Cool stuff and Why Not

Google Chrome was born explicitly as a platform for web applications. From the first bits I saw I can say that Google’s new creation delivers most of the promises and brings new interesting innovations in the user experience realm. Competitors will find them hard to ignore, especially when you look at the tab concept improvements. For a good review of these points, you can refer to this post on Ars Technica.

Many hailed Google’s move as a revolutionary step. And indeed, with Google Chrome, the web application era is getting real. Let’s look beyond the technology and outline some possible models and consequences Chrome might have for the field of user experience:

Firefox’s Aurora Concept, where the web browser remains the key tool and the main interface for using a web application, is a service that is completely online. In this case, the user experience is chiefly based on typical web technologies, that is, the magic triad XHTML, CSS, and Javascript. Standard web browsing is blended in with web application interaction. The user jumps between tabs within the same context and tool.

An alternative model seeks to overcome the web browser, hiding it for the user, like Mozilla Prism, or at least trying to replace it with a different client and dedicated interfaces. This is the model you can see in action with Adobe Air or Microsoft WPF, and also with Apple’s iTunes. In this case, the user experience is based on a mix of locally installed software components and user interfaces, online contents and services. With this model you get the best performances and a more consistent user experience while the web remains in the background as a distribution channel for data exchange. Any device and system has its own client, designed and created ad hoc. Nevertheless, as you can see with iTunes, the user sometimes is locked into a “walled garden.”

The pure online web application model based on Chrome, with few local components installed on your hardware, is certainly the most promising one: truly open, flexible, and easy to upgrade. But for now, Chrome is still a web browser, and its dependency from the web browser’s user experience could be a soft spot, or at least a strong constraint for the web application’s evolution.

Talking about the Chrome “revolution,” many commentators are using the metaphor of the operating system. The browser plays the part of the platform, and the web application is the software. But a real operating system is not only a software platform; it also provides a framework for user interaction, a consistent UI layer, as well as components that the software designer and developers usually have to follow. It puts together many small tools and modules, unifies the user experience, and brings into play every software application built on it.

I think that this is the next big challenge. Will Google be able to change the rules of the web user experience? With Chrome and Android, Google is getting into the big game: building a consistent and unique experience for end users as well as application designers and developers. Google is an acclaimed leader in web technologies innovation, but from the end user point of view many web applications are still nothing more than a toy for geeks. Now they have the opportunity to get their beautiful tech jewels out of the eternal beta phase, into true commercial products focused on the end user.

Google’s new Chrome browser has many technical issues that need to be addressed. That’s hardly surprising for beta software, but it’s causing user frustration nonetheless.

The company officially released the Web browser in beta on Tuesday to much fanfare complete with examples of how fast and secure the software is compared to Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, Mozilla’s Firefox, and even Apple’s Safari. But almost as soon as it was available, complaints about Chrome’s compatibility began to crop up.

Google has posted a page of known Chrome issues. These include laptops failing to sleep when running Chrome, various network errors related to proxies, lack of support for SSL client authentication, inability to remove entries from the Most Visited sites page, and issues with Google Calendar, Docs, and Spreadsheet.

Many Chrome users trying to view Facebook pages have reported problems, for example.

“So many issues I can’t believe this even came from Google,” someone posting to Google Groups under the name “Jill” complained.

Would-be Google Chrome users have reported difficulties installing the new browser while running anti-virus software from Kaspersky and Zone Alarm. Google is working to address the issue and recommends disabling problematic security software before trying to install Chrome.

Users of Symantec (NSDQ: SYMC) Endpoint Protection have also reported problems. Google says that it is investigating the issue.

Google Chrome appears not to install correctly at companies behind a proxy requiring authentication. Google is aware of the issue and is investigating.

Many Chrome users have reported being unable to scroll up while using a Synaptics TouchPad on both Windows XP and Windows Vista operating systems. As with other issues, Google said it is looking into the problem.

Chrome also appears to have issues with Java applets, particularly POGO.com games. A help guide on Google’s message boards suggests using Java 6, Update 10, because Chrome does not support older versions of Java.

Users of Windows XP x64 are reporting Chrome crashes. Google hasn’t yet acknowledged whether this is an issue for all XP x64 users.

Such difficulties appear not to have dampened everyone’s enthusiasm for Google’s new Web browser, however. As someone posting in Google Groups’ Google Chrome Help group under the name “day-dreamer” put it, “As Chrome is relatively new, I suppose such problems are inevitable but I really hope the Chrome team can look to this as I would really love to make Chrome my default browser in the near future.”

Internet users with a low tolerance for unfinished software would be well advised to temper their expectations of Chrome, at least for the next few beta releases.

If you haven’t seen Chrome in action yet, take a spin through our Google Chrome image gallery and have a look at the browser that’s being touted as a game-changer.

Google has finally released its long-rumoured browser, Chrome. The browser which takes the company’s battle with Microsoft to next level promises increased speed, security and usability.

The most talked-about tech product since the iPhone, the browser is currently available in beta test version. Here’s looking into some of the little known facts about the new browser.

Google Chrome is a 7MB download. The browser is currently available only for XP and Vista.

