[dundee] Google's Response to the MS bid for Yahoo

[Arron M Finnon]

Well for me the reasons being, that M$ have to many fights on too many
fronts, from Google to anti-trust cases, to Linux, to patents, by design
they are spread to thin on the ground.  The key difference between M$
and IBM's  situation is that

a.) That IBM missed a new market place (namely the Home PC market)

b.) They are more Home PC then when IBM where number One

c.) IBM still kept their bread and butter, namely the commercial sector

d.) The Internet hadn't BOOMED

f.) They didn't have the all their chips in the dot.com, so when it did
go BOOM they saved by a lack of action.

I believe the M$ are flat footed in the face of modern computing, and
now all chips are on the Internet revenue streams.  I mean going into
the red to do it as well.  No guarantee's they'll win.  The question
will be what will M$ do if Google and Yahoo become bed partners, yahoo
believe that 44.6bn is a low estimate for their company, and are looking
at speaking to Google again about strategic partnership.  That could
well be a bridge too far for our much loved friends at redmond.

I suppose when you look at the competition then the answer really lays
at if you think Google are a threat to M$.  I'm in the belief that even
if you don't M$ does.   May reason for the thought of the modern 2.0
re-inflated dot.com bubble, is that there are many inventors, hedge
funds, and the many more commercially driven accounts involved in the
Internet re-ignition that may not quite understand the complex and
diverse world of computing.  Also if M$ goes the heavily pushed
technologies are going to be pushed into the cold, like
silverlight, .NET, and i'm taking a shot in the dark that the code will
not be released to the community, but rather a patent troll will buy
them to make monies on infringements.  I'm not saying the Open source
will come out on top, it's far to early in the day for that.  However i
think when your a static beast, with battles on too many fronts that
evolves slower than it's enemies are on to trouble.  I think if your
using the argument about well if they go there's no reason to think that
2.0 will die because it didn't with IBM, then Apple probably would be a
better company to use for the sakes of it being likened fields.

However i must point out this is only my opinion and time will either
prove me right or wrong