Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
MS Yahoo: The Real Deal
I haven't read every single story on Microsoft's $44 billion offer for Yahoo! but the ones that I have fail to emphasize the major factor in Redmond's thinking: Google Desktop.
Forget search engines and queries and ads -- Microsoft really does not care about that. It does care, however, that more and more folks are figuring out that distributed apps can be very handy. That you can do all kinds of things with wikis. That there is no reason to ever run Vista as your OS.
This is not an afterthought for MS, this is the primary play. Microsoft cannot afford to sit by while control of the PC desktop moves elsewhere.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 10:48AM|#
Having two titans going head to head for supplying our desktops is great. Apple's challenge to Microsoft was and is too small; Google can make them sweat.
Taktix®|2.1.08 @ 10:51AM|#
Feel free to run a Google search on reason as I have
been predicting Google's future competition in the OS market for
years now.
*turns back forward to receive pat*
|2.1.08 @ 10:55AM|#
I'm not sure I understand why they need Yahoo to combat Google
Desktop.
It's hard for me to imagine Microsoft releasing its own version of
Google Desktop and cannibalizing itself before it had to, and
Microsoft already has a delivery platform to do that if it wanted
to. I'm not saying there isn't any potential there, but...
One of Microsoft's biggest issues, to my eye, over the last ten
years or so has been that big mountain of cash it sits on. The only
reason you'd let that cash sit on you balance sheet so long is if
you couldn't find anything better to do with it.
Maybe they think Yahoo is better than cash?
Mike Laursen|2.1.08 @ 11:00AM|#
Apple's challenge to Microsoft was and is too small; Google
can make them sweat.
The size and fortunes of companies in Silicon Valley can change
quickly. All those smart people working at Google could be working
at Apple a year from now.
kinnath|2.1.08 @ 11:04AM|#
All those smart people working at Google could be working at
Apple a year from now.
Apple seems quite content to just invade the consumer electronics
market.
|2.1.08 @ 11:06AM|#
Apple's challenge to Microsoft was and is too
small
As disaffection with Vista grows, with no Microsoft alternative on
the horizon, MS should be sweating bullets.
I've used PCs my whole life, but I've used Vista machines, and I
can guaran-fucking-tee you my next machine won't be running Vista.
Microsoft is driving people into Apple's arms, if only Apple can,
for once, figure out how to catch and keep them.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 11:07AM|#
All those smart people working at Google could be working at
Apple a year from now.
I know the 5th guy hired at Google. He's a very smart guy. He
doesn't work at all anymore, he just goes skiing from his Tahoe
mountain house and flies his plane.
|2.1.08 @ 11:16AM|#
I built a Vista machine, pretty much the week Vista was
released, and I had all sorts of issues, mostly related to drivers.
...Jimeny Christmas, MS had the beta out there for a year, and the
big mobo guys can't get their drivers straight?!
Anyway, most of those issues were addressed by subsequent driver
updates, and most of the outstanding issues with Vista will
probably be addressed when the first service release comes out,
which I understand is due to happen within a couple of weeks.
This all happened before, didn't it? I remember when no one would
support your computer or anything attached to it unless you'd
installed Windows XP, with Service Release 2. ...only back then,
they were driving everybody into Linux's arms.
...and we all know how that worked out.
|2.1.08 @ 11:19AM|#
Is Microsft a monopoly? No.
Was Microsoft ever a monopoly? No.
Is the Department of Justice a monopoly? Yes.
Will the Department of Justice remani a monopoly? Yes.
Is
antitrust action against Microsoft just foolish bureaucratic
attempts to justify their jobs? Hell yes!
But we all knew that. Right?
|2.1.08 @ 11:19AM|#
Oh, and I configured an apple machine for a friend of mine the
Christmas before last, and you know what I liked best about
it?
...it dual booted Windows.
|2.1.08 @ 11:19AM|#
R C Dean,
Vista looks like a serious misstep. I think MS is going to be
forced to continue supporting XP as its principal OS for quite some
time, unless the Vista service pack updates are divinely inspired
programming. Otherwise, look for something new to start making
serious inroads, and Google will likely be the driver of that. A
idiot-proof Linux interface might do it, though I have a feeling
something else will happen.