It took three Google teams located in Mountain View, Kirkland and Denmark about two years to build Chrome.

Chrome short for Chromium gets its name after the area at the top of a browser screen which contains the address bar, tabs, settings and navigation buttons — which Google says is another key area of development.

The URL address bar at the top of the page doubles as the Google search field. Called OmniBox, it integrates the traditional browser address bar with a search box. With OmniBox, searches can be conducted directly from the address bar.

The open source browser is now available in beta in more than 42 languages, across 100 countries. These include English, Chinese, German, Japanese, Russian, Spanish and a slew of others.

For Chrome, Google has mixed its new developments like the multi-threaded JavaScript engine V8, with pieces developed by other open source projects, like Apple’s WebKit and Mozilla’s Firefox.

Apple’s WebKit is the core rendering engine for Google Chrome. Incidentally, WebKit is also the same rendering engine used in Android, Google’s mobile platform, and Apple’s iPhone.

Developed by Google’s engineering team in Aarhus, Denmark, V8 is the new JavaScript engine used in Google Chrome. Written in C++, V8 can run standalone, or can be embedded into any C++ application.

In case you have issues with your new browser, Google has set up a Chrome Help Center, however, there’s no support desk to call or send email.

Users who feel bored seeing the same home pages everytime will have option in Google Chrome. If they don’t want to go to the same designated home page every time during start up, they can create several as shortcuts that will stay live on their desktop.

The user just needs to click on the one he wants to go to, and the browser will open up and take you there.

In Google Chrome, functions such as Print and Save are hidden under a small pull-down window.

For users, who don’t like using the pull-down window, these functions can be reached with a right-click on the mouse.

Interestingly, one of the missing features in the Google browser is no support for ad blocker. There is also no feature to store and track web-content as snippets.

Another miss is the download manager. Chrome is tied to the tab that a user triggers the download under. This means that while the user’s download will continue even if the tab is closed, he won’t be able to track it on the browser’s footer.

Google Chrome, the search giant’s first ever web browser, was released to great fanfare on Tuesday, amid talk that it could one day pass Internet Explorer as the world’s most popular browser.

The version released for free download is only at the beta - testing - stage, but users and critics have been quick to pass early judgment. The consensus? Google Chrome is attractive, fast and has some impressive new features, but may not - yet - be a threat to its Microsoft rival.

Here is a selection of reviews from some of the most respected technology blogs and writers on the web. Click on the links to read the full reviews, or post your first impressions of Google Chrome in the box at the bottom of the story.

All in all, Google Chrome, after just a little time using it, is superb. It’s not only fast, but it’s useful. It’s not only elegant, but it understands what you really want to do with a browser. And although it suffers from some setbacks that shouldn’t be overlooked, it’s still a highly-capable browser. Download Chrome. You won’t regret it.
TechCrunch
advertisement

Google has produced an excellent browser that is friendly enough to handle average browsing activities without complicating the tasks, but at the same time it’s powerful enough to meet the needs of more-advanced users. The search functionality of the Omnibar is one of many innovations that caught my attention.
PC World

While Chrome’s performance is a little better than that of Firefox, in practical terms, it is far less useful, because it lacks the broad array of third-party add-ons programs like Flashblock that make Firefox so customizable. With time, it might catch up, but in the meantime, I’d recommend giving the new Internet Explorer a spin.
The Associated Press

The interface in Chrome is very different from other browsers and takes a little getting used to. Instead of the traditional Netscape/IE-style toolbar across the top, Chrome puts tabs across the top. Moreover, the tabs are detachable, so the terms “tabs” and “windows” become interchangeable within Chrome.
CNET

Will Google Chrome shape the way Web browsers are developed and designed? It is too early to tell, but Google has certainly come up with something appealing and unique. Will Chrome replace Internet Explorer or Firefox? Perhaps not in its present form, and not for a very long time. Overall, Chrome is a killer little application to have and offers a nice break from tradition when surfing the Web. While there’s plenty of room to for growth and improvement, the first beta release is impressive.
The Tech Herald

Chrome is a smart, innovative browser that, in many common scenarios, will make using the Web faster, easier and less frustrating. But this first version — which is just a beta, or test, release — is rough around the edges and lacks some common browser features Google plans to add later. These omissions include a way to manage bookmarks, a command for emailing links and pages directly from the browser, and even a progress bar to show how much of a Web page has loaded.
Walter S Mossberg from the Wall Street Journal

It munches through media sites with ease, streaming music and video and handling Flash very smoothly. PDFs open so suddenly that you might not even realise you’re using them. Opening a new tab brings up not your home page (although you can switch to that) but a thumbnail view of your nine most visited sites, plus recent bookmarks and a box to search your history. Overall, my first impression of Chrome is 9/10 for speed, 8/10 for ease of use and 7/10 for stability. And those figures should have Microsoft and Mozilla very, very worried.
TechRadar

What I discovered was a product that has some clear advantages over Microsoft’s, but also some shortcomings that, overall, hardly make it a killer - at least today. To be sure, Chrome is a work in progress. In addition to being a test version, outside developers are invited to make improvements. But it faces a stiff challenge from Microsoft, which also is making improvements with its latest iteration, which includes some of the same features as Chrome, like tabbed browsing.
San Francisco Chronicle

Our first impression of Chrome is that it’s nice and fast. There’s very little lag opening pages and the entire interface feels very streamlined. Dragging tabs in and out of windows is awesome, with a transparent version of the page pulling away with your mouse. The fact that you can pull tabs out of windows as well as combine windows is a great touch. Everything involving the tabs feels very, very smooth.

