Google Considering Merger With Microsoft 563
buford_tannen writes "According to this New York Times Article (registration, etc.), Google may be considering a merger with Microsoft in the near future. As many people know, Google's search services are powered by Linux. "
Holy time machine! (Score:5, Funny)
Um, isn't it still about 5 months until April 1st?
April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:4, Troll)
Or perhaps Slashdot is celebrating some other holiday that involves scaring people.
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
You don't merge with Microsoft, they simply take you over.
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:4, Funny)
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:3, Informative)
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:3, Informative)
Google would have to buy over half those shares - a single share over half would be enough - to take over the company. This would be extremely expensive, but it is possible. Basically, Google doesn't have to buy Microsoft in the physical property sense of paying the entire value of the item. They just have to buy majority c
Re:April Fools year round with Slashdot (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, as of yesterday afternoon, Microsoft's market capitalization (number of outstanding shares times price of one share) was 282.44B [yahoo.com], which is a tad more than the 40B in the bank.
Moreover, if there was a takeover bid, the price would certainly rise, makeing the deal even more expensive.
Google doesn't have to buy Microsoft in the physical property sen
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:2, Funny)
Those silly Google guys!
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:5, Funny)
It's the end of the 'Net as we know it
It's the end of the 'Net as we know it
It's the end of the 'Net as we know it
And I feel fiiiiiiiine....
- David Stein
Grossly misleading headline (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but the headline and description are totally misleading. I don't care which submission was posted on this story, but at least get it right. A merger would have meant that Microsoft effectively controlled the Internet, at least until someone came along with a better technology. Here's the post that I originally submitted:
Microsoft and Google: Partners or Rivals?
The New York Times Technology [nytimes.com] reports that Microsoft and Google were in partnership/takeover discussions [nytimes.com] during the last two months, in part due to the competitive threat that Google poses to Microsoft. 'Microsoft - desperate to capture a slice of the popular and ad-generating search business - approached Google.' Ultimately Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page decided to go the initial public offering (IPO) [slashdot.org] route. How different might things be if Google had agreed to be acquired by Microsoft? Looks like we'll never know. This also puts some [slashdot.org] of the search industry frenzy [slashdot.org] and acquisition [slashdot.org] activities into a different [slashdot.org] context [slashdot.org]. Fittingly, here's a Google link [nytimes.com] to the article.
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:3, Insightful)
Think a little bit. Just think.
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:4, Insightful)
True enough, but since Google is only selling 10-15% of their stocks (at least according to the article) a hostile takeover isn't possible no matter how much money is thrown about.
A friendly over-the-counter takeover, now that's another matter..
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:5, Insightful)
False, only an additional 10-15% of shares will be on the market in the IPO. But the Venture Capital firms will still hold a large chunk of stock and they will be planning to unload as soon as they can.
Google are unlikely to take the Microsoft offer now because the IPO price will be six or seven times what the company is really worth - just like the old days...
Wait until after the IPO and there will be a different dynamic, Google will settle into a realistic valuation at which point it will be a takeover target.
The fact Google uses Linux is pretty irrelevant, if you look at what the machines are actually doing very little of the time will be spent in the kernel, porting to embedded windows would have no real impact either way. The principal cause of crashes is going to be hardware failure whichever way you work it.
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:3, Informative)
once on the board ( 3% of the public float) then they can make a tender offer for more. With the new laws in effect after Enron and others, the tender must be reviewed carefully and if they don't accept they might be subjected to sharehold legal action.
very careful steps have to taken since boards now have to sign documents also.
Onepoint
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:5, Insightful)
Eventually, people will start using another search engine. (Probably one that most of us habent heard of yet.) By then, Google's valuation will be in the toilet, and its stock-holders will be happy to sell out to MS. Now, this doesn't mean that Google will die. With every PC defaulting to "MSN Google", a lot of people are still going to use it, and it's search results will sometimes still be quite useful. But the era of Google innovating is about to end. For cool new technology, look to University labs and starving entrepeneurs, not to paper billionaires worried about when their stock options will vest.
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:3, Interesting)
My biggest fear in the whole Google floatation is that they go the way of Yahoo. I used to like Yahoo, even after I heard of Google because of the category searching.
Now, I look at their site, and it's just a great big load of stuff. What is ads and what is content is too heavily blurred. The page is now more like 2 screens than 1 because of this, so getting to the category area takes time.
I know what people will say - they have to advertise to get the revenue. Of course, if no-one visits, t
Re:Hostile takeover (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Holy time machine! (Score:3, Funny)
Has Redmond frozen over, then?
