Microsoft Archive

Oh Wait, I Didn't Mean to Say We'd Totally Buy Yahoo on the Cheap and Laugh Maniacally While Doing It...

Much ado about this Steve Ballmer "slip up" at the Gartner conference today that sent Yahoo's shares way up in anticipation that Microsoft may come back to the table. Here's a segment Paul Kedrosky-- better known around the TT studio by his rap name "P-Ked"-- and I did on TechTicker this morning. Speaking of TechTicker, a word on the degree to which we're kicking ass and taking names as Wall Street burns all around us: (from the USA Today)

"Yahoo Finance, the largest finance site on the Internet, has experienced its biggest weeks for viewership in the second half of September. Activity is up 40% on Yahoo Finance message boards. Its video news program, Tech Ticker, drew a record 2.5 million streams on Sept. 15. "People are asking what is going on, how it affects them and where it may be headed," says Yahoo Finance general manager Mark Interrante."

That's more than three-times the audience of CNBC for our not-even-one-year-old scrappy show. Boo-ya, Jim.

When Tech Reporters Become Irrelevant

In some ways, 2008 has been a great year for TechTicker to launch. The biggest tech story was, after all, the continually botched-then-even-more-botched deal between Yahoo and Microsoft. It was a story we surely had some implicit authority on, and one that allowed us to prove we'd cover Yahoo as reporters not employees. (I have the denied access to Yahoo's intranet to prove it.)

But the bad news is that's been pretty much the only big tech story. Mostly it's been a year of financial news. So, especially lately, TechTicker is looking less "tech" everyday. But, hey, people want to kvetch over the economic crisis, and we are here to oblige. If you haven't been watching Henry and Aaron's excellent coverage from the Nasdaq, you should start. Mostly, to see how excited Henry is about all of it. He is quite literally flying out of his chair in some clips. (Judging from these eye-popping numbers, few of you aren't watching TechTicker. I'm glad I wasn't missed during my month on tour. Sniff.)

In a semi-desperate attempt to have a value-add again-- or at least show off my latest DVF splurge-- I did a few segments with Paul Kedrosky around the crisis, trying to hew to tech as much as possible. If you're one of those people who needs an economy fix, clips are on the jump.

Team TechTicker on Google's Chrome

Google's new browser is all anyone in techdom can talk about or think about today. (Except yours truly who's swamped with other stuff.) Here's a link to Walt Mossberg's Tech-Ticker write-up. He'll be on the show tomorrow to discuss.

Plus, Henry and Aaron talk about it in the video below. [Avid fans will note our new Scottrade sponsorship. Go team Yahoo Finance!]

My only side note amid the flood of coverage from every angle: Om had a nice write up on why Firefox isn't worried. I'd add to that that open source and Firefox die hards should actually be happy about this. Why? Two reasons: 1. There's been ongoing speculation that Google would buy Firefox at some point, given the cozy ad relationship of the two. Firefox has been outspoken that this wouldn't happen (see my video earlier this year with John Lilly below) and this move cements the idea that the two aren't eventually going to be one. Which leads us to reason no. 2: Google isn't doing this for the good of the Internet, it's doing it for its business and quest to discover another big revenue stream outside of paid search, ie, its ongoing war with everyone's no. 1 competitor, Microsoft.

That doesn't make Google bad in any way-- that makes them a good public company in fact. But if you believe in the mission of Firefox, Google risks becoming just another entrenched monopolist on the Web, making Firefox no less relevant, but hopefully lighting a fire under everyone to do better and innovate more.

[Warning: In the above interview, Henry goes insane at the end. Why Google's move suddenly means Mozilla should go public is beyond me! I think it's just the opposite! Its do-good, non-for-profit-ish strategy is now even more of a differentiator! Can you imagine how the stock would be selling off today if Mozilla were a public company? Those Wall Street guys and their one-track IPO minds!!]

UGBT: Seattle-Portland De-Co

So it's been almost about a week since I flew back from my Pacific Northwest UGBT extravaganza. I was thoroughly exhausted from five days of very late night conversations, keynote planning and, then last minute replanning, and consuming my share of the Edgewater's entire trove of Kenwood Cabernet. (Brian Solis: I blame you for the early morning headaches!)

I've blogged less about the stops than previous ones, partially because I met fewer local entrepreneurs than past stops. I only did one event in each city and the turnout was smaller than previous stops. And while I was in Seattle for several days, most of it was spent at Gnomedex where I hung out with many entrepreneurs not from Seattle. So all-in-all, it was a blast, but I'm not sure I got the same local flavor I've gotten from DC, Omaha and Des Moines. Of course that just means I HAVE to go back! Right?

So, for now, take these thoughts with a grain of salt, and feel free to jump in and tell me why I'm wrong. ;)

Hey, You, Get Off Of My Cloud!

This is yet another guest post by my super popular contributor and Twitter friend, Paisano. This time I asked him to do a think piece on that over-used buzz word of tech buzzwords, THE CLOUD! Enjoy!