I’ve been using the Google Chrome web browser for half an hour now, and I already feel right at home. Downloading and installing Google Chrome was quick and painless - a welcome contrast to the chaos and downloading hassles accompanying the launch of Mozilla’s Firefox 3.0 browser in July.

Within just a couple of minutes, Google Chrome had hoovered up hundreds of Firefox bookmarks, saved passwords and my recent browsing history. This gives a pretty seamless transition to Google Chrome - with the exception of my RSS feeds, which weren’t imported automatically and aren’t supported in this 0.2 Beta version of Chrome.

First impressions

Google Chrome is so unobtrusive it almost isn’t even there - a clear design choice by Google, which has just a tiny, semi-transparent logo above the tabs, running along the top of the screen. There’s no status bar, although another semi-transparent tab appears at the bottom of the screen showing the status of loading pages.

Each tab has its own small forward, backward, reload and new tab buttons, along with a couple of menu items and the address bar - or Omnibar if you speak Google. The tabs can be ‘ripped’ to the desktop to form new windows just by drag-and-dropping - another neat touch.

The Omnibar is much more than just a place for typing URLs. Most importantly, it doubles as a search box: type search terms and hit Enter to be taken to your local Google website. It autocompletes with a level of smarts that rivals (if not exceeds) Firefox’s new Awesome bar, picking out previously visited sites intelligently and extremely quickly.

Speed freak

You want quick? You got it. Google Chrome feels nippier than Firefox all round, as well it should considering the demands it places on your computer. With each Google Chrome tab forming a separate process, you quickly build up a list of ‘chrome.exe’s in your Windows Task Manager (Linux and Mac versions coming soon, apparently). This means that one bad tab can’t crash your whole surfing session but I think I’ll have to keep a sharp eye on how many tabs I have open, especially when working on less powerful machines

Google Chrome munches through media sites with ease, streaming music and video and handling Flash very smoothly. PDFs open so suddenly that you might not even realise you’re using them. Opening a new tab brings up not your home page (although you can switch to that) but a thumbnail view of your nine most visited sites, plus recent bookmarks and a box to search your history. It loads almost instantly but is visually cluttered and doesn’t really do anything that the Omnibox and a good selection of bookmarks can’t handle.

And now the bad news

Of course, Google Chrome’s not perfect. It’s not working very well with the touchpad on my HP laptop and I’ve had a couple of page errors - annoyingly just now while working on the Tech Radar website (this post is being composed in safe old Firefox). There are no plug ins for Chrome just yet, either, so it does feel like a very stripped-down, Google-heavy environment right now, especially as I’m used to having widgets all over the place.

But these are typical issues for a new version of any browser, let alone one that has been built from scratch. Overall, my first impression of Chrome is 9/10 for speed, 8/10 for ease of use and 7/10 for stability. And those figures should have Microsoft and Mozilla very, very worried.

Now that the dust has settled and millions have downloaded Google Chrome Browser, the search giant must remain vigilant as issues are bound to surface (something they highlighted in their now legendary comic book).

We’ve yet to go past the first 24 hours since Google open the floodgates but yet there are some issues both in terms of usability and compatibility that have appeared; we’ve compiled a list of 10 of the most important ones.

1. Some might not like Chrome’s sqeaky clean, extremely minimalist interface which gets rid not only of the familiar menus and toolbars you can expect on other browsers but also the status bar (which now pops up now and then); in effect, Chrome ressembles a full screen version of Firefox or Internet Explorer. (Ed: But then, there’s no F11 option in Chrome.)

2. The browser is not currently compatible with toolbars and plugins which means that you won’t be able to use Google’s own Notebook plugin or Google Toolbar for example.

3. Google docs left panel is not appearing for a number of users. This is something that has not been replicated elsewhere.

4. There are also reports of memory and CPU issues which have yet to be confirmed. More about this on Taragana. However, Google’s Own Browser task manager seems to do the job. You can already find out how much memory Adobe’s Flash plugin is consuming (80MB on our test PC).

5. There are already issues related to site compatibility (some Facebook features don’t seem to work properly) and even with Google own calendar. Flash is said to be working fine on Vista but not on Windows XP. Ditto for Microsoft’s Silverlight which is not compatible with Chrome.

6. Chrome is not available for Linux and Mac yet. Which is strange for an open source software and even weirder given that Google normally offers its software on several platforms from the onset. Let’s also hope that Google will release Chrome browsers for mobile platforms like the S60.

7. Intriguingly, Google Chrome does not allow you to export your bookmarks or your settings (cookies, passwords), a far cry from what you could do in Firefox or Internet Explorer.

8. Chrome doesn’t allow you to recover lost files by default. Firefox would automatically bring back content even when you close down the software, something that IE8 can do, but not Chrome for the time being.

