<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Non-obvious winners and losers in Microsoft Yahoo Deal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/</link>
	<description>Turning Data into Knowledge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:38:03 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tony E.</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-26094</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony E.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:52:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-26094</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d say that Microsoft ended up with egg on its face Saturday... I get the feeling that the &quot;bid&quot; existed mostly as a way to pressure Google to make its own proposal, but Google didn&#039;t take the bait.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d say that Microsoft ended up with egg on its face Saturday&#8230; I get the feeling that the &#8220;bid&#8221; existed mostly as a way to pressure Google to make its own proposal, but Google didn&#8217;t take the bait.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Louis</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25748</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Louis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25748</guid>
		<description>tonza and Like: Remember that Google already owns about 5% of AOL and that AOL has a lot of online brands. It&#039;s more about reach and ad inventory than actual technology, as far as I see it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tonza and Like: Remember that Google already owns about 5% of <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> and that <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> has a lot of online brands. It&#8217;s more about reach and ad inventory than actual technology, as far as I see it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Louis</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25747</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Louis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:23:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25747</guid>
		<description>Myles: Microsoft has spent a lot of money across all their online properties so I think this move could actually get them to rethink and refocus a number of their initiatives...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Myles: Microsoft has spent a lot of money across all their online properties so I think this move could actually get them to rethink and refocus a number of their initiatives&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luke</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25734</link>
		<dc:creator>Luke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25734</guid>
		<description>Can you point me to one good reason why Google would buy AOL. Google has a track record of acquiring other companies. I&#039;ll give you that. But they&#039;ve always done it to gain useful technology that they couldn&#039;t easily recreate in-house. What technology does AOL have that Google would be interested in?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can you point me to one good reason why Google would buy <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym>. Google has a track record of acquiring other companies. I&#8217;ll give you that. But they&#8217;ve always done it to gain useful technology that they couldn&#8217;t easily recreate in-house. What technology does <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> have that Google would be interested in?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JoÃ£o</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25631</link>
		<dc:creator>JoÃ£o</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25631</guid>
		<description>Fred &amp; Tristan: Interesting idea, that of moving to a Unix Core OS... Ever since I switched to the Mac, back in the 10.2 / 9.2.2 &quot;Classic&quot; days (Now I&#039;m running Leopard but I&#039;ll still keep a Tiger partition to play some old games, since I&#039;m still stuck with a PowerPC ;) ), I&#039;ve been asking myself if it wouldn&#039;t be wiser for them to outright buy a Unix distribution and develop a sandboxed DOS/Win9x/NT mode... After all, Vista broke a lot of apps and peripherals anyway, and Apple, being the tiny midget company it is in comparison, managed to do the exact same thing in but a few years.

Sure, if Microsoft did that, it would break backwards compatibility, big time. But if they managed to make a phased transition from 9x to NT, why couldn&#039;t they try the same with Unix (or a Unix-ish OS of some sort)? Just to stick it to the world and prove they can[not] write an OS of their own? :P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred &amp; Tristan: Interesting idea, that of moving to a Unix Core <acronym title="Operating System">OS</acronym>&#8230; Ever since I switched to the Mac, back in the 10.2 / 9.2.2 &#8220;Classic&#8221; days (Now I&#8217;m running Leopard but I&#8217;ll still keep a Tiger partition to play some old games, since I&#8217;m still stuck with a PowerPC <img src='http://www.tnl.net/editor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  ), I&#8217;ve been asking myself if it wouldn&#8217;t be wiser for them to outright buy a Unix distribution and develop a sandboxed DOS/Win9x/NT mode&#8230; After all, Vista broke a lot of apps and peripherals anyway, and Apple, being the tiny midget company it is in comparison, managed to do the exact same thing in but a few years.</p>
<p>Sure, if Microsoft did that, it would break backwards compatibility, big time. But if they managed to make a phased transition from 9x to NT, why couldn&#8217;t they try the same with Unix (or a Unix-ish <acronym title="Operating System">OS</acronym> of some sort)? Just to stick it to the world and prove they can[not] write an <acronym title="Operating System">OS</acronym> of their own? <img src='http://www.tnl.net/editor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tonza</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25623</link>
		<dc:creator>tonza</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 10:50:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25623</guid>
		<description>I agree with Mitch,

and I&#039;ll go a step further daringly and say that because Apple have a technical stake in AOL (it&#039;s the underlying service that drives Apple&#039;s iChat infrastructure) then if anyone ought to acquire AOL, it should be Apple.

(But Google acquiring AOL ought to be interesting and useful for Apple, too, since I would imagine that Apple and Google have been technology-sharing and collaborating for a good while now!)

My 5 cents.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Mitch,</p>
<p>and I&#8217;ll go a step further daringly and say that because Apple have a technical stake in <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> (it&#8217;s the underlying service that drives Apple&#8217;s iChat infrastructure) then if anyone ought to acquire <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym>, it should be Apple.</p>
<p>(But Google acquiring <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> ought to be interesting and useful for Apple, too, since I would imagine that Apple and Google have been technology-sharing and collaborating for a good while now!)</p>
<p>My 5 cents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myles Eftos</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25608</link>
		<dc:creator>Myles Eftos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 04:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25608</guid>
		<description>Yeah, don&#039;t hold your breath for OpenID - Microsoft has pumped to much in to Windows Live ID, that I doubt they would drop it for a technology that is so young.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, don&#8217;t hold your breath for OpenID &#8211; Microsoft has pumped to much in to Windows Live ID, that I doubt they would drop it for a technology that is so young.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randy</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25605</link>
		<dc:creator>randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 03:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25605</guid>
		<description>Tristan: The next version of IE will spell doom for the browser market if they implement the so-called &quot;version targeting.&quot; But then, I wouldn&#039;t expect anything less from Microsoft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tristan: The next version of <acronym title="Internet Explorer">IE</acronym> will spell doom for the browser market if they implement the so-called &#8220;version targeting.&#8221; But then, I wouldn&#8217;t expect anything less from Microsoft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Louis</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25601</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Louis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 02:42:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25601</guid>
		<description>Mitch: Google already owns 5% of AOL so they&#039;d buy the rest. It&#039;s more about eyeballs than anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mitch: Google already owns 5% of <acronym title="America Online">AOL</acronym> so they&#8217;d buy the rest. It&#8217;s more about eyeballs than anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Louis</title>
		<link>http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-25600</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Louis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 02:41:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tnl.net/blog/2008/02/01/non-obvious-winners-and-losers-in-microsoft-yahoo-deal/#comment-25600</guid>
		<description>Fred: the next version of IE can pass the ACID test (there was something on their blog not too long ago). However, I wouldn&#039;t hold my breath for them moving to a Unix Core OS :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred: the next version of <acronym title="Internet Explorer">IE</acronym> can pass the ACID test (there was something on their blog not too long ago). However, I wouldn&#8217;t hold my breath for them moving to a Unix Core <acronym title="Operating System">OS</acronym> <img src='http://www.tnl.net/editor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
