svlug_decline_of_yahoo

This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.



From: Drew Bertola <drew@drewb.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:47:59 +0000 ()
To: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Cc: Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com>, svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?

Derek J. Balling writes: 
> In at least one of the cases he mentioned (Yahoo), the problem isn't
> "platform detection for the sake of platform detection", but really because
> the application in question (probably "Radio", "Companion",
> "FinanceVision", or "ShoppingVision") really doesn't work on anything other
> than the windows platform.

That's a shame.  Yahoo had always been purists when it came to there
web content.  The "sr. director, corporate development" (as of 3/2000),
John Briggs, reported to me that they were against such things as
"gratuitous java script" and all that.

But with their stocks tumbling to 1/5th their price a year ago, and
some mergers and buyouts which always alter cultural makeup, they may
be changing their ways.

Too bad for them.


===

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 08:06:55 -0800
To: drew@drewb.com
From: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?
Cc: Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com>, svlug@svlug.org

At 2:47 PM +0000 1/18/01, Drew Bertola wrote:
>That's a shame.  Yahoo had always been purists when it came to there
>web content.  The "sr. director, corporate development" (as of 3/2000),
>John Briggs, reported to me that they were against such things as
>"gratuitous java script" and all that.

There's a difference between "Gratuitous" (do it because you can), and
"necessary" (as in "This is a really integral part of the product and
simply isn't available on $OTHER_PLATFORM).

For example, if you know of a way to seamlessly integrate Yahoo!Companion
with "whichever version of Netscape is installed" on your linux box (e.g.,
without compiling it in from Mozilla code) please feel free to pipe up.

Likewise, the integration between browser and streaming content that
Windows Media Player permits.

If those features existed on other platforms, we'd be there... if it
wasn't, and those platform represented anything other than a microscopic
share of the market, then there might be incentive to come up with some
workaround for them (e.g., if 20% of the market couldn't see it or
something), but in reality, Linux is SUCH a small percentage that it really
isn't worth committing the man-hours for.

I'm a linux supporter, and you know that, but the reality is that whatever
figure you might think is accurate, is probably pretty high. Admittedly, I
have the benefit of access to hard statistics on a statistically-valid
sample set. (I'm trying to obtain permission to divulge a "snapshot" to put
it in perspective for you)

>But with their stocks tumbling to 1/5th their price a year ago, and
>some mergers and buyouts which always alter cultural makeup, they may
>be changing their ways.

Were you to check historically, you'd see that all these features have been
around for 1+ years, long before any "shakeout".

===

From: Drew Bertola <drew@drewb.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:44:02 +0000 ()
To: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Cc: drew@drewb.com, Bill Jonas <bill@billjonas.com>, svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?

Derek J. Balling writes:
> At 2:47 PM +0000 1/18/01, Drew Bertola wrote:
> >That's a shame.  Yahoo had always been purists when it came to there
> >web content.  The "sr. director, corporate development" (as of 3/2000),
> >John Briggs, reported to me that they were against such things as
> >"gratuitous java script" and all that.
> 
> There's a difference between "Gratuitous" (do it because you can), and
> "necessary" (as in "This is a really integral part of the product and
> simply isn't available on $OTHER_PLATFORM).

Thanks for clarifying the word gratuitous for me.  I really wasn't
sure why I threw that quote in.

> For example, if you know of a way to seamlessly integrate Yahoo!Companion
> with "whichever version of Netscape is installed" on your linux box (e.g.,
> without compiling it in from Mozilla code) please feel free to pipe up.

Are you saying that the source for Yahoo!Companion is available to be
compiled into mozilla.  That I did not know.  Where can I find it?

> Likewise, the integration between browser and streaming content that
> Windows Media Player permits.

What are they doing that's different from what Real does?  I've never
looked into it.

> If those features existed on other platforms, we'd be there... if it
> wasn't, and those platform represented anything other than a microscopic
> share of the market, then there might be incentive to come up with some
> workaround for them (e.g., if 20% of the market couldn't see it or
> something), but in reality, Linux is SUCH a small percentage that it really
> isn't worth committing the man-hours for.

Why port IE to Solaris?  It can't be that big (20%) share of the market.

> I'm a linux supporter, and you know that, but the reality is that whatever
> figure you might think is accurate, is probably pretty high. Admittedly, I
> have the benefit of access to hard statistics on a statistically-valid
> sample set. (I'm trying to obtain permission to divulge a "snapshot" to put
> it in perspective for you)
> 
> >But with their stocks tumbling to 1/5th their price a year ago, and
> >some mergers and buyouts which always alter cultural makeup, they may
> >be changing their ways.
> 
> Were you to check historically, you'd see that all these features have been
> around for 1+ years, long before any "shakeout".

I asked for a link from Karl(??) but haven't seen one yet.

I still point out that the Yahoo philosophy has changed.  They've
gotten more wrong in those 1+ years than they've gotten right.  I like
the fact that they switched search engines, but that doesn't drive me
to their sight.  Heck, I just use Google straight off my own links
page.