9. Chrome seems to have some problems even finding some websites according to post on Google Chrome help group.

10. There are loads of people encoutering problems when using Google Chrome on their laptops with the browser refusing to scroll up or down or both.

The more you look at it, the more you feel that Google Chrome looks like a half-baked product, a great beta but definitely not something that was bound to be released to the general public as it contains a few glaring misses.

However, Google already has a Chrome Troubleshooting group where you can post your queries about issues affecting the browser.

Deep underneath your feet is a hellish stone soup, kept hot by a torrent of radiation from poisonous isotopes of uranium, thorium and potassium in the earth’s superheated mantle. This is the heat that helps cause volcanoes, geysers and hot springs. And it is the heat that powers a modest number of electricity generators around the world, from Iceland to Indonesia.

This energy source remains largely untapped, though, simmering either too far below the surface to reach, or isolated from water that could carry it up.

But on Tuesday, Google.org, the philanthropic arm of search giant Google, announced it would try to help spur companies to reach underground to produce clean electricity. It is investing a total of $10 million in a geothermal energy company called AltaRock Energy and a drilling company called Potter Drilling, and it is funding research and mapping efforts and a policy agenda.

It is part of Google.org’s effort to help bring about renewable energy that is cheaper than coal by investing in companies, research and policy development. The organization is focusing on three main technologies: solar thermal power, which uses the sun’s heat to generate electricity; advanced wind technology; and, now, a way of tapping geothermal energy called enhanced geothermal systems, or EGS.

In traditional geothermal energy, engineers drill near a geyser, hot spring or volcano, stick a valve and turbine on the hot water, and that’s pretty much it. With EGS, holes are drilled deep into hot rock and water is injected into the cracks. When pressure forces the water up other, nearby wells, it is hot enough to run a turbine and produce electricity. Engineers would, in a sense, be making their own geysers, and this opens up far more of the globe for geothermal energy development.

“It’s a big resource, it’s got a good cost curve, and it’s not getting enough attention,” says Dan W. Reicher, Google.org’s director of climate and energy initiatives.

Last year a study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said EGS could open up an additional 100,000 megawatts of generating capacity in the U.S. by 2050, up from 2,000 MW today. That could mean 800 million megawatt-hours of more power every year, up from just 15 million megawatt-hours today. Researchers estimate the cost would start at about 9 cents a kilowatt-hour for the first EGS project and fall to as little as 4 cents, including construction, development and financing but not including any government subsidies that may be available. That would compare well with gas at 8 cents, wind at 6 cents and solar at 31 cents or more.

Because geothermal produces consistent, base-load power–it doesn’t depend on the wind blowing or the sun shining–utilities will pay up to three times more for geothermal electricity than for electricity from an intermittent source, like wind.

Geothermal heat has been a source of electricity since 1904, when steam vents in Larderello, Italy, were used to power a handful of light bulbs. That site now powers a million homes in Tuscany, turning out 5 million megawatt-hours per year. But, like Larderello, today’s geothermal electricity comes from unique geologies, where hot rocks and underground water sit together, close to the surface of the earth. Geothermal energy provides just 0.5% of the world’s electricity and 0.4% of the needs in the U.S.

EGS was first proposed by Los Alamos National Laboratories in the 1970s, but the technique was largely forgotten about when oil prices fell. High energy prices and technological breakthroughs helped resurrect the idea. And the idea is attracting some sudden attention. After recently pulling funding for geothermal energy, the U.S. Department of Energy is now offering $90 million in research money for EGS research. It is just a small start, says Alexander Karsner, assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy at the Department of Energy.

“The government is going to lean into this issue,” he says. “This is a renaissance.”

Still, there is not a single megawatt of EGS-produced power on line yet, and, at best, it will be quite a while before it becomes a significant energy source. It takes years to fully develop a site, from surveying the geology, drilling test wells, receiving permits, drilling working wells and building generators. And it takes capital. Each well can cost $5 million to drill, double the cost of an oil or gas well, because the holes need to be twice as deep, 15,000 feet or more, and sites need at least four wells. Geologists and engineers have a lot to learn about the rock formations they will encounter.

An Australian company called Geodynamics, which is conducting the first major commercial test of EGS now, was surprised to find hot, high-pressure water in the granite it first thought was relatively dry. While that is ultimately a pleasant discovery for the company, the surprise cost it dearly: The pressurized water led to the failure of Geodynamics’ second well in 2005 and nearly bankrupted the infant company.

Geodynamics’ first 50-megawatt station will cost a staggering $250 million, says Chief Technical Officer Doone Wyborn. (That’s $5 million per megawatt; Duke Energy’s new coal-fired plant in Cliffside, N.C., will cost $2.3 million per megawatt.) But now that the company understands where, how and how deep to drill, Wyborn says costs will soon plummet, and by the time the company gets 150 megawatts online, in 2014, Geodynamics’ costs per watt will be cheaper than that of coal.

There is another major EGS test under way in Soultz, France. The first test in the US is scheduled to begin this year near Reno, Nev.

