Oh dear my heart bleeds for poor old M$, don't like it do they when Microshafting happens to them :)

'Microsoft grumbled that the search, advertising and IM deal between its two biggest internet rivals, which was inked last Thursday, would “limit choices for advertisers and publishers” and “destroy a competitive alternative.”'

Pot

Kettle

Black.

but of course it is ok if Microsoft buy out Yahoo and do do everything they are claiming as it is them doing it then so that makes it fine.

calling the kettle black!! (Note, this is a TRADITIONAL saying, no racial connotations are intended!)

Now, I'm not suggesting that this hook-up is a 'good thing' by any means, but seriously, BG & Co, you are in NO position to make this kind of comment.

Key points:

"limit choices"

“destroy a competitive alternative"

"what amounts to a price-fixing agreement"

"hamstring competition"

"consolidate more than 90 per cent of the [...] market"

These are all mainstays of Micro$not's business practices, and are not to be performed by anyone else.

I'd rather see Google and Yahoo! merging, than an M$ takeover. In fact, Google-Yahoo are much more compatible in technology base and mindsets than M$-Yahoo.

All the Google and Yahoo stuff for mobile phones, for example, will run seamlessly with my Blackberry, while the MS stuff (MSN Spaces, specifically) will rebuff me with "OS not compatible" crap. As long as Microsoft doesn't have a big share into the web, you can guarantee that most websites can run on other browsers than IE. I'm pretty sure that if MS takes over Yahoo! they'd use it to push their god-awful Silverlight stuff, that only runs in Windows/IE.

Cry all you want, Ballmer. We don't care anyway.

Nobody can have a monopoly but MS!

Competition is against the Mafia ethic.

And what sauce would you like on your goose, Mr Ballmer..?

If Microsoft doesn't like it, it MUST be a good idea. Generally that is a good truth indicator.

Now if Carl Icahn would take note, we would all be happier!

I think I like it better as "Yagle!" or Yoogle!?

-dZ.

What could be funnier than Microsoft fussing about the evils of monopolistic practices?

What would be really interesting is to have MS write up a set of remedies that would maintain innovation, competition, and consumer choice in the Googahoo monopoly, but with the (secret) caveat that MS would have to abide by the same remedies, only substituting Windows and Office for Google and Yahoo.

>>"Our position has been clear since April that any deal between these two companies will increase prices for advertisers and start to consolidate more than 90 per cent of the search advertising market in Google's hands," he said.

90% share? That would be terrible. Of course 90% share in the OS market is OK, just not in search apparently.

A quote from Bill Gates.

"The world is unfair, get use to it".

It applies to Microsoft too.

ok, so I've finally come to terms with leccy, mobe, and lappy, but please ban the following from commentspace:

M$, Micro$oft, MicroShit, Micro$hit, MicroShaft, Micro$haft, Crapple, CrapOS, Crapintosh, WinBlows, Slowlaris, Screwgle, Farceberk, BSd, hpox, lunix, ReiserFS, and any other shitty non-pun?

And for those who think that this kind of carry on is funny/insightful/useful, can they please just fuck off to appleinsider, zdnet or slashdot?

... Oh no wait! Thats now "Desperate Desperate Desperate"

Microsoft and Yahoo joining forces could have actually created competition for Google.

Google is far and away the biggest search engine around, and thus them teaming up with their competition IS anti-competitive.

Competition always breeds innovation, once you get a monopoly, you get Lazy (Microsoft being a good example), whats to stop Google getting the same?

"They don't like it up 'em".

@Snail is right, this tie up *would* potentially be anti-competitive. Just because we are enjoying the schadenfreud of seeing MS being beaten at their own game shouldn't distract our attention from the substantive issue.

I think the subject says enough. :)