MS to Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS to Google (Score:3, Interesting)
Sounds like the Netscape scenario : Internet Search will be "embedded" into Longhorn, and if successful, so long Google.
We may have to remember this day when, by saying no to MS, Google has committed suicide.
But there are a few if's in this scenario
- MS search service successful,
- MS OSes still dominant when longhorn released in 2007
-
Re:MS to Google (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:MS to Google (Score:3, Insightful)
covering all the franchise bases... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:MS to Google (Score:2, Funny)
Re:MS to Google (Score:3, Funny)
Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:5, Informative)
The Ledger (NY Times business section) - Microsoft and Google: Partners or Rivals? [theledger.com]
'Microsoft - desperate to capture a slice of the popular and ad-generating search business - approached Google within the last two months to discuss options, including the possibility of a takeover.'
Financial Times (business section) - Google approached by Microsoft for takeover [ft.com]
'The approach "gained little traction" , according to the report, with Google indicating that it preferred to pursue an initial public offering.'
CNN Money - Microsoft courting Google [cnn.com]
'Microsoft may still be interested in pursuing the Web search company at a later date' (The page title is 'Mr. Softee Courting Google' despite the article heading.)
It appears that Microsoft is trying to threaten Google with "If you don't merge with us, we'll make MSN search built into Longhorn, and everybody will use it instead of you because they won't know any better." To Google's credit, they think they can do a better job, find new and interesting areas to innovate, and generally tell Microsoft to suck it. The real question remains: Will Google be as good once they are a public company?
And Saddam will be GWB's V.P. candidate. (Score:2, Funny)
Whew!!!! Slashdot Halloween scare story!
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:4, Funny)
That's because "Mister Softee" is the nickname for Microsoft among stock traders (from the symbol MSFT).
I'm sure this is Melinda Gates' least favorite nickname for Bill...
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:3, Funny)
Perhaps she thought it up first? After all, "Microsoft" isn't the double entrendre it once was.
OK, that was a little harsh, even for a world-dominator wannabe like convicted monopolist Billy Gates...
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:3, Funny)
"That's because "Mister Softee" is the nickname for Microsoft among stock traders (from the symbol MSFT)."
Shouldn't it be Miss Fart?
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:4, Interesting)
There's good and bad with the going public thing... if controlling interest remains with the current head(s) of Google, they may operate the same way they do now. World Wrestling Entertainment, for example, went public, but the McMahon family has the controlling interest... so when other stockholders bitch at them they basically say "Oh, really? Too bad."
One problem with that approach is that your stock price will go down with that attitude...
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think that it would be up to google management. Since Microsoft has been recognized by the government, the matter would be up to the FTC. And I think that we all know that this would be an anti-competitive move.
That said, I'm sure Microsoft could pay someone off but we would all find a new search engine once Microsoft ruined google and the employees leave to start fresh.
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, will Google's Board of Directors even have the option of resisting a Microsoft bid once they're representing public shareholders?
Offer They Can't Refuse (Score:5, Interesting)
It's clear that Microsoft recognizes the value of Google's technology.
I don't know about you, but my web browsing relies heavily on Google to find sites that I will look at. I mean, that level of reliance is almost like how I rely on libc . And any businesses that I might find on the other end probably consider high Google rank worth a lot of money.
Microsoft, of course, loves to be in a position where people and businesses have to rely upon them heavily. It's potentially quite profitable.
Until now, people have relied on Google's goodwill not to use their powerful position unfairly. Since there are monetary incentives for Googles business to "manage" those searches differently, I'm alway apprehensive and would be appalled if a company with Microsoft's track record were to gain that additional power (as if they aren't sufficiently powerful now).
Re: This ain't scary. (Score:5, Informative)
What to do? Switch to Teoma.
I use Teoma interchangably with Google. Teoma results are as relevant as Google's yet slightly different, however they almost always have the best most relevant results in common.
Teoma's search site is as sparse and ad free as Google's and the search results are of as high a quality. The only Google feature I would miss if it were to dissapear tomorrow is the Google cache.
You can pry Google from my cold, dead fingers... (Score:3, Insightful)
I use Teoma interchangably with Google. Teoma results are as relevant as Google's yet slightly different, however they almost always have the best most relevant results in common.
The problems I see with Teoma are
1) they seem to crawl sites pretty infrequently (I see two old pages of mine listed...one 404's, another has had all its content moved to my new site (and redirects you there after a couple seconds). Google appears to visit my site at least once a month, sometimes mor
Dude, Google partially powers Teoma. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:2)
Well, what would you say if you were negotiating price? Generally an IPO raises more money than a sale (because the public is the greatest fool.) But it is not uncommon for a company to file an S-1, get a read from their ibankers for price and then sell the company to someone else. It would almost never make sense to sell before proceeding partway down the IPO path--how else could you get a feel for value?