In any case, it won't come from Apple. Apple, for all its cocky
commercials and iPod success, cowers in fear when facing the
Microsoft juggernaut. The whole "cult" thing has never translated
into market share in computing. Even when I was working at a
supercomputer center, the geek alternative was rarely the Mac
OS--it was almost always Linux.
|2.1.08 @ 11:22AM|#
J sub D,
That stupid prosecution of MS may very well have been the trigger
for the dot com bust. That and the constant attempts by the
administration (and, to be fair, Congress) to regulate the Internet
to death. For all those keeping score, that was the Clinton
administration. Bear that in mind before you vote--or maybe you
think Google needs some DOJ attention?
|2.1.08 @ 11:23AM|#
Yes J sub D. Microsoft was a monopoly because we know now ten years on that all of the money to be made in the software insustry in the late 90s and early 2000s was going to be made by bundling browsers with operating systems. Things like ad revenue from search engines were no where near as important as browsers. It is difficult to find a more pointless and wasteful lawsuit than the microsoft litigation.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 11:24AM|#
The whole "cult" thing has never translated into market
share in computing.
Maybe that's because Mac OS is no better than Windows. Hiding
errors from your users helps convince computer-illiterate users
that your OS is stable, but doesn't change the fact that it
isn't.
|2.1.08 @ 11:27AM|#
Biggest mistake of my life was buying a Windows machine. Nothing but headaches from day one. Now I have an iMac and I love it. I think Apple has an excellent opportunity to capture the home PC market. Once you go Mac you never go back.
|2.1.08 @ 11:29AM|#
I'm pretty sure that it wasn't Clinton-era regulation that
caused there to be an investment bubble in the tech industry.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't Clinton-era regulation that caused that
bubble to burst.
Personally, I think the tech bubble and its collapse happened
because of sprawl.
kinnath|2.1.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Apple is a hardware company. There success is dependent to some significant extent on "usability" issues that relate directly to the software hosted in their hardware, But Apple has never been, nor never will be, a software company.
|2.1.08 @ 11:30AM|#
...sprawl, and people at Dunkin Donuts who give you Hazelnut coffee when you want regular.
|2.1.08 @ 11:31AM|#
You think Pro? Now Joel Klein and company will tell you that the findings of fact issued in November of 99, which found Microsoft to be a monopoly and the March 2000 dot com busts were just coincidences. How could you ever doubt DOJ?
|2.1.08 @ 11:32AM|#
Was Microsoft ever a monopoly? No.
The law doesn't ban monopolies. It bans certain behavior by firms
with large enough market share to muscle others out of the market
without having to compete with them.
That's why it's not called the Sherman Anti-Monoply Act.
|2.1.08 @ 11:33AM|#
Mac lost because they are worse greedy monopolists than Microsoft. Microsoft for all of its faults always played well with other companies' products. Mac fairly or unfairly got the rep of only working with other Mac products.
|2.1.08 @ 11:34AM|#
Yes, uniquely in the history of investment capital, the dot com
bubble 1) was going to continue growing forever and 2) burst
because of a court finding, rather than cascading losses causing
panic.
Damn you Bill Clinton! You made my cat run away, too!
|2.1.08 @ 11:34AM|#
Maybe that's because Mac OS is no better than
Windows.
!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!
Choose your weapon, suh!
Actually, if I had to start all over again, after five Macs and one
Linux-powered (Knoppix) laptop, I'd most likely go straight Linux.
Unless our pals at Mozilla get their thumbs out of their ears and
write a version of Camino which can work with mac OS 6.
I can dream, can't I?
And- what happened to that clean-sheet-of-paper windows OS I've
been hearing about?
|2.1.08 @ 11:37AM|#
So Joe it was worth, in hindsight the billions of dollars in stock value and legal fees to ensure that Microsoft couldn't bundle explorer with windows? The Microsoft litigation in hindsight is probably the least defensible thing done under the Clinton Administration. Show your independence and admit that. This is an easy target and chance for you to show you don't mindless defend anything done by that administration.
|2.1.08 @ 11:39AM|#
P Brooks,
Is Linux that good for someone who doesn't know or care to know
much about computing? At this point, now that Apple can run
bootcamp and run both Windows and its own OS, I honestly can't see
a reason not to go to Apple and I am a person who historically
never had much use for them.
|2.1.08 @ 11:39AM|#
A idiot-proof Linux interface might do it, though I have a
feeling something else will happen.
