3 ms·

I'm not sure passing on Youtube and Yahoo were bad decisions for Microsoft as stated by the article. As far as Youtube is concerned, AFAIK it still hasn't been

I'm not sure passing on Youtube and Yahoo were bad decisions for Microsoft as stated by the article. As far as Youtube is concerned, AFAIK it still hasn't been profitable for Google and would have likely bled more red ink with Microsoft in higher bandwidth charges, or alternatively, MS might have tried monetizing sooner slowing Youtube's growth. It's doubtful purchasing Yahoo in this economic climate would have been a big winner either. I also don't really buy the article's description of the Xbox business defying the data and business common sense. For a long time, Microsoft has wanted to be in the living room, purchasing WebTV in 1997. If anything, it's an example of how Microsoft has succeeded in the past; constantly improving upon it's past mistakes and not giving up as quickly as other companies might. The original XBox wasn't all that successful, but they did some smart moves with the 360, getting it out earlier than the PS3, providing good tools and support to their development community, and realizing that good networking support at the OS level to allow seamless multiplayer experiences was going to be a game changer for this generation of consoles.

msg 17y ago
As far as YouTube's bandwidth bill goes, it is probably low, as discussed a couple months back: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=886109 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=886109 I wouldn't deny that the Microsoft seems to be improving the Xbox from the customer's point of view... but I think the larger point is that the Xbox program is in the red. There was already a convergent device for the living room. It's a computer with an HDMI cable and a wireless keyboard, or maybe a wireless tablet. Packaging it as a console with funky controllers is not a game changer, no matter how many games come out for it.
- xsmasher 17y ago
  The thrust of that article is that YouTube's bandwidth bill at Google is zero, because of Google's dark fiber / peering. If MS had bought them the bill might be astronomical.
- willwagner 17y ago
  If Microsoft had purchased YouTube, I don't think it would have had the same low bandwidth costs that Google enjoys per that article.

msg 17y ago

As far as YouTube's bandwidth bill goes, it is probably low, as discussed a couple months back: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=886109 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=886109 I wouldn't deny that the Microsoft seems to be improving the Xbox from the customer's point of view... but I think the larger point is that the Xbox program is in the red. There was already a convergent device for the living room. It's a computer with an HDMI cable and a wireless keyboard, or maybe a wireless tablet. Packaging it as a console with funky controllers is not a game changer, no matter how many games come out for it.

xsmasher 17y ago
The thrust of that article is that YouTube's bandwidth bill at Google is zero, because of Google's dark fiber / peering. If MS had bought them the bill might be astronomical.
willwagner 17y ago
If Microsoft had purchased YouTube, I don't think it would have had the same low bandwidth costs that Google enjoys per that article.