Walter Watts
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 1571
Reputation: 8.89
Rate Walter Watts
Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
  
|
 |
Microsoft and Yahoo: A Really Bad Idea
« on: 2007-05-05 19:59:02 » |
 |
PC Magazine
ARTICLE DATE: 05.04.07
By John C. Dvorak
Microsoft and Yahoo: A Really Bad Idea
For some unknown reason the ludicrous retread of an idea that Microsoft and Yahoo should merge crops up in the conversation every so often. Most recently, columnist Lance Ulanoff took a swig of this bromide and actually added even more silly rationales for what is an incredibly dumb idea.
Before I begin with my retort and critique, let me first say that the likelihood of such a merger or buy-out ever being allowed by the government regulators is nil. But for the purposes of this column let's say that it could happen.
Long before Google became the nexus of computerdom, this notion of Microsoft joining forces with Yahoo had come and gone numerous times but was always rejected when anyone objectively looked at all the inherent redundancies. This means that joining two companies like this would not be a 5+5=10 scenario but a 5+5=6 scenario. With all the problems mergers have anyway, it might even be a 5+5=4 situation when all is said and done.
I think that was realized long ago and the idea was never discussed again until recently. The new reason to rethink this idiotic notion is because of the bogeyman Google. Run kids! Run for your lives! The big bad Google is coming to kill you and eat your liver. Run!
The simple fact is that two entities fighting Google on two fronts is a better idea than a combined Microsoft/Yahoo behemoth battling Google mano e mano.
Let's carefully examine the behemoth idea. Let me understand the logic. You have one set of boneheads at Yahoo trying to deal with Google on search, apps, messenger, e-mail etc. Google is winning. At Microsoft you have its boys trying to deal with Google with search, apps, messenger, e-mail, etc. Google is winning.
What exactly would change if Microsoft joined with Yahoo? Will a genius, who knows how to compete with Google, suddenly emerge to destroy Google? Where is that person now? What good would a combined company do him or her? What would change? If that person actually existed and hasn't already crushed Google on behalf of Yahoo or Microsoft, then I suspect that he or she would get axed in a re-org and end up working for Google. That's how these things work.
Let's face one thing. Both Yahoo and Microsoft are stodgy and borderline hopeless bureaucracies. Neither company is structured to compete with a wild unstructured company like Google, where they chose a CEO because he went to Burning Man. —next: Competition Junkies >
Part of the problem here is that too many companies, egged on by writers like Ulanoff, are competition junkies. And yes, there is some sort of competition needed, but you get the distinct sense that Google just does the best job it can to make its products better and to add new products as needed. In other words, they keep their eye on the product ball. A lot of things Google does are not best-of-breed. Its messenger system, for example, is not the best one out there.
Other things such as its mapping and products like Writely are outstanding—as is the search engine.
It does the best product it can do without being preoccupied about the competition.
In fact, it is preoccupation itself that is hurting both Yahoo and Microsoft. Sitting around being worried sick about Google accomplishes nothing. If Ulanoff wants to dole out some advice to these companies he should be telling them to ignore Google and just focus on what they can do to substantially improve their offerings. This means looking beyond Google.
There are a lot of great ideas floating around in cyberspace that, if ever implemented, would bury Google. But to focus on Google is to play the copycat game, and that seldom works since you always look derivative and second-rate. I'm always reminded of the McDonald's hamburger chain clone operation called Henry's. Everything with Henry's was the same except the place was green and usually around the corner from a McDonald's. The menu was identical and the food was almost an exact copy. The business concept was that the Henry's chain could benefit financially (a.k.a save money) by seeing where McDonalds set up shop and just open a Henry's around the corner. No research overhead!
This idea never worked and the company could not attract enough customers. What was missing was the idea of having a better product, not a derivative clone of the original.
This is what Google did: a better search engine. A better this and a better that is the key. People tend to gravitate towards better. Yahoo and Microsoft have to make a better product. Combining forces would probably have the opposite result. It always does.
Copyright (c) 2007 Ziff Davis Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
Author
Logged