I've been waiting for an idiot-proof, or even competent, Linux
interface for about 15 years. For your typical Joe User, it still
ain't ready for prime time.
In any case, it won't come from Apple. Apple, for all its cocky
commercials and iPod success, cowers in fear when facing the
Microsoft juggernaut.
There's a difference between Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft is an
I/T company, and Apple is a consumer electronics company. I love my
Macs, but Apple just doesn't play in the same space as
Microsoft.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 11:40AM|#
Choose your weapon, suh!
Let's get into a Mac/Windows slugfest and see if we can drown out
the joe/John slugfest.
I will begin:
Mac OS blows. They suppress errors and crashes so that you don't
get messages when they happen, you just get freezes. At least in
Windows they inform you about crashes and let the process die so
you can get on with things.
Your turn. And be loud.
|2.1.08 @ 11:42AM|#
John,
I don't think the case was handled very well, but the bundling of
the software with the browser was the least of the problems with
Microsoft's behavior.
They've ceased strong-arming or wiping out every new app that might
compete with their products, and that's a Very Good Thing.
robc|2.1.08 @ 11:50AM|#
How are the linux interfaces any more or less idiot-proof than
microsofts?
On that topic, it is impossible to idiot proof anything. At best,
you will just evolve bigger idiots. Just like antibiotics.
|2.1.08 @ 11:50AM|#
I tried to build a linux machine in 2001. I couldn't get any of
the drivers to work and went nuts with it. I looked on the web and
found help sites that actually celbrated the fact tha the damn
thing was impossible to use. It was almost as if computer geeks
loved it loved it because it made it too damned hard for ordinary
philistines to use computers.
I hear Linus has gotten much better and user friendly since then,
but it had a hell of a long way to go, at least in 01.
|2.1.08 @ 11:56AM|#
How are the linux interfaces any more or less idiot-proof
than microsofts?
Well, at least on Windows, if you click an icon, either your
requested action will be performed, or you'll get some kind of
feedback telling you why it wasn't. Linux tends to treat such
requests as suggestions, and if it decides it's not going to start
your application, you may wait a long, long time before it gets
around to telling you so, if ever.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 11:57AM|#
It was almost as if computer geeks loved it loved it because
it made it too damned hard for
ordinary philistines to use computers.
This is known as "propeller-head syndrome", and actually exists. I
have dealt with other programmers who were proud when their code
was unreadable, because it made their code indecipherable, which
somehow (in their minds) meant "really smart". Very annoying.
|2.1.08 @ 12:02PM|#
joe,
Don't be disingenuous--I wasn't saying that the bubble wasn't a
bubble. But the panic was enhanced by the growing fear that the
government would intervene in some sort of bullheaded way. By any
measure, the Clinton administration was not technology friendly.
Nor is the current set of fools, for that matter, though in a
different way.
My real point is that the severity of the dot com crash probably
can be largely placed at the feet of stupid federal actions and
threats (Congress is not immune from this blame, either, so it's
not just Democrats vs. Republicans). I was in the e-commerce
business back then (and did a short stint at OMB's Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, which deals with information
technology issues), and the fear that the government would kill the
goose was palpable. Even the bureaucrats I was working with thought
that they should sit back and wait, but that's not what the
marching orders said.
Mike C|2.1.08 @ 12:03PM|#
I use both XP and OS X on a daily basis. I haven't had the
pleasure of using Vista yet.
I have to say that OS X is much more stable than XP. Sure,
applications will crash every now and then on a Mac, but I've never
gotten an error message on booting that said "something.DLL
missing". My uptime has been >15 days many times, the only time
I have to reboot is for an OS update.
The quality of software that is developed for OSX is generally
better than the alternatives in Windows (like quicksilver).
