Linked by David Adams on Fri 4th Dec 2009 17:16 UTC
In the News This 24/7 Wall Street article displays three common media ailments: hyperbole, a love for top ten lists, and an obsession with December predictions for the coming year (which off course OSNews is obviously also falling victim to), and there are some predictable losers on this list (Blockbuster Video, anyone?). I thought it would be an interesting topic for OSNews because three of the companies/brands are quite familiar to us: Palm, Motorola, and Sun Microsystems.
Thread beginning with comment 397994
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What I see happening...
by FealDorf on Fri 4th Dec 2009 20:28 UTC in reply to "What I see happening..."
FealDorf
Member since:
2008-01-07

[disclaimer: i'm a yahoo user, so there may be bias]

Even if the Microsoft-Yahoo! deal works out in terms of the legal hurdles, the whole deal removes a lot of what made Yahoo! the company they were: search.

I don't think so.. Yahoo! was rather something else; it was a web portal and Yahoo's the last surviving one of them. Considering how statistics suggest Bing and Google have eaten up Yahoo's share in search market; I'm not surprised they're being eaten up.
That said, Yahoo's noticeably shifting its focus and I can see their ads all over the place*. Maybe Yahoo has new incentive. Personally; I'm content with YahooI stick to Yahoo because of Mail, Messenger, Delicious and Flickr.
On the other hand, it'll definitely be interesting to see how Google will go. Who knows, maybe it'll become the IBM; dominant for years until a change will take place in the market that Goo would fail to notice. I just hope it doesn't become Intel - a *persistent* monopoly..

EDIT: * when I say ads, I don't mean web ads. I mean billboard ads in my country, India

Edited 2009-12-04 20:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: What I see happening...
by Moochman on Fri 4th Dec 2009 20:57 in reply to "RE: What I see happening..."
Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, I agree that although search is how Yahoo got its start, it hasn't been its reason for existence in more than a decade.

Yahoo's main function is and has been for a long time as a portal--a kind of replacement for ex-AOL users who just upgraded to "the raw internet" (which it was long before AOL itself turned into a web-based portal). It has long been one of the most "trusted" brands by average people for webmail, news, stocks, etc. Google on the other hand, started out with just search, and added all of the stuff Yahoo already had (mail, groups, news, etc) in a gradual manner. Which is why there are still plenty of people who go to Yahoo instead of Google, because they still see Google as primarily "just a search" site.

Yahoo also has lots of cool but severely under-marketed technology up its sleeve--it has a really nice AJAX web applications platform with Zimbra, and it's got an awesome content mashup tool in Yahoo! pipes. Yahoo's main problem as I see it is an unwillingness to experiment with any kind of branding that is not "Yahoo!" When it bought Konfabulator, it totally messed with its guts and renamed it Yahoo Widgets--a recipe for fail. Ditto for Zimbra--it's now branded the Yahoo Zimbra Desktop. Just about the only thing it didn't try to impose its brand on was Flickr (and thank god it didn't).

If you compare Yahoo's approach to AOL's, AOL (believe it or not) does a much better job of building brand recognition by allowing each of its brands to flourish under its own banner, without being obviously tainted by the AOL name. Engadget, MapQuest, Moviefone, TMZ, ICQ--How many people even realize that these are AOL properties? And yet AOL still gets the advertising bucks. Yahoo could learn something. Or (my favorite pet imaginary deal) Yahoo could just buy AOL outright and acquire a large stable of great content websites at a (most likely) bargain price.

My only big pet peeve of Yahoo is that they're now the *only* major webmail provider that charges extra for POP access. What year are we living in???

Reply Parent Score: 3

sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

If you compare Yahoo's approach to AOL's, AOL (believe it or not) does a much better job of building brand recognition by allowing each of its brands to flourish under its own banner


AOL is completely absent from the world. It only survives in the USA.

My only big pet peeve of Yahoo is that they're now the *only* major webmail provider that charges extra for POP access. What year are we living in???


In your country. In mine they don't charge for POP. They do for IMAP. And god I hate those giant animated flash ads they pop from everywhere. It sucks! Die Yahoo!... die!

Reply Parent Score: 3

FealDorf Member since:
2008-01-07

I agree that they're under-marketting their better products. But Yahoo has a very dominant global presence; AOL (or Aol.) has only recently entered India and many of Indian yuppies already heard enough bad news about Aol. to warn against it.
I feel annoyed about Yahoo! Mail too; although I *do* get POP access in my country..

Reply Parent Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I don't even remember Yahoo getting its start from pure search capabilities. I remember that it excelled at its categorizations of the search results. Yahoo has had several search providers in the past, so having microsoft do it is really nothing new. Some past providers:

Altavista (starting in 1996)
Inkotomi
Google ( until 2004m then it created its own search engine)

So switching to Bing? Not that big of a deal.

Reply Parent Score: 2

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't even remember Yahoo getting its start from pure search capabilities.


From what I remember, Yahoo started mainly as a categorized directory of websites. Then, as the number of websites & the size of the directory grew, there was a shift towards search (as opposed to drilling down through the directory categories).

Reply Parent Score: 2