Yahoo + Microsoft still not good enough match for Google

VenturBeat redirected me to Jason Calacanis's blog and I totally agree with his comments.

Yahoo was once the No. 1 search site on the Internet, but no one remembers now. That’s because the company farmed out its search engine, the core of its brand and largest source of its traffic, to upstart Google. Yahoo’s increasingly cluttered home page shooed Web users away to the faster, cleaner Google interface which delivered the same search results more quickly and effectively. 

In 2009, Yahoo didn’t need to make the same mistake again with Microsoft. In fact, it’s Microsoft that needs to grow the audience for its expensive Bing search engine. Instead of outsourcing, Yahoo should have done what Microsoft did: Acquire a bunch of core technologies and build a Google rival. But no, Yahoo took their eyes off the prize by ceasing to innovate and trying to bizdev their way to success. That’s why the founders of Flicker and del.icio.us, prize Yahoo acquisitions of innovative Web 2.0 sites, have left the company, as did chief scientist of search Marc Davis last week. Microsoft, meanwhile, invested in building the search engine Yahoo should have developed. 

Carol Bartz is a competent dealmaker and operator, but not a product genius like the Google kids. Without innovation, Yahoo will now die on the vine. The End.

This deal may be good for Microsoft and will cause big problem for yahoo in long run. Don't know how much people remember from 2000-2004 Yahoo search was powered by Google then Yahoo built its own search technology but people moved out with Google. same will happen if Microsoft search is good enough. if not people will move to Google. Eitherways Yahoo is the loser.

And Microsoft has no focus no strategy and keep following the new popular kid in town. It was AOL, Yahoo, and now its google. with big cash from windows + office business they are tring to do everything and anything but nothing good. and I feel best of Microsoft is behind them.

Inyosys & Capgemini...

Infosys is considering a bid for Capgemini that's speculation is making news in Indian as well as international media. If such deal happens then it would be the biggest overseas acquisition by an Indian corporate.

Most of the Indian IT services firms are US focused with very little IT consulting revenues. Infosys is no exception. I was check number close to 75% revenue last year came from US region while Europe constituted less than 20% and Consulting revenues were less than 5%. Clearly, Capgemini acquisition would help Infosys move up the IT services value chain and also establish a significant presence in European market.

Ofcourse if this deal does happen then Integration will be very big challenge.

In the News: Infosys likely to acquire Capgemini

Google Voice Search

Google is testing new Voice Search, to connect to local businesses in the U.S. using your phone, for free by dial the toll-free number 1-800-GOOG-411 (1-800-466-4411) and speak the name of a business or its category. You can choose to connect to the business directly over phone or, if you are calling from your mobile phone, you can also say "text message" and we'll send you the business's details by SMS.

Currently Google is not charging for this service but ofcourse regular phone charges will apply.

Google, a step ahead of the rest.

M&A: Oracle bought Hyperion.. so what happens now?

BI Industry most certainly must be wondering about the Oracle’s Hyperion Deal, since its came as surprise news. But Ofcourse, its obvious for Oracle to buy Hyperion. Oracle is in buying-mood for some years now to trigger more growth and market share deals in financial planning applications (essbase,etc..), solutions-oriented sales force applications (peoplesoft,etc) and now BI tools.

Growth by acquisition is not New but Can Oracle successfully acquire companies (remember Cisco days) ?? by industry track record specially in product integration, answer is ‘wait-and-watch’.

But trend will continue — more acquisition can be expected in BI market. I would imagine SAP is working on their product strategy since many small vendor are still active.

Wage Inflation...not to Worry

Widely acknowledged by the outsourcers themselves and until now kept at bay by strong growth, the continual increase in salaries at top Indian companies (tech specially) is changing from annoyance to a present danger. Indian companies are no longer merely competing with one another for the best and the brightest, they must also compete with other MNC opened shops in india.

Why its not to worry? because:

• The rising costs will turn away the benefits of India. Even if the wage inflation rate continues to grow at the present rate, then only in 2032 will there be an overlap with the rates of U.S.
• wages paid to workers in India represent such a small percentage of total costs for companies that operate there, a 15% increase in salaries results in no more than a 2% rise in prices charged for IT services, says Narayanan. That's well below the current U.S. inflation rate.
• IT suppliers in India, for example, are lowering their costs by moving to 'tier two' cities--away from traditional high-tech centres- and opening delivery centres in other countries.

RBI is keeping eye on it - the wage disparity between the U.S. and India remains vast, and it's going to take many years of double-digit inflation in India for that to change. till then relax.

but our worries are : Remaining in position of low-cost workfoce is NOT something great and to be proud of. heap low-cost IT work which only means the nation will remain a poor developing country for another decade or so.