As for Apple being a hardware company not a software company, I
would argue that it does both equally well. I think that when you
focus too much on either aspect, you lose. Remember the clones?
Look at Vista's problems with 3rd party hardware.
|2.1.08 @ 12:05PM|#
I've been waiting for an idiot-proof, or even competent,
Linux interface for about 15 years. For your typical Joe User, it
still ain't ready for prime time.
I dunno about this. Ubuntu is pretty idiot proof. I had the thing
installed and up and running very quickly. I'm still running 6.10
version, but the 7.X versions are even better. (It seems they have
better support for proprietary video drivers). And their help files
and the community are pretty fantastic, too. I must say, I highly
recommend Ubuntu to anyone who is considering forgoing
Windows
All in all, at home I walked away from Windows and I haven't looked
back. Not too many things I can't do with Ubuntu that I could do
with Windows -- and everything for Linux is free.
Vista is something I will never install mainly because of the
bullshit DRM crap written into the OS. I don't need to pay for a
program to automatically downgrade my video quality if it suspects
I have a "pirated" copy of something I am watching.
kinnath|2.1.08 @ 12:14PM|#
As for Apple being a hardware company not a software
company, I would argue that it does both equally well.
They do software well enough. But the software is a means to and
end, not the end itself. Apple sells hardware.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 12:14PM|#
and everything for Linux is free
I think this is a factor I don't appreciate enough. As a Microsoft
Developer and MSDN subscriber (paid for by my employers) I have
access to every bit of Microsoft software--for free. Free OS, free
development environment, free SQL Server, free everything.
|2.1.08 @ 12:16PM|#
J sub D,
Methinks you vastly overstate the case.
My real point is that the severity of the dot com crash
probably can be largely placed at the feet of stupid federal
actions and threats
Remind me again, what was Pets.com's capitalization at the peak?
The crash was severe because the bubble was ridiculously inflated.
As were expectations. And, apparantly, as was the fear among some
about government interference.
robc|2.1.08 @ 12:16PM|#
Pig Mannix
I have never had a linux app not start up when I clicked (or an
error message in reasonable time). Of course, if you are clicking
on icons in linux, you are doing it wrong. :)
robc|2.1.08 @ 12:18PM|#
John,
Linux was easier to install from scratch than Windows by 2001. Of
course, making sure your hardware was supported before you started
was an important issue. Less so now.
BTW, just finished teaching an intro to linux class a few minutes
ago. (I just cant make this class last more than 4.5 days, plus
none of the students wanted to come back after lunch anyway)
robc|2.1.08 @ 12:20PM|#
I have dealt with other programmers who were proud when
their code was unreadable, because it made their code
indecipherable, which somehow (in their minds) meant "really
smart". Very annoying.
Annoying and stupid. If I cant take over your code and understand
what you are doing in a reasonable amount of time, you did it
wrong.
|2.1.08 @ 12:22PM|#
"This is not an afterthought for MS, this is the primary play.
Microsoft cannot afford to sit by while control of the PC desktop
moves elsewhere."
MS switched from a productive capitalist entity, to a
defensive/accumalitive capitalist entity between 1998, and 2002,
not only can they "afford to sit by", they will do little
else.
They will buy creative business's and subsume them, but they will
burn fuel faster than then they actually produce and continue to
oppose the kind of creative productive market capitalism that gave
birth to them.
They will remain profitable, but it will be on the basis of IBM,
expect little of them other than place-holding and innovation
opposition.
Innovation in the business environment will continue to be a threat
to them...as it is now.
robc|2.1.08 @ 12:23PM|#
All in all, at home I walked away from Windows and I haven't
looked back.
I havent had a Windows machine at home since my license for Window
ME RC0 expired. Aug 15, 2001, I think.
Other than newer games, Im not missing anything that I know of. I
do occassionally have to use windows machines at work and I dont
see any big reason to ever consider switching back.
Episiarch|2.1.08 @ 12:24PM|#
If I cant take over your code and understand what you are
doing in a reasonable amount of time, you did it wrong.
I'm even more anal. If you can't read my code--without
comments--and understand what I'm doing because of properly named
variables and methods, I did something wrong.
|2.1.08 @ 12:33PM|#
Oh, yeah, joe? Well this is for you! [pulls out scissors
from Dead
Again and stabs joe over and over and over
again.]