===

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 09:57:50 -0800
To: svlug@svlug.org
From: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Subject: [svlug] Browser Compatibility

OK, so the topic was "why doesn't Yahoo (et al) go out of their way to
support Linux".

Forget whatever high percentage of market-share you were told Linux has on
the desktop. It's wrong. Maybe its based on figures from sites like /. or
FreshMeat,or linux.com, I dunno. The figures below represent a "day in the
life" (last Friday, to be exact) in requests to yahoo.com.

Windows          :  94.26%
Unix (all flavor):    .73%

That disparity plummets even more on a weekend (typical "browser folks
day", with UNIX dropping to around 0.41%, and Windows increasing to 95%...
on weekends, even WebTV has a greater penetration than all UNIX users.

We can ponder Linux's growing market share all we want, but with a
statistically valid sample of the "general browsing populace", I can tell
you authoritatively that it isn't making significant gains in the
workstation environment. If anything, its losing ground. On the same day
the year BEFORE, UNIX accounted for 0.91%.

We can grouse about the lack of support, or we can realize that companies
won't invest the time/money/energy until our desktops represent a
significant chunk of their business and attempt to do something to increase
our own workstation penetration. :)


===

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:04:26 -0800
To: drew@drewb.com
From: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?
Cc: svlug@svlug.org

At 5:44 PM +0000 1/18/01, Drew Bertola wrote:
>> For example, if you know of a way to seamlessly integrate Yahoo!Companion
>> with "whichever version of Netscape is installed" on your linux box (e.g.,
>> without compiling it in from Mozilla code) please feel free to pipe up.
>
>Are you saying that the source for Yahoo!Companion is available to be
>compiled into mozilla.  That I did not know.  Where can I find it?

No, what I meant by that was to NOT require it to be compiled in. e.g.,
right now, as it stands, Yahoo can distribute a binary/DLL which just
"merges" with netscape or IE, whichever version happens to be running and
not have to worry about anything.... with Linux, the only way to get that
functionality into the browser would be to distribute source, and let
people compile it in. (which won't happen I don't suspect)

>> Likewise, the integration between browser and streaming content that
>> Windows Media Player permits.
>
>What are they doing that's different from what Real does?  I've never
>looked into it.

The integration is such that Windows Media Player lets you include URL's in
the stream, and they act as cue-cards for specified browser panels.

>Why port IE to Solaris?  It can't be that big (20%) share of the market.

As you'll no doubt have already seen from my stats. It isn't even close to
that. I (personally) think they were just trying to scare Netscape. :)

>I still point out that the Yahoo philosophy has changed.  They've
>gotten more wrong in those 1+ years than they've gotten right.  I like
>the fact that they switched search engines, but that doesn't drive me
>to their sight.  Heck, I just use Google straight off my own links
>page.

Remember that Yahoo isn't a search engine, it's a directory. If we can't
find what you're looking for in the directory, we kick it over to our
search engine partner (currently Google, although Inktomi and AltaVista
have both filled that role in the past) to see if they can find what you're
looking for.

Directories and search engines both serve distinct types of markets... one
is better for "literal string matches" and the other is better for
contextual searches.


===

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:34:52 -0800
From: Karen Shaeffer <shaeffer@best.com>
To: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Cc: svlug@svlug.org
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?

On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 08:06:55AM -0800, Derek J. Balling wrote:
> 
> I'm a linux supporter, and you know that, but the reality is that whatever
> figure you might think is accurate, is probably pretty high. Admittedly, I
> have the benefit of access to hard statistics on a statistically-valid
> sample set. (I'm trying to obtain permission to divulge a "snapshot" to put
> it in perspective for you)
> 

It's my impression that most Linux users avoid Yahoo and prefer Google. So,
your statistics would not be unbiased, if they originated from Yahoo.

===

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 11:44:36 -0800
To: Karen Shaeffer <shaeffer@best.com>
From: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
Subject: Re: [svlug] Microsoft Again?
Cc: svlug@svlug.org

At 11:34 AM -0800 1/18/01, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 08:06:55AM -0800, Derek J. Balling wrote:
>>
>> I'm a linux supporter, and you know that, but the reality is that whatever
>> figure you might think is accurate, is probably pretty high. Admittedly, I
>> have the benefit of access to hard statistics on a statistically-valid
>> sample set. (I'm trying to obtain permission to divulge a "snapshot" to put
>> it in perspective for you)
>>
>
>It's my impression that most Linux users avoid Yahoo and prefer Google. So,
>your statistics would not be unbiased, if they originated from Yahoo.

First, I don't think that "most Linux users avoid Yahoo" at all. Google and
Yahoo perform two completely different types of searches -- one contextual
and one literal -- and since "most Linux users" possess clue, they'll use
whichever search is better, specifically, for what they are looking for at
a given moment.

I think that, with 45 million page views a day, being the largest (or is it
2nd largest) in the world, that's a fairly representative sample. I would,
in fact, challenge you to find a larger more representative sample than
that. That sample covers essentially all walks of life, around the world.

===

the rest of The Pile (a partial mailing list archive)

doom@kzsu.stanford.edu