Google isn't "bigger". They dominate the majority of searches, but Yahoo owns the news business (more people read news at Yahoo! News than at Google News) and Microsoft alone is worth vastly more than Google.

No MS knows they have Doubleclick, Hotmail and Passport. They realise that if they also get the search engine they can also intergrate features into windows OS with the search engine. MS wants to unify the Windows OS with the internet completely. You know that index feature intergrated into the OS? They'll link that to their internet search as well.

The next thing about hostle may have truth. Yahoo is down to earth open system run by a group of people. A lot of these investers aren't statis qoe. From my understanding Yahoo supports open source. If MS would take them over a lot of these investers and employees wouldn't be happy about the changes made to MS takeover.

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT FUD MEANS? Everytime someone provides negative comments about something you immediately stamp the FUD label on it. This isn't FUD because average Joe customers have no business in these dealings. Your acting like everyone fears the search engines. Their not like the console wars where you invest into them. (Unless your selling add space). If I want to search I just type www.google.com, www.search.com, www.ask.com or www.yahoo.com.

Nearly everyone knows the history of MS and their tactics with the OS.

They've stolen code from stacker. They've crushed smaller business that made technology advances. Want to talk about fud why don't you GOOGLE "halloween documents." MS hurt several smalker companies by copying the add on features normally sold as 3rd party products. They in essence added them to the OS so people no longer need these third party products. Defrag, Networking built in, Compression, Anti-virus, Internet surfing and Firewalls. All these features used to be made solely by third parties.

By sticking them in the OS and raising the OS price they literally took the shirts off these companies backs. Forcing them to invest more money in their products to compete with them. Take the netscape Navigater It's now firefox and open source.

Most just went bellyup. The facts are MS has the same effect on the industry as a Walmart store being built by a local Mall. I've seen it happen the small shops go out of business because they just can't compete anymore.

If MS takes over Yahoo it'll do the same thing they did to hotmail put a price tag on it intergrate it into their OS through passport etc and direct traffic to them through their OS monopoly. This would ultimately steer funding away from google and other search engines untill they can no longer compete.

Figure it like this. A casual user logs on the windows OS the default browser is Windows explorer, they load it up and hit search. It'll go directly too MS yahoo and displays adds for their double click. If MS buys out yahoo their search engine will be defaulted from the OS monopoly all the way to the advertisements. That my friend is an effective way to destabilize the internet and gain dominance by steering casual users.

MS will hold the OS casual surfer userbase with the advertisers and become dominate force on the net. Casual PC users go for the b-line making it easy to monopolise the internet using the OS defaults. This is a "hostle" tactic similar to when MS put the IE shortcut on the desktop of windows. It simply directs traffic to them using the OS monopoly as leverage.

It reduces and limits the equal opportunity to the other search engines while directly harming advertisement revenues maintaining these search engines and their advertisers. What will end up happening is advertisers would jump ship for the largest market and likely abandon companies like google.

This isn't FUD it's a reality and MS knows what their doing here. The bid they made has a large agenda behind it IMHO.

It IS viewed by Yahoo as hostile. Microsoft has been trying to buy Yahoo for several years and they have always been flatly denied. Yahoo does not want to be bought by Microsoft, it's that simple. The only way it will happen is a hostile takeover.

They didn't complain because they knew that it would be brought up when they went and did something like this. A monopoly is also a problem when there are only two companies out there. Especially when they offer very similar products and all that depends on your choice of the product is all up to your personal choices.

A lot of people in the industry hate the fact that everything is so multiple platform. At least in the case the game industry development teams could invest in one console without fear of neglecting that other audience of gamers.

The gaming industry is like the HD format war. A lot of people just want the multiple formats to go away. From a customers standpoint this competition can be good or bad. If it's good it drives prices down and everyone benefits. Companies fight to gain the upper hand innovating and driving the industry forward.

If it's bad it drives prices down and literally harms the industry by creating money losses that slow development and innovation to a halt. If your losing to much revenue fighting a war then you can't invest money you don't have.

Even the industry hates the multiple platforms. They have to develop on more then one console or make a choice to abandon the other. Several stories on N4G have had devs saying "why couldn't there be just one console"

These guys mis the days when SONY had a monopoly. Can you blame them? Now it cost a lot more to develop for.

As for this article I think my statment in comment 4-1 says it all. This takeover could disrupt the internet and harm it by leveraging the OS monopoly and steering revenue away from google and its supporters effectively pulling the shirts off their backs in the process.

Please explain how this is a good thing?

something happen when you were young, someone dropped you on your head?

Google and yahoo is a much better combination

msn might turn to rubble!

"I love how Microsoft always innovates things" When were you born? Yesterday?

"instead of just doing what GOOGLE does and "TAKING OVER" other people's property." Say what? I don't know which is worse, your grammar or your theory. I think you need some "EDUCATION."

They copy steal or mimic it then sell it under their own brand. Preferably into other products or services.

Back in dos days MS stole the interface from apple who stole it from xerox.

MS takes ideas people have for products copies them then puts them in their products. These copied features are for products that innovative companies sold as 3rd party products. After those features are copied the attach rate of their products dropped severely. MS took the innovation from 3rd party devs put it in their products then killed off the people who are the true innovators.

I really feel bad for you. You must be very young or missed the early PC years because MS all but crushed companies that designed software to enhance the PC and placed it in their OS taking away revenues.

Seriously how would you feel if your a company that designed a software product that did something no other software did. You couldn't pay the patent office so you release it to the market and less then a half a year later MS comes out. Low and behold your sales drop because they took your idea created a copycat feature inside their OS. Now your product has no basis for customers to buy it because the OS has it.

Your screwed because you simply can't fight MS without going bankrupt.

I believe MS agenda is to incorporate this search engine into the OS so all new OS software would default to it. Given the nature of most average to below average PC users they'd simply go to this search engine and not even know they have a choice.

It's exactly how MS dominated the OS market by giving PC makers discounts for preinstalling windows and dos on new pc's.

Most people aren't even aware there are other OS. Thats how they became #1. You put a product in someones face as default their more likely to ignore other alternatives. This is how defauting works for the average PC user. MS knows the more they interweave producds and services into their OS the less people will notice alternatives. The outcome will generate revenue for themselves by dubiously steering customers towards their search engine and it's products.