3 ms·

The second sentence. Sounds like you maybe missed the first screenshot?

• ineedasername 5y ago
  I did miss it, thanks. I avoid Twitter, so browsing it on a phone makes it easy (for me) to miss how they stacked the images. But that doesn't change much about this story: what does it matter that they note features-- already on Google's roadmap-- when they then, as their stated reason for actually buying YouTube, is as a defensive move? Basically: "YouTube has some nice features but we're already building them and just want the company so Yahoo can't have them." That doesn't make this picture look any better for Google.
  • PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    > Basically: "YouTube has some nice features but we're already building them and just want the company so Yahoo can't have them." That's not what it says. If you want to go that basic: "Youtube is doing better at innovating here than us, but we have some stuff they don't, and if we acquired them we'd get the best of both worlds and deny it to Yahoo"
  • nl 5y ago
    > That doesn't make this picture look any better for Google. Even if you make the case this only anti-competitive there is nothing wrong with that behaviour by 2005 Google. It's not illegal or even significant in anyway.