Even as Google.org, Geodynamics and others try to develop EGS, traditional geothermal is experiencing its own revival. There is plenty of traditional, high-grade geothermal resources that haven’t been found yet. The University of Nevada at Reno estimates 80 per cent of these easier-to-develop hydrothermal systems are hidden, and companies are now starting to look for them. The most recent maps showing the heat flow underneath the US are based on data gathered in the 1970s. Google.org is financing a group at Southern Methodist University to update the data.

Worldwide geothermal investment was up 83 per cent last year to $1.7 billion, according to Mark Taylor, a geothermal analyst at New Energy Finance. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management had its first ever land-lease auction for geothermal resources, and it produced 57 leasing agreements. It will hold another auction this month.

Traditional geothermal could provide thousands of megawatts of electricity capacity, which would be welcome. But Google.org was attracted to EGS because it could add tens of thousands. “It has the potential to deliver vast quantities of power 24/7,” says Reicher. “And be captured nearly anywhere on the planet.”

In a newly-opened online showcase, search engine specialist Powerset is now previewing a contextual search engine seen by some as a possible threat to Google, Yahoo and other major players through its support for “conversational phrasing.”

Although right now, Powerset queries Wikipedia only, rumors are circulating that investment bank Allen & Co. is shopping the emerging natural language search engine to potential buyers that might even include Microsoft, which decided to drop its recent attempt to take over Yahoo.

Unlike the search engines of Web sites like Google, Yahoo, and Ask.com, for example, Powerset does not rely on keyword searches.

Instead, users submit their queries as questions that don’t necessarily need to include keywords. Like traditional search engines the results are returned as URL links, often accompanied by pieces of text from the linked pages.

With the Powerset search engine, however, the answer is often included directly within the search results. Users can expand the result to see the full text with pertinent sentences highlighted.

To get a better understanding of how the natural language engine works, BetaNews today typed in the question, “Where is the Chesapeake Bay?”

In response to our query, Powerset came up with what seems like a decent answer directly within the first of the more than 2.600 links provided. Here is the Wikpedia text included in the first answer in Powerset’s response to the query:

“The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the United States. … The north end of the oligohaline zone is north Baltimore and the south end is the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.”

But the accuracy of results obviously varies according to the query, especially with Wikipedia being the only source for the time being. And when we asked Powerset to give us a definition of the oligohaline zone, we were simply told it contains “very little salt.”

Popular online video site YouTube on Wednesday launched its Indian edition, at www.youtube.co.in, that features a localised homepage and search functions, allowing users to create and share videos, discover the most popular and relevant videos in India, and connect with other Indian and global users.

“We are very excited to bring a local version of YouTube to India considering the passion of users here for music and entertainment,” said YouTube’s chief technology officer and co-founder Steve Chen. “YouTube India will not only offer Indian users more relevant content but also provide a platform to share unique and diverse culture and lifestyle with the largest online video community in the world.”

YouTube’s international manager Sakina Arsiwala said YouTube India would benefit from an entirely local experience highlighting and featuring the content and functionality most desired by the Indian users.

“YouTube allows anyone with a simple web camera or even a cell phone to create content, connect, and converse with each other through the medium of video. It provides a powerful way for people to express themselves. From a home video to a magic show to classroom lectures or working professionals connecting with their families in another city, YouTube is about communication and not just entertainment,” she added.

A subsidiary of Google, YouTube in India has signed partnerships with various firms including Eros Entertainment, Rajshri Films, IIFA, the Ministry of Tourism, IIT Delhi, NDTV, UTV, Zoom TV, India TV and Krishcricket. It also aims to facilitate connections among large non-resident Indian community.

Internationally, it has partnerships with content providers like CBS, BBC, Universal Music Group, Sony Music Group, Warner Music Group, NBA and The Sundance Channel.

YouTube was created in 2005 to enable the Internet’s lay users to share videos, movie clips and song videos. It was acquired by Google in November 2006.

– Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer may be running out of time to clinch his proposed purchase of Yahoo! Inc. as the Internet company forges tighter ties with Google Inc.

Microsoft was leaning toward making a hostile bid as of last night, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter. Yahoo may agree to use Google’s Web advertising software within a week, the newspaper reported. The decision would build on a test program the companies ran last month.

After three months of pressing Yahoo to give up looking at alternatives and agree to a deal with Microsoft, Ballmer faces a potential setback. An accord with Google may spur Yahoo’s sales and give it a better chance of staying independent, pressuring Microsoft to raise its $44.6 billion bid.

“The board and management of Yahoo are trying to retain independence at all costs,” said Laura Martin, an analyst at New York-based Soleil Securities Corp. who has a “hold” rating on Yahoo shares.

Ballmer said yesterday he would walk away from the purchase before he overpays for Yahoo, the Sunnyvale, California-based owner of the second-most popular Internet search engine.

“I know exactly what I think Yahoo is worth to me, exactly,” Ballmer said in a meeting with employees, according to remarks provided by spokesman Frank Shaw. “I won’t go a dime above, and I will go to what I think it’s worth if that gets the deal done.”

Yahoo spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler and Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich declined to comment. Shaw didn’t return a call late yesterday.

Challenging Google

Yahoo has repeatedly turned down the $31-a-share acquisition bid since Microsoft first made the offer Jan. 31. Microsoft, the world’s biggest software maker, would use the takeover to bolster competition with Google, the leader in the $41 billion online advertising market.

