microsoft :(
>>"Our position has been clear since April that any deal between these two companies will increase prices for advertisers and start to consolidate more than 90 per cent of the search advertising market in Google's hands," he said.
90% share? That would be terrible. Of course 90% share in the OS market is OK, just not in search apparently.
Get use to it
A quote from Bill Gates.
"The world is unfair, get use to it".
It applies to Microsoft too.
For the love of god and our mother tongue...
ok, so I've finally come to terms with leccy, mobe, and lappy, but please ban the following from commentspace:
M$, Micro$oft, MicroShit, Micro$hit, MicroShaft, Micro$haft, Crapple, CrapOS, Crapintosh, WinBlows, Slowlaris, Screwgle, Farceberk, BSd, hpox, lunix, ReiserFS, and any other shitty non-pun?
And for those who think that this kind of carry on is funny/insightful/useful, can they please just fuck off to appleinsider, zdnet or slashdot?
... Oh no wait! Thats now "Desperate Desperate Desperate"
All Monopolies are bad
Microsoft and Yahoo joining forces could have actually created competition for Google.
Google is far and away the biggest search engine around, and thus them teaming up with their competition IS anti-competitive.
Competition always breeds innovation, once you get a monopoly, you get Lazy (Microsoft being a good example), whats to stop Google getting the same?
As Jonesy would say ...
"They don't like it up 'em".
@Snail is right, this tie up *would* potentially be anti-competitive. Just because we are enjoying the schadenfreud of seeing MS being beaten at their own game shouldn't distract our attention from the substantive issue.
hmmm... kind of like Microsoft buying part of Apple?
I think the subject says enough. :)