Microsoft And Time Warner Resume Talks 58
An anonymous reader writes: "Seems as though Microsoft and Time Warner have come back together at the negotiating table." From the article: "The two companies are focused on combining AOL's Web content with Microsoft's search-engine technology, although other aspects of the talks are sketchy. It isn't clear whether they are considering merging their Internet dial-up businesses, which generate lots of cash, the paper said. The two companies originally began discussions about some sort of Internet deal earlier this year. But the talks stalled in the late summer over a range of issues including technical obstacles and questions about control."
ftc (Score:1, Funny)
Well, if they do merge, I just hope the new company is called HyperCompuGlobalMegaNet.
Re:ftc (Score:3, Interesting)
In most places whether its, AOL, Earthlink or MSN... you are connecting to a third party POP like UU.net.
Funny how that works...
What? (Score:5, Funny)
Okay, there are two unknowns here. Can somebody tell me what is AOL's web content, and which is Microsoft's search engine technology?
Re:What? (Score:1, Troll)
Re:What? (Score:2)
Re:What? (Score:1)
Great news! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great news! (Score:2)
Re:Great news! (Score:1)
Alta Vista Babel Fish Translation (Score:2)
The comment itself translates to: "At present Dialup is probably still for sale, but in 3-4 years hardly still someone will probably pay for it, and within the Broadband range will have both MSN and AOL will oversleep. That can become thus probably only so a kind club of the dead Provider."
Monopoly on Evil? (Score:1)
Re:Monopoly on Evil? (Score:1)
Re:Monopoly on Evil? (Score:3, Insightful)
The companies poisoning our earth, funding civil wars in Africa over stupid clear rocks, or even pilfering the pockets of employees and shareholders are far more evil.
I know this is slashdot and all, but you could try and tone done the rhetoric to "semicoherent."
Re:Monopoly on Evil? (Score:1)
What MS is evil of another magnitude. Any old corporation can lobby the govt to drop bombs on brown people (it's easy!), MS is going after our ability to persist information, to pass what we know to our children and grandchildren.
Re:Monopoly on Evil? (Score:1)
[rising to the tollbait] yeah, they'll be running it all on SCO, powered by bio-diesel created from dead genetically-modified baby seals which were clubbed to death by Larry Ellison.
Great for Yahoo, bad for Google (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Great for Yahoo, bad for Google (Score:2)
Re:Great for Yahoo, bad for Google (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Great for Yahoo, bad for Google (Score:1)
Google spend their time thinking about how to keep their users using their service and realise the advertising bucks will roll in as a 'by-product'. MS don't get it even now and still think about how they can 'screw' their users.
Relax people. When did u ever hear someone say they used MSN for search?
Re:Great for Yahoo, bad for Google (Score:2, Insightful)
It seems like MS is going back to the "cut off their air supply" strategy they employed with Netscape.
Is This a Big Deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
The paranoid might see this as some sort of threat, I suppose. Perhaps you should look to Google if you want to fuel the flames of your paranoia. They have a pretty aggressive strategy for, well, just about everything. Multimedia, search, searching multimedia, desktop search, hell, I heard they're even coming out with BrainSearch so you can remember who that was you slept with last night.
As for the dialup market... it's dying off. And with so many locales having serious talks of wireless-for-everyone -- why, one taste of the difference between wireless and dialup will sell just about anyone.
Anyone that thinks this is a big deal as far as some monster being created is probably either distributing FUD, or open to buying it.
Re:Is This a Big Deal? (Score:2)
dev/null?
Re:Is This a Big Deal? (Score:1)
Or did you mean
Big deal if cable is involved (Score:2)
OK, call me paranoid if you want, and this will either be modded troll or never noticed, but here goes.
The one thing Tim Warner has the would really benefit Microsoft is its cable franchises. This would be a big lever to impose Microsoft tech in the entertainment field - Windows Media formats and MS DRM.
If Microsoft took over your cable modem services, that would be the real nightmare scenario. One way or another, subtle or overt, they would require using Windows as a condition of internet access. And t
Marriage of Content & Tech (Score:4, Interesting)
Just a thought.
Re:Marriage of Content & Tech (Score:5, Insightful)
No beneficial outcome for MS (Score:2)
My prediction. If anything comes out of this, it will be Microsoft supporting both formats.
Eventually... (Score:2, Funny)
It sell everything from software to pornography to heating oil, and will immediately either purchase or simply firebomb any competitor out of existence.
People will call this system a "free market".
And all will be well with the world.