Jerry Yang, Yahoo’s CEO, has said the offer is too low. Ballmer, who gave the company until April 26 to agree to a deal, let the deadline pass without taking action.

Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft may make a friendly deal with Yahoo, start a proxy fight to replace Yahoo’s board or abandon the bid, Ballmer said at the meeting. The company will make an announcement in “very short order,” he said.

“Not getting this done is putting a substantial amount of pressure on him,” said Rob Enderle, president of the research firm Enderle Group in San Jose, California.

Google’s Plan

In German trading, Microsoft shares rose 16 cents to $29.56 as of 11:25 a.m. in Frankfurt. Since Jan. 31, Microsoft’s stock has fallen, valuing the deal at $29.48 at yesterday’s closing price. Yahoo climbed 36 cents to $27.17. The shares have gained 15 percent this year.

Google may be using its Yahoo partnership to delay the deal, Enderle said.

“Google wants it to go as long as possible,” he said. “The longer this goes on, the happier Google is.”

Yahoo said last month that it would test displaying ads sold by Google next to Internet search results. The trial was limited to 3 percent of search queries and would last as long as two weeks, the company said.

Google, Yahoo and Microsoft sell text links that appear next to search results, charging advertisers when they are clicked. Google generates more revenue from each search query, so a partnership may boost Yahoo’s revenue.

Antitrust Questions?

Yahoo and Google may strike a nonexclusive partnership, meaning that the system could display ads from competitors, including Microsoft’s, the Journal said. That approach is designed to keep antitrust authorities from blocking the deal, the newspaper said.

The U.S. Justice Department is reviewing the initial test, Mountain View, California-based Google said last month. The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee would examine any formal partnership between Google and Yahoo, Chairman Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat, said last month.

“Regulators will not allow this,” Soleil’s Martin said. “It would put all of Internet advertising into the hands of Google, the predominant search marketer on the Web.”

Microsoft can still build an Internet advertising business without buying Yahoo, Ballmer told the Journal yesterday in an interview that ran in a separate story. Ballmer declined to say whether Microsoft plans to mount a hostile takeover or walk away, the Journal reported. He also declined to comment on when a decision will be announced, the newspaper said.

Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft Corp. remained in a standoff Friday as a threatened Microsoft deadline for a hostile acquisition attempt approached.
�
The two companies and their advisers have been talking in recent weeks, but achieved no breakthroughs that would lead them to a friendly deal by Saturday, said people familiar with the matter. That’s the day Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer has set as a deadline for Yahoo to reach a friendly deal before Microsoft goes hostile, threatening to lower the price in that case.

The people familiar with the matter said that, as of late Friday, no meetings between the two companies were planned for the weekend and they were skeptical that any friendly accord could be reached before Monday.

The issue of price has been a main sticking point, with Microsoft’s cash-and-stock offer valued at $29.68 a share as of Friday’s market close. Yahoo’s directors have rejected the offer as undervaluing the company, and major Yahoo holders have signaled they want closer to $35 a share.

Yahoo has been waiting for a higher offer from Microsoft to bring to its directors for a vote, but Microsoft hasn’t extended one, said people familiar with the matter. For their part, Microsoft executives have been frustrated by what they perceive as Yahoo’s refusal to engage in discussions about a reasonable price, said people familiar with the matter. Yahoo has signaled that it expects a significant boost in Microsoft’s bid, whereas Microsoft has been willing to entertain only a moderate increase, the people said.

A central question is whether Microsoft might raise its offer this weekend to try to spur a friendly deal. Mr. Ballmer, in Madrid on Friday, reiterated that his company didn’t see a reason to raise the price.

“Our bid is quite generous, roughly 80 times earnings,” said Mr. Ballmer. “If we don’t hear from Yahoo, we’ve said we’ll go to their shareholders.”

Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell had said on Thursday that the company would weigh its options and provide details publicly next week. He said Microsoft’s options included taking its offer to Yahoo’s shareholders, pressuring Yahoo management to yield to Microsoft or withdrawing the offer.

The architects of the bid at Microsoft have faced opposition in recent weeks from other executives who are opposed to Microsoft buying Yahoo, say people familiar with the matter. It’s unclear how dissent will affect Microsoft’s next moves.

Some major Yahoo holders have suggested they wouldn’t back Microsoft in a hostile effort if it didn’t raise its offer above the $31-a-share value first extended on Jan. 31. Among them is Legg Mason Inc. portfolio manager Bill Miller, who earlier this month said $31 was too low.

If Microsoft were to walk away, Yahoo’s share price likely would fall from its level of $26.80, down 50 cents, in 4 p.m. Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading Friday. It was trading at $19.18 before Microsoft’s offer, which carried a 62% premium at the time it was announced.

Yahoo could continue to pursue some alternatives, such as a pact to carry search advertising from Google Inc., with which it has been conducting a limited test of such an arrangement. The success of that test so far has played a key role in emboldening some at Yahoo in their continued resistance to Microsoft’s overtures.