Frankly, I blame Al Gore for inventing the godforsaken web in the
first place. I just heard on NPR this morning that all those social
sites (except for Facebook, for the moment) are losing users like
crazy. Guess the whole "Internet" fad is over now. Let's get back
to building cars!
Kap|2.1.08 @ 12:44PM|#
I can second the recommendation of Ubuntu. I've been using it full-time for a few years now.
The Wine Commonsewer|2.1.08 @ 12:50PM|#
I have one computer running 64bit business vista and it seems
fairly stable. Big pissy drawback is that my high speed scanner
won't run on a 64bit platform.
But, I don't know my butt from breakfast compared to most of the
techhies around here.
I DO know what works for me and what doesn't and I can trash a
computer in just a few months because I am a heavy user.
Happy Jack|2.1.08 @ 1:33PM|#
Mac lost because they are worse greedy monopolists than
Microsoft. Microsoft for all of its faults always played well with
other companies' products. Mac fairly or unfairly got the rep of
only working with other Mac products.
It isn't a rep. It's the difference between a closed and open
architecture.
|2.1.08 @ 1:37PM|#
"Linux was easier to install from scratch than Windows by 2001.
Of course, making sure your hardware was supported before you
started was an important issue. Less so now."
I found that to be anything but the case. In 2001, I put my copy of
windows into the CD player and viola, it installed itself and I was
up and running. It couldn't have been any easier. It has been 6 1/2
years so I frankly can't remember all of the problems I had with
Linux but it was a nightmare getting my video and soundcard to work
properly.
Rhywun|2.1.08 @ 1:40PM|#
the geek alternative was rarely the Mac OS--it was almost
always Linux
That's rapidly changing, especially since Mac OS is built on Unix.
Geeking on the Mac is about 1000x easier than it is on Windows, and
doesn't require fiddling around with Linux.
Rhywun|2.1.08 @ 1:44PM|#
Mac OS blows. They suppress errors and crashes so that you
don't get messages when they happen, you just get
freezes.
If you're going to bash Mac OS, at least try to be accurate. Your
statement is totally false.
Rhywun|2.1.08 @ 1:53PM|#
I have access to every bit of Microsoft software--for free.
Free OS, free development environment, free SQL Server, free
everything.
So do I. Then I go home to develop in a Mac/Unix environment and
it's soooo much more enjoyable.
Ron Giuliani|2.1.08 @ 2:06PM|#
I don't know about you guys, but I find that scheduling abortions and monitoring torture/interrogations is much easier on a Mac. Not to mention how much time I save when writing racist newletters about the gay mexican panda agenda.
Clemsonuee|2.1.08 @ 2:08PM|#
I haven't used a Mac since 2002 or so, but back then anyways at
the one place I used a Mac they were very likely to freeze and do
all sorts of other wierd things. That lab used Mac's because it was
heavily frequented by kids who did graphic design and very few of
them liked using the Mac's. My Windows machines have not been
perfect, but they are reasonably reliable and more often than not
when something pukes on me it's the 3rd party software's fault not
Windows. I do reboot my system daily and I am sure that
helps.
The only time I used Linux was for a senior level design class in
electrical engineering and we used software that was only made for
Linux. Now I don't know if it was the software or Linux but that
system was pretty unstable.
I still have XP on my machine and no desire to upgrade. The type of
work I do requires software that is only available on Windows
machines so there is no chance of using Linux anyways.
Microsoft seems to have been pretty lost since Bill stopped running
the show. The move to Vista does make me want to find some way to
use another OS.
stoneymonster|2.1.08 @ 2:11PM|#
I haven't used a Mac since 2002 or so, but back then anyways
at the one place I used a Mac they were very likely to freeze and
do all sorts of other wierd things.
Six years is an eternity in the computer industry. I would never
have considered a mac back then either (cut my teeth on
BSD/SunOS/Linux early pre-PC dominance personal computers, etc.).