The rumblings you hear overhead isn't thunder but everyone scrambling to setup shop in the cloud these days. The consensus is that we want to run and store all of our stuff in one centralized location online, not in several different local destinations which is a headache and time consuming. Let's focus on the cloud computing strategies for three of the biggest angels on the web these days: Yahoo, Microsoft and Google.

YHOO-MSFT-ICAHN: What a Mess

I've just stopped blogging about it, because I stopped saying anything new. Everyone has done a bad job and everyone is angry. We get it!

But I can only hope Henry's analysis is the consensus of Yahoo's investors leading up to this shareholders' meeting. I don't say that as someone who draws a salary from Yahoo. First off, I don't think Microsoft would cancel TechTicker and it's just one of my several jobs, so it's not like my livelihood depends on this deal not happening. And I don't own stock in any tech companies, Yahoo included. (Besides, whenever I write or speak about Yahoo it's as a reporter not a contractor. I don't report anything I see or experience being on campus for work, per my contract.)

I'm just weary of all this fire-sale/break-up news that positions Yahoo as if it's, say, Novell: A troubled company that's a shadow of its former self. (Sorry friends at Novell!) Let's be clear: Yahoo is a shadow of Google when it comes to search-- which is hardly its whole business or greatest asset. But hardly a shadow of itself.

As a member of the media, let me express how remarkably unbroken Yahoo is as a property. Just see the news that the SF Chronicle is laying off another 100 newsroom jobs? Picked up an every shrinking issue of any business magazine lately? Yeah, that's our world. No other platform reaches half a billion people a month. TechTicker has become one of the biggest audiences for financial video content since its February launch mostly by being on Yahoo Finance. (As much as I think we're awesome...) And remember the much maligned Digg-copycat Yahoo Buzz? Look at its traffic, again just by being in front of that fire-hose of traffic.

Yahoo may operate like a fiefdom at times but it's a fiefdom that draws its strength from that torrent of traffic. Why you'd think you could get more value from breaking it up is beyond me. I guess that's why this story has ceased to interest me. It's become nothing more than a Wall Street game. And one that even Henry is bored by!

No, It's Not Game-Changing

Here's Henry and Aaron's coverage of Microsoft's announcement this morning. Although Henry says it won't work, I think the "knobs" (as they're affectionately known in-house thanks to a snarky Yahoo commenter) give way Microsoft too much credit for creativity and strategy here.

Search engines that reward people with prizes and cash have been tried before with the idea, "If you're searching anyway, why not search where you can make money?"  Because I don't search to make money. I search to find information fast. A few pennies here or there isn't going to pay my mortgage. It's not enough of a value add to accept an inferior search engine (sorry, MSN still is. It pains me to say it, but Yahoo is too) or even enough to change basic customer habits. I don't even have ads on my blog (yet) because the take home would be so low, it wouldn't be worth even a marginal annoyance to my readers.

Similarly, there was a big debate back in 2006 about whether or not user generated content sites should share in advertising fees with their content creators. The most famous example was the smack-down between Jason Calacanis when he was running Netscape and Digg. Calacanis was actually offering substantial money to switch and few top Diggers did. I have long said the key to successful UGS sites is tapping into human needs like connecting with friends and validation. Those are so much more rewarding than cash. People use and love these sites because they are not work. I don't want to get paid by Facebook, I don't want to get paid by Yelp, I don't want to get paid by Digg. I want to use the sites because I love them and conversely I want the founders to have to WORK to retain me as a contributor. I'd rather them plow that money back into making the site better than give me a cut.

In short, this strategy is only new and innovative if you have a time machine. And it has almost never worked. Nice try though, Redmond!

My Own Memo to Zuckerberg: Don't Listen to Any of Us

Just wrapping up my morning of blog reading-- amid a flurry of radio interviews-- and I saw Kara's memo to Zuckerberg. I think she made some good points. Particularly about the pressure he'll get if he turns down a Microsoft offer and the point that there's nothing "basic" about whether Facebook should sell. As this news of Facebook traffic falling spreads, the "sell! sell! sell!" drumbeat Kara refers to is only going to grow louder.

So here's my own memo to Mark: On the very off chance you are reading any of this, stop. Don't listen to any of us. It's your company. It's your vision. If we knew what was best for Facebook, we wouldn't be bloggers and reporters. You've gotten this far without us.

I Still Don't See Microsoft Buying Facebook

Or more to the point, I don't see Facebook selling. New fears by John Furrier and Robert Scoble remind me of that "Googlezon" video that was making its way around the Web several years ago. You remember, we all watched it and shuddered and thought, "That could totally happen!" It didn't. And it looks sillier the farther we get from it.

A lot of things could "totally" happen, and there's nothing particularly wrong with Scoble's logic. Except that Facebook doesn't want to sell, Mark Zuckerberg hasn't even been in the U.S. for weeks, and I'd be stunned if Facebook's end goal was really to break the Web. (Can't vouch for that EVIL EVIL Microsoft!) There are always rumors in the valley, but I simply haven't heard this from a credible source.

Why Henry Is Wrong about Facebook....AGAIN

Here's the link to his post. And I'll just let my morning Tech Ticker piece speak for itself.