Couple that with the fact
Re: They already do this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft already points their browsers to MSN.com by default, but amazingly many people know better and switch their search page to Google. So if Google didn't need any help from Microsoft before, why would they need it now? Thankfully this tactic hasn't worked as well for micro$oft as they had originally hoped.
Economist article. (Score:3, Informative)
The Economist also have an article [economist.com] today on the subject of Goggle.
The article speculates a possible $15bn Goggle IPO, and argues that this would be risky, because unlike Yahoo, Lycos, MSN etc, Goggle have only a single product, and can easily be displaced by a couple of clever computer geeks, just like the founders of Goggle did with Alta vista.
Worryingly, they argue that Goggle should head into the paid for search search market in order to increase their current $150 m profit. ($150m is cle
Re:Before anybody gets too worked up... (Score:2)
I actually started this as an email to daddypants@slashdot.org saying "How could you write something so misleading?", but then I figured it would do more good as a commment.
PLEASE GOD NOOOOO!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt I could trust the results if Microsoft ran the show.
Man... (Score:2)
Be very afraid! (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "WINDOWS"?
SEARCH: Anti-trust
Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "CAPITALISM"?
SEARCH: Bill Gates
Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "YOUR NEW CORPORATE OVERLORD"?
Re:Be very afraid! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, no results found! Did you mean "CAPITALISM"?
Funny, perhaps. However, the reality is that Microsoft broke the rules of the free market in the context of even a libertarian government, and they will face the consequences. They painted themselves into a corner, where companies like Red Hat, Sun, IBM, Lindows, etc. are standing outside the door smiling widely. Of course, this will play out over the next decade, but it is rather inevitable even without the Justice Department intervening.
Re:Be very afraid! (Score:3, Insightful)
And when you ask them, what did you want out of all this, the only answer you get back is more.
We all secretly wish to rule the world. To have it all. We despise Bil
Re:Be very afraid! (Score:3, Insightful)
What are the rules of a free market?
Hrm. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, the whole point of the subject was to draw comments like this, so nice troll submitter, and nice troll to the admin who approved it.
Also seen in the headlines:
US Government considers merger with MS, Apple considers merger with MS, and GWB considers quitting presidency and working at Mickey D's.
Fun, isn't it?
Re:Hrm. (Score:2)
Things like this go on all the time behind closed doors though. Rumour and speculation have taken over real facts here I think.
If you cant beat them buy them (Score:2, Informative)
now this? (Score:2)
did they just wake up one day and decide, "we've been the best for a long time now, why don't we find some ways to really suck for a while?"
First post merger search would be... (Score:2)
I would rather (Score:2)
The siren call of all that money is tempting. but the danger is that you end up loosing all control. I am sure there are many former dot.com founders who have interesting tales of caution along this line.
I do not want google to become another thing to be looted by a bunch of investment types or by MS.
I can see the errors now... (Score:5, Funny)
Nooo.. (Score:2)
not right away (Score:2, Informative)
"While the overture appears to have gained little traction - Google indicated that it preferred the initial offering route, the executives said"
However they indicated it could happen in the future -
"Though seemingly spurned, Microsoft may still be interested in pursuing Google at a later date, according to an executive briefed on the discussions"
This would be very troubling if MS did buy Google at some point. Google ma
Even if Google refuses Microsoft's offers and... (Score:5, Insightful)
At least when you're a private firm these things are controlled by the vision of a few people who agree on things and a not a fractured group who are, for the most part, out to make a buck.
Re:Even if Google refuses Microsoft's offers and.. (Score:3, Informative)
Google could easily either hold a bunch of shares with the original owners (preferably more
Not entirely true (Score:3, Informative)
If google is public and MS wants it, the only hope it would have of remaining "free" is that the FTC would decide MS doesn't need to expand its "monopoly" into
Re:Even if Google refuses Microsoft's offers and.. (Score:2)
Re:Even if Google refuses Microsoft's offers and.. (Score:3, Informative)
And Homer says: (Score:2, Funny)
hmmm... Googles of donuts... auauguuuggghhh
your planet is doomed! DOOOOOMED! (Score:3, Funny)
Entering the search engine market (Score:3, Interesting)
If they do team up, I sure hope they fix that crap in IE that re-routes me to this:
"We can't find "doesnotexist.c0m"
You can try again by typing the URL in the address bar above.
Or, search the Web:
Go to MSN Search to see complete results for "doesnotexist.c0m".
A re-route to google would be far less annoying.