Not to be outdone, Microsoft is reportedly in its own talks with media giant News Corp. to put together a potential joint bid for Yahoo . The action comes just days after Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer tried to jump-start the stalled process by sending a letter to Yahoo’s board — setting a three-week deadline to close the deal and threatening a proxy battle if the offer was rejected. See full story
It’s been 10 weeks since Microsoft announced its offer to buy Yahoo for $31 per share in a mix of cash and stock. Yahoo rejected the offer as undervaluing its business, and since then, the value of the deal has fallen from its original level of about $44.6 billion to around $39 billion, based on Microsoft’s share price.
Yahoo has since raced to put together alternatives to the Microsoft proposal. Wednesday, the company announced it will begin a test program with arch-rival Google , under which it will use Google’s search-advertising service to deliver ads through related searches done on Yahoo’s Web site.
Yahoo said the test will last up to two weeks, involve traffic only on its site in the U.S. and relate to no more than 3% of its search queries. See full story
The company added that the test “does not necessarily mean that the company plans to join Google’s AdSense for Search program or that any further commercial relationship with Google will result,” adding that it will not comment on “the nature or timing of any potential relationship.”
Citigroup analysts Mark Mahaney and Brent Thill called the test with Google “an aggressive response” to the threat of a proxy battle from Microsoft.
“As such, we believe this will increase pressure on Microsoft to increase its $31 offer price,” the analysts wrote in a note to clients. “Arguably, a worst-case scenario for Microsoft would be a full Google search outsource decision by Yahoo.”
AOL rumors re-emerge
Later in the day, The Wall Street Journal reported that Yahoo was also in talks with the AOL unit of Time-Warner Inc. Rumors of talks between the Web brands were floated several weeks ago, but no deal has emerged. According to the report Wednesday, Time-Warner is considering a move to fold AOL into Yahoo and make a cash investment of an unspecified amount for a stake in the combined entity.
The cash would allow Yahoo to buy back a large portion of its own shares. The report cited unnamed sources “close to the talks” who added there was still “a lot of work to do” before ironing out an agreement. See Wall Street Journal story. (Subscription required)
A deal among Yahoo, Google and AOL would potentially face scrutiny from regulators, since Google already controls about two-thirds of the search-ad market.
Following Yahoo’s announcement of the test with Google, U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, said his subcommittee will be “following closely the results” of the test.
“Should there be moves to make this agreement permanent, we will examine it closely in the antitrust subcommittee to ensure that it does not harm competition,” Kohl said in a statement.
The move promptly drew a response from Microsoft, which blasted any proposed alliance between Yahoo and Google in the search market as potentially anticompetitive. Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said the agreement “would consolidate over 90% of the search advertising market in Google’s hands.”
“This would make the market far less competitive, in sharp contrast to our own proposal to acquire Yahoo,” Smith said in a written statement. “We will assess closely all of our options. Our proposal remains the only alternative put forward that offers Yahoo shareholders full and fair value for their shares.”
News Corp. back at the table?
Another potential player in the affair is News Corp. The Journal story said Microsoft was in talks with the media giant over a potential joint-bid for Yahoo, but gave no further details.
Another report in the New York Times said the companies were talking over a joint bid that would create an Internet behemoth that would combine Yahoo with Microsoft’s MSN service and the popular MySpace social networking hub owned by News Corp.
The Times said talks between Microsoft and News Corp. “are at a sensitive stage,” citing unnamed sources. An alliance between the companies could remove a potential ally for Yahoo; News Corp. was said to be in earlier talks with the Web portal, but no deal emerged from those discussions.