I'm not worried. (Score:3, Funny)
They can raise the software and heating oil prices.
If they touch my Sunny Leone vids, it's gonna be war.
Re: (Score:1)
Why the focus on Dial-Up (Score:4, Insightful)
It just boggles my mind that a service that has been made obsolete (except in rural areas, but that will happen eventually too) is still focused on by such large companies. You'd think at least AOL would have learned from their mistakes and switched their focus entirely by now.
Re:Why the focus on Dial-Up (Score:2)
Makes me think of the movie "other peoples money" (Score:5, Insightful)
"I bet 10 years ago there were dozens of dial-up companies...5 years from now there will only be one
and I bet you it will be the best damn dial up company you ever saw...but would you want to be a shareholder in that company?"
This is not an aquisition to create a new internet behemoth, this is cannibalism. This is microsoft eating AOL getting its list of technophobes and little old grannies. Its Time Warner dumping AOL for as much money as it can get. The only worrysome part is Microsoft getting control of Netscape. I suspect we can get the feds to force Microsoft to sell off Netscapes trademarks and assets as a condition of sale and that SHOULD be Mozillas stand on the issue.
Re:Makes me think of the movie "other peoples mone (Score:1)
This won't happen - some thoughts (Score:4, Interesting)
Any company that just buys and absorbs AOL is going to take a stock hit. The market knows AOL is piece of shit, with dial-up customers abandoning it, no penetration in broadband (locked out in effect by telecoms and cable gatekeepers), the naive new-to-the-information-super-highway-please-rape-
Even M$N employees have said MSN is at best a bit of fun. A place where cash is burned on shiny projects just to stay relevent and keep a presense. Microsofts heart just isn't in the internet at all, that might change so they keep an oar in.
Microsoft could take 30% of googles ad revenue and M$FT stock wouldn't budge. M$ is just too bloody big, it would be a penny in the ocean of cash. But googles stock would probably be in some trouble. M$ would just be hurting google for the sake of hurting something. Possible even typical (but would the share-holding sheep go along in 2005 when its their dividend being sqandered on balmers he-man [really you need to see the current mini-blog] ego-trip board games)
MSN messenger and AIM already link up anyway.
You can mix pig-shit and horse-shit anyway you want - but you'll never make a tasty treat.
Re:This won't happen - some thoughts (Score:1)
You might not think that would suffice as a reason for MS to blow excess funds, but there are signs that something about Firefox has some factions within Microsoft very fearful. Perhaps that fear is justified.
No way there's going to be a merger (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus, who who would be on top? I don't think Bill would enjoy biting the pillow.
Re:No way there's going to be a merger (Score:1)
Bill reserves that particular honour for Windows users.
Both are ISPs, though ... that's what's crucial (Score:5, Insightful)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=164421&thresh
Alright, supposing for the sake of argument that the Level 3 filtering is just a rivalry between two ISPs
As to regulation, a legitimate purpose of government is to prevent such abuse by corporate entities (which have legal rights as "persons" under the law, yet have far greater freedom at the public's expense to acquire wealth than do either you or I). Of course, the fact that government has not done so in the past and has allowed the increase of such abuse means that government will probably not do so in this case.
As usual, we cannot depend upon government to protect us even though it should. So, it becomes important to get the word out to so people to stop subsidizing such abuse by dropping both Microsoft's and Time Warner. For those left without alternatives, isn't that an argument in and of itself to prevent monopolization by these giants?
Nothing to do with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray? (Score:2)
These aren't problems (Score:2)
Those are never problems for Microsoft...
chemistry 101 (Score:1, Funny)
Hungover Hank
Jennifer Government (Score:1)
MSN playing catch up? (Score:1)
One great article by Microsofts Scoble http://radio.weblogs.com/0001011/2005/10/04.html#a 11372 [weblogs.com] shows that there is along way yet before search is over, the domination by Google is only for a short time if they only were to protect their lead but would be
How will Ballmer sell this one? (Score:1)
You can't say you didn't see this one coming... (Score:1)
Who is trying to keep the monopoly here? (Score:1)
Most Window users are more of alternate operating systems such as Linux than they are of alternatives to Norton's antivirus. So many computers come with Norton's that the vast majority have never used anything else and aren't aware of alternative AV programs, such as AVG, Avast, NOD32, etc. The only other antivirus software I've seen being sold at Wal-Mart (the biggest store chain in the US) is McAffee's.
Seems to me that Symantec has more of a monopoly on AV applications than Microsoft does on operating s