• The cost of outsourcing to India is the cost of maintaining a sufficient stable quality of product from India.
• Wage inflation isn't the issue here - staff stability is. As wages go up, and the supply of qualified labor goes down in India, the job hopping that will occur will be as bad there as it was here in the early 90's. This will have a further deleterious effect on product quality and quantity out of India.
• This will put almost instant pressure on margins for companies. They will have to work incentives and bonuses just to get key staff that are trained and up to speed on key client projects to stay on board.
  

The timeframe will be compressed. It's not going to take India as much time. Witness the evolution of the middle classes in the Asian Tigers in the 90's. It didn't take long for China to start robbing Malaysia, Taiwan, and Thailand of manufacturing business that made its way originally from Mexico.

In other words, India's future as the tech industry's top outsourcing hub rests not so much on whether it can continue to offer the lowest costs--that seems probable--but whether it will produce enough skilled graduates to ensure that the work is done at acceptable quality levels.

Upgrade to Vista now or WAIT?

Most hyped Software Product released, with 6bn$ investment and over 5years in development - Finally Windows Vista is here. Now, Microsoft marketing blitz for Windows Vista has begun. Confusion and temptation of when to buying Vista?? is question of the season.

If you want a truly seamless transition to Vista - especially if you're upgrading your existing PC versus buying a new one with it pre-installed - I'd say wait. Not the possible 11 months or so it will take for Service Pack 1 to come out, but maybe a month or two to let software and hardware vendors to work out the kinks with their apps and drivers.

Also, Vista haven't publish kernel OS code for 3rd Third party tools/software. So you will not find any 3rd party software for Vista as of yet.

Its good to remember - Historically Microsoft releases a really shoddy product on its initial launch. Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME (never had a shining moment anyway), and Windows XP were all mediocre or even terrible until the first or even second service pack or equivalent, with the exception of ME which was just plain terrible.

Vista already has known issues with lots of common hardware. It also doesn't seem to have *really compelling* features to drive an upgrade. And of course, the biggest reason to not upgrade now, is the COST.

New ROI of blogging report from Forrester

Eversince Google's high-profile buyout of YouTube, I was wondering about ROI and how this can be extended to blogs. During my quest to understand this better.. I landed on Forrester to find very interesting research.

The ROI Of Blogging: The “Why” And “How” Of External Blog Accountability

Many large companies stand on the brink of blogging, yet they are unwilling to take the plunge. Others, having dove in early, now face the challenge of managing existing blogs without the ability to show that they effectively support business goals. While blogging’s value can’t be measured precisely, marketers will find that calculating the ROI is easier than it looks. Following a three-step process, marketers can create a concrete picture of the key benefits, costs, and risks that blogging presents and understand how they are likely to impact business goals. This, in turn, enables marketers to answer the key questions, such as whether to blog or not to blog, or to make smart choices about an existing blog.

and follow-up research

Calculating The ROI Of Blogging: A Case Study, A Look At The ROI of General Motor’s FastLane Blog

Forrester used the process outlined in the first document in this series to calculate the ROI of General Motors’ FastLane blog; but, this is not merely an exercise to generate a number. Using scenarios, General Motors can understand the risk and impact of increases and decreases of a key metric — the number of press mentions — on the value of the blog. With this knowledge in hand, General Motors can make critical businesses decisions, such as whether to invest heavily in innovations that will rekindle press attention.

Metrics reflect the benefits:

These research deploy a framework to measure benefits of blogs.
Some common benefits highlighted are:

• increased brand visibility,
  
• savings from customer insights,
• reduced impact from negative user-generated content,
• increased sales efficiency

Very Interesting study

Yahoo... oho.. out of the game ??

Yahoo "blew it", claims Wired in a lengthy expose. Company bounced back in the past five years, only to drop even deeper as it fell behind Google, the story alleges. It's hard to argue with the raw data. Google's revenues have taken a decisive lead over Yahoo's.

Yahoo made two monumental mistakes: it failed to acquire Google in 2003 instead they allegedly brushed off the $5bn asking price, bidding a measly $3bn and it never properly integrated the 2002 Inktomi acquisition, a provider of pay-per-click advertising. The Inktomi deal is scheduled to be wrapped into the Yahoo business later this year, which is an embarrassment by all standards. The Inktomi dilemma is important, because Google has shown that good technology allows you marry the right advertiser with the right consumer/user.

But Yahoo also is betting on content much more than Google is. The firm is trying to be a destination rather than an information broker. Creating content is far more expensive than pointing people towards it.

Fact is: do a search on Google for anything. Anything at all. Then do the same search on Yahoo. One guess as to who comes up with more relevant data. One clue. It's not Google. Come to think of it, Ask.com also has a better search than Google, and I know it's not politically cool to say this on one of these sites, but so do MSN and AOL.

But Yahoo is falling behind, and if it allows this to continue, it risks becoming an acquisition target and Google is laughing all the way to the bank.