Not to be outdone, Microsoft is reportedly in its own talks with media giant News Corp. to put together a potential joint bid for Yahoo . The action comes just days after Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer tried to jump-start the stalled process by sending a letter to Yahoo’s board — setting a three-week deadline to close the deal and threatening a proxy battle if the offer was rejected. See full story
It’s been 10 weeks since Microsoft announced its offer to buy Yahoo for $31 per share in a mix of cash and stock. Yahoo rejected the offer as undervaluing its business, and since then, the value of the deal has fallen from its original level of about $44.6 billion to around $39 billion, based on Microsoft’s share price.
Yahoo has since raced to put together alternatives to the Microsoft proposal. Wednesday, the company announced it will begin a test program with arch-rival Google , under which it will use Google’s search-advertising service to deliver ads through related searches done on Yahoo’s Web site.
Yahoo said the test will last up to two weeks, involve traffic only on its site in the U.S. and relate to no more than 3% of its search queries. See full story
The company added that the test “does not necessarily mean that the company plans to join Google’s AdSense for Search program or that any further commercial relationship with Google will result,” adding that it will not comment on “the nature or timing of any potential relationship.”
Citigroup analysts Mark Mahaney and Brent Thill called the test with Google “an aggressive response” to the threat of a proxy battle from Microsoft.
“As such, we believe this will increase pressure on Microsoft to increase its $31 offer price,” the analysts wrote in a note to clients. “Arguably, a worst-case scenario for Microsoft would be a full Google search outsource decision by Yahoo.”
AOL rumors re-emerge
Later in the day, The Wall Street Journal reported that Yahoo was also in talks with the AOL unit of Time-Warner Inc. Rumors of talks between the Web brands were floated several weeks ago, but no deal has emerged. According to the report Wednesday, Time-Warner is considering a move to fold AOL into Yahoo and make a cash investment of an unspecified amount for a stake in the combined entity.
The cash would allow Yahoo to buy back a large portion of its own shares. The report cited unnamed sources “close to the talks” who added there was still “a lot of work to do” before ironing out an agreement. See Wall Street Journal story. (Subscription required)
A deal among Yahoo, Google and AOL would potentially face scrutiny from regulators, since Google already controls about two-thirds of the search-ad market.
Following Yahoo’s announcement of the test with Google, U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, said his subcommittee will be “following closely the results” of the test.
“Should there be moves to make this agreement permanent, we will examine it closely in the antitrust subcommittee to ensure that it does not harm competition,” Kohl said in a statement.
The move promptly drew a response from Microsoft, which blasted any proposed alliance between Yahoo and Google in the search market as potentially anticompetitive. Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said the agreement “would consolidate over 90% of the search advertising market in Google’s hands.”
“This would make the market far less competitive, in sharp contrast to our own proposal to acquire Yahoo,” Smith said in a written statement. “We will assess closely all of our options. Our proposal remains the only alternative put forward that offers Yahoo shareholders full and fair value for their shares.”
News Corp. back at the table?
Another potential player in the affair is News Corp. The Journal story said Microsoft was in talks with the media giant over a potential joint-bid for Yahoo, but gave no further details.
Another report in the New York Times said the companies were talking over a joint bid that would create an Internet behemoth that would combine Yahoo with Microsoft’s MSN service and the popular MySpace social networking hub owned by News Corp.
The Times said talks between Microsoft and News Corp. “are at a sensitive stage,” citing unnamed sources. An alliance between the companies could remove a potential ally for Yahoo; News Corp. was said to be in earlier talks with the Web portal, but no deal emerged from those discussions.

The Yahoo-Microsoft takeover battle took a series of dramatic turns Wednesday, as Yahoo accelerated its efforts to find an alternative while Microsoft reportedly brought a surprising player into the fray.

Early in the day, Yahoo announced that it will begin running Google’s search ads alongside some of Yahoo’s search results. Yahoo said it will conduct a limited test on up to 3 percent of its search queries, lasting as long as two weeks.

Yahoo hopes to evaluate the potential of a more extensive agreement with Google, in which it would outsource all its search advertising to Google. Wall Street analysts believe Yahoo could significantly improve its profitability by doing so because its Mountain View rival makes so much more money for each search.

Yahoo may also be close to consummating a deal with Time Warner’s AOL. The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday night that Time Warner is considering folding its AOL unit into Yahoo and providing Yahoo with cash that it could use to buy back its own shares.

But later in the evening, the New York Times reported that Microsoft was in talks with News Corp. on a joint bid for Yahoo, in a deal that would create an enormous Internet company combining Yahoo, Microsoft’s MSN and News Corp.’s Web properties, including MySpace and Fox Interactive.

With News Corp.’s help, Microsoft could conceivably raise its bid. But a person close to the talks told the Times that a definite deal was still a long ways off.

The move is especially surprising because Yahoo had talked to News Corp. about a possible deal.

For the past two months, Yahoo has been searching for an alternative to Microsoft’s bid that it can use to persuade shareholders that Yahoo would be more valuable as an independent company.

According to comScore, Yahoo was the most popular Internet property in February, with 137 million visitors. AOL ranked fourth, after Google and Microsoft, with 109 million visitors. Still, both Internet properties make far less money than Google, despite their heavy traffic.

Antitrust experts say a full-blown arrangement between Yahoo and Google would raise red flags. An AOL deal would also be scrutinized. Google owns 5 percent of AOL and provides search and search advertising to the struggling portal.

Yahoo would have to persuade shareholders the two deals would not be blocked by regulators and would create more long-term value than an immediate sale to Microsoft.

This could be a hard sell, as a significant portion of Yahoo’s shares are held by arbitrage firms that are counting on a quick profit. Yahoo’s shares barely budged after news of the Yahoo-Google deal was reported before the end of the trading on Wednesday. Yahoo closed at $27.77 a share, up a mere 7 cents.

Saturday, Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer gave Yahoo three weeks to accept a bid of $31 a share or face a hostile takeover at a lower price. Yahoo Chief Executive Jerry Yang and Chairman Roy Bostock responded they would consider a deal only at a higher price.

“Coming on the heels of Microsoft’s ultimatum over the weekend, we view the announcement as a pure negotiating tactic,” Ben Schachter, an analyst with UBS Investment Research, wrote in a note Wednesday night about the Google test.

On Wednesday, Brad Smith, Microsoft’s general counsel, reiterated the company’s view that it has made Yahoo a fair offer, and raised concerns about the Google deal.

“Any definitive agreement between Yahoo and Google would consolidate over 90 percent of the search advertising market in Google’s hands,” Smith said in a statement. “This would make the market far less competitive, in sharp contrast to our own proposal to acquire Yahoo.”

Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., chairman of a Senate subcommittee on antitrust issues, said Congress is paying close attention to Yahoo’s test with Google. “Should there be moves to make this agreement permanent, we will examine it closely in the antