02-07-2008, 03:04 PM
I'm not saying that Yahoo shouldn't be profitable, or that it doesn't need to be, but rather should the return on investment come at the exclusion of all else? On the surface, looking at just the numbers, the MS offer is difficult to ignore. But in the bigger picture, if they managed to change all of the Yahoo apps to use MS Products (Linux is out, MySQL is out, Apache is out, PHP is out, the list goes on and on), dump anything that competes with MS Products (Zimbra, Konfabulator, who knows what else), and dump everything that is still in R&D and then expect the Yahoo brand to still compete with Google...well it would be a waste of $45 Billion dollars to in my opinion. The MS brand certainly won't compete with Google. Their only hope is to refocus Yahoo, and make it into Microsoft's Google. Keep the Yahoo name and try to keep anyone from knowing that it has ANYTHING to do with MS. If MS did that, I think that it would actually be a benefit for Yahoo. Part of what makes Google Google is that they use the best tools for the job, and if the tool doesn't exist, they make it. If it needs to be modified, they can because it is free, open-source software. Microsoft would NEVER buy into that philosophy though unless there is a major shift in their philosophy. From what I can gather, Yahoo has been profitable, just not like it was in the late '90s, and no where near where Google is.