Two observations: (Score:5, Interesting)
Second: I can see the top 5 results from a search for "Linux" now:
1. Independent study shows Windows more secure than Linux
2. How to lower TCO by switching from Linux to Windows
3. Linux for terrorists, says expert.
4. Nazis retake Germany, install Linux
5. Linux bad for innovatoin, says expert panel.
Of course, all of these links will be to "archived" versions of "authentic" articles on a MS server somewhere.
Seriously. If we can't trust the MS marketing engine to be honest about their products, how can we trust them to keep their grubby fingers out of search results?
At least we'll still have alltheweb.com.
Re:Two observations: (Score:3, Informative)
My 2c.
Microsoft may be interested in the search engine.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Search results (Score:3, Funny)
1) Guide to Migrating to Windows from UNIX and Linux
2) Windows Services for UNIX 3.0 Product Overview
3) 247804 - How to Remove Linux and Install Windows on Your Computer
If you can't beat 'em buy 'em / Apple affected??? (Score:2)
Gee Thanks... (Score:2)
CLAP CLAP!! Great job Taco (Score:5, Insightful)
The article says M$ approached google for purchase and were told to get lost. And slashdot says Google considering to merg with M$. Agreed you editors are busy people but please do atleast a little research before posting anything. Or you just dont care maybe?
I hope /not/ (Score:2)
Let's hope not! (Score:2)
I will stop using Google. (Score:2)
Easier then creating their own (Score:2)
Sounds like monopoly in action.
Google wont run on Linux after that.. just one more 'example of a failed Linux company, see they arent viable' to tout around...
the only company MS is buying (Score:2)
Oh no!!! (Score:2)
So I guess the people who predicted the fall of the internet might be proven right after all.
- MS merges with (takes over) Google
- All Google's Linux based hosts are replaced with Windows boxes.
(- Internet slowdown)
- Latest worm exploits MS security vulnerability, spreads through all IE browsers doing searches, then through local shares to servers.
(- Internet slowdown)
BANG! :-)
ztwo points, and the real underlying issue (Score:3, Informative)
1. Even the N.Y. times wasn't able to offer much real evidence for merger talks. Also, remember that they are just talks, and a preference for IPO was stated by the company.
2. If Microsoft acquires Google, give them enough time and they will commercialize it to the point that it isn't as useful. At that point, the private world will once again rise up to meet the demand.
The real underlying conflict here is between privately and publicly owned business. The mass markets and finely tuned product quality have always been at odds.
Good ol' NYT journalism (Score:3, Insightful)
Need I say more?
Err, what happened to Google rule #1 (Score:3, Insightful)
This is totally wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Isn't the summary backwards? (Score:4, Informative)
-h-
My tinfoil hat.... (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Microsoft Loses Antitrust case. [gpo.gov]
2. Bush gets into the Whitehouse and expected results of antitrust case become very wattered down. [channelsupersearch.com]
3. Microsoft employee becomes chief of cyber security for the government - authors 'National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace' [microscopemagazine.com].
4. Google is known to have former NSA people on the payroll [indymedia.org].
5. Microsoft's 'trusted computing [cam.ac.uk]' strategy includes building an all in one DRM gateway [ebnonline.com].
6. Microsoft goes after Google...
It seems to me that Microsoft is tightening their ties with government in an attempt to influence the upcoming DRM war. What better way to do that than to have an inside man to set internet security policy, to control all access of electronic resources into the home, and to control the most important search portal. There are probably other evidence to support this view - but I don't have the time to 'google' it all for you (kind of ironic, if it wasn't so scary in a 'big brother is watching you' sort of way...)
To paraphrase Frank Herbert, "he who controls the access, controls the universe"
Join the dots jouranlism (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing to see here, move along.
TWW
Try it out now! (Score:3, Funny)
echo "207.68.176.250 www.google.com" >>
You'll love it.
Sweet (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wrong Holiday (Score:2)
Re:This is a good thing! (Score:5, Funny)
More bandwidth, processing power, and resources. I hope this goes through ASAP.
I hate to disagree, but ff Microsoft were to buy Google and start running it, wouldn't it go through ASP?
Re:Panic!! (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt google's seriously going to sell their souls to microsoft, but it wouldn't suprise me too much if they were thinking about it. Who could resist that much money, honestly.
Re:Assuming this is true, what are the alternative (Score:2, Informative)
Re:eek! (Score:2)
Re:microsoft.com is also running Linux! (Score:3, Informative)
The are still running Windows and IIS in the background. Notice the IIS for Webserver, they have not ported IIS to linux.
You can read about it in historical news on Netcraft.
Have fun...
Re:Google is already a creepy entity. (Score:3, Informative)