James,

The Christmas spirit must be working over-time. No one has ever asked me to post MORE. But since you asked;

I like google. I use it because it is simple and easy for me to get what I want from it. I have done  side by side comparison searches on Google and Bing to confirm that the returned results are not identical. And they are not. But, there is something about the Google simple elegance that keeps it as my home page. I like their language tools that assist me in deciphering some russian aand german security info.

However, I feel they are on a collision course with doom, if they continue to try and be everything to everyone. If they spread themselves too thin, they will loose focus on what they do well. Plus the gimmickry of their employees, who can pass an IQ test of super-mensa proportions, means they have a work force of people who may or may not be in touch with reality. They have recently come up with a few solutions to problems that don't exist. All in an effort to be the best of the web. Like the open collaberation system they call WAVE. Everyone already has either Star office, Open-Office, Microsoft Office or a free copy of WordPerfect. And all of those except WP have all the sharing tools inside. The learning curve to master these tools makes people reluctant to change to a new system. So their latest efforts will not come to fruition until the niche market users become the old hands at the new google stuff, and the old guard retires. Can they wait that long?

I really enjoy youtube. But youtube gets more recognition than any of their advertisers. Kind of similar to the Kodak advertisements at the Koala exibit in the San Diego Zoo. Everyone one remembers the zoo, and seeing the Koalas. But almost no one even notices the adverts right in the middle of the exhibit. Sure a company can brag on their corp web site that they advertise on youtube. But it is like wetting your pants while wearing a dark suit. It gives you a warm feeling. But nobody notices. How much longer can it bleed before the plug gets yanked. Or maybe it provides a tax write off.

Respectfully,

Kurt

Also Kurt, I would like to hear your thoughts on Google and on Google and YouTube?

Hey Kurt - Never is a bit strong but I just can't them coming back to what they were, almost ever! ;) Honestly, I used to use them all the time and for everything, but they just aren't the same and I really am unimpressed with Carol Bartz as their CEO. Maybe she will pull a rabbit (or many rabbits as they need a bunch!) out of her hat, but I really don't see it as they have fallen so far, and while Google now has a few chinks in their armor and are seeing some of the stresses of the leadership position, they are still solidly at number 1 and their simple model seems to really work, and I think they will stay on top... for a few years anyway!! ;)

James,

Maybe if someone started a rumor that yahoo is sharing search info with the Feds, people would spread the word, and regenerate intrest in the old dog. Or maybe an Ad campaign to preach how their service is not monitored and unlike with google, your Yahoo searches will remain private in perpetuity. Build the under-dog sentimentality. Not that I disagree with your summation. I just don't like to say "NEVER."

Respectfully,

Kurt

To those who said Yahoo isn't dead, look at the close to my piece, that they are a second-rate player in the big search engine game. They are not dead, but compared to what they were, they might as well be.

And the homepage redesign, that is the best Carol Bartz can do? I was pretty suprised and not at all impressed, heck my brother is agreat web developer and I could have gotten him to do it for a hundredth the price it cost them, and I guarantee it would look and work a LOT better than what they have now!!

People seem to be forgetting that while the company is lising ground in the user percentage and revenue areas. it is also Yahoo services that are suffering, with few doing well at all. Additionally, regarding Carol Bartz, she did do good at Autodesk and while I acknoledge that, she is not doing so good at Yahoo and that is a fact. And rebranding and a new homepage, again this is a pretty thin strategy for a turnaround, and it doesn't look good!

Yahoo is not dead, not completely, but they are now a much smaller player in the big game of the search engine space, and it is unlikely that they will ever return to their once hallowed position as leader. (they will not, I am certain of it) and meanwhile the many things they offered for free are no longer there or now suffering (searches are not as good, email is terrible, small business area is struggling, etc.) they will continue to now be a once great fallen giant, nothing more.

What she should have done?

Social networking, more active position in mobile space, extending APIs for developers, non-closing of dormant accounts, language support, more relevant ads, country specific content, ... All this was right happening before them, but they did not pick a clue.

Even now, as I type http://yahoo.com.pk/, I am taken to http://world.yahoo.com/

I was quite of a Yahoo! fan in those days of glory that you have described. Little by little and thanks to a combination of non-evolution and lack of respect toward people like me who had more than one Yahoo! account and one sunny day all the emails were gone except a Yahoo! message saying that I haven't signed in for a long time. Yahoo! had to punish me in order to make me sign in more often. One day I got enough and didn't use Yahoo! services anymore. 

"To lead a company to success in the fast-paced world of today, people and companies must be open to change and new ideas." I agree with that. 

-Susan

James,  the evolution theory proclaims-  to survive, you have to adapt yourself.Yahoo seems to be a dinosaur of the Internet  .And we all know what happened to dinosaurs.  May be  Yahoo should hire Steve Jobs? Once, he resurrect Apple, it might work with Yahoo

James, I would agree with most of your points - Yahoo missed so many opportunities.  However, I think your comments re: Carol Bartz are a bit overstated:

Sure "Under Queen Carol's leadership, Yahoo continues to lose ground (earnings in the third quarter of 2009 were down 12 percent from the third quarter of 2008)" but how many other companies are having similar results that are down from last year.  The economy is not great!

Bartz has been there less than a year.  I don't think many investors expected, other than in their fantasies, that Yahoo could be turned around in that short a time frame.

Bartz has been willing to axe dead wood properties - the list of Yahoo products that she has helped cut is impressive.  She has also made similar tough calls on staff cuts.

I would ask - what are you proposing that Carol should have done?  It's easy to say she did not do a great job - but it's harder to identify a better path.

It's very easy to criticize Yahoo! board and founders, especially now--and I'm happy to pile on--but can we think of any other company that went through a similar trajectory, faced a similar change in market structure, and made the right decision? One that comes to mind is IBM -- bet on and stuck with mainframes way past the PC revolution (which it lost control of)-- and guess what? They're back on top, and mainframes are part of their success!

Does IBM's path, or Microsoft's (late on the Web, late on games, late on mobile, late on social, lagging in search, but still hugely profitable) have any lessons for Yahoo!?

Carol Bartz, by the way, had a very successful career kicking Autodesk into high gear, and surviving the onslaught of lower-priced design software. I think she was at Apple before that...so she was not a crazy choice -- except that her most recent decade(s)'s experience was *not* with broad consumer market.