Now I wouldn't consider anything else that's out there. Not to say
something else won't come along, but they really did a good job
with Mac OS X.
|2.1.08 @ 2:13PM|#
That's rapidly changing, especially since Mac OS is built on
Unix. Geeking on the Mac is about 1000x easier than it is on
Windows, and doesn't require fiddling around with Linux.
True enough, I ditched Linux for a Mac a couple years ago. All of
the Unix goodness of Linux, and none of the aggravation of having
to constantly tweak your OS to get it to work properly. Also, I
still have MS Office, Lotus Notes and all the other business
applications I need to function in a business environment.
Of course, I still have Linux, XP, Solaris and FreeBSD available -
running as VM's in Parallels.
Clemsonuee|2.1.08 @ 2:34PM|#
I know 6 years is an eternity. That's why I called out how long
it's been. Heck, it was only 1 computer lab I ever used them in. It
just might have been idiots doing the IT that caused a lot of the
issues. I've never used OS X so I can't comment on that.
I really don't have issues with my XP machine. Back in the late
90's I liked to geek out on my computer, but these days if I can
run the programs I need for work and it not crap out on me I'm just
fine.
Heck compared to the factory automation world all these OS's look
nice. More often than not they can communicate with stuff that
connects to it. Oftentimes if I try to communicate with a PLC or
other electronics in a factory it takes minutes to hours to get
things to talk to each other. And these are things that I talked to
before.
Geeky joke alert:
The running joke where I work is that the reason we know
Independance Day is a work of fiction is that Will Smith was able
to communicate with the alien's computer systems. If I was sent to
save the world I am pretty sure I'd get up there and find I needed
a gender bender, or a null modem, or that my communications
protocol was version 6.5 and I needed at least version 6.6.
Off topic I know, but I can ramble.
Rhywun|2.1.08 @ 2:38PM|#
I would never have considered a mac back then
either
Me neither. Nobody is more surprised that I am using a Mac than
me.
Dirtman|2.1.08 @ 8:31PM|#
I would never buy a Mac because you have to pay like $500+ more
for the same specs as you would on a Windows machine, all for an OS
whose difference with windows when you get down to it is just a
manner of taste.
My experience is that the 2 freeze up just as often. I personally
find Windows more intuitive, but I guess I could see why some
people would prefer Mac.
Mike Laursen|2.1.08 @ 8:45PM|#
Dirtman, I'd never pay more for a BMW when a Toyota will do,
because I'm not that into cars.
I do make my living doing user interface development, however, so I
know whereof I speak: Apple puts much more time and energy into
perfecting the usability of their products than Microsoft does.
Dirtman|2.2.08 @ 12:15AM|#
Yeah, there's a market of people for whom Apple computers are
what they find to be easy and intuitive(it may get up to 20% of
consumers perhaps), and they'll pay more for that just like someone
would pay more for a bespoke suit of the same quality material as
an off-the-rack to get their perfect fit.
But if all you care about is performance, and you are OS-neutral
(I'm pretty much in that camp although I find Windows a tad more
intuitive due to using it a bit more), then a PC will always be the
better value.
Rhywun|2.2.08 @ 1:11PM|#
a PC will always be the better value
If you consider total cost of ownership, that's simply not true any
more. Old stereotypes die hard, I guess. My 2-year-old iMac is
running like I just bought it yesterday (and without any of the
tedious maintenance required to keep a Windows machine running
smoothly). All my previous Windows machines (an HP, a Dell, and a
Sony) started crapping out after about 1 year.
As for the operating system, Mac OS is a shiny, simple layer on top
of a much more robust and stable base than Windows can offer. Plus,
I can run Windows on it if I have to. For me, it's no contest.
Rhywun|2.2.08 @ 1:35PM|#
Back on topic... this merger is a complete yawn to me. You couldn't pay me to use any of Microsoft's online services (was there ever a more brain-dead concept than that chick from The L Word jabbering at you while "searching"?), and I haven't had a reason to visit Yahoo in about, oh... when did Google come out? Google and Microhoo can have a pissing match over advertising dollars for all I care and I will continue to block all ads as long it remains possible to do so (i.e. forever). As for "Google Desktop", we Mac users have had that functionality built-in for a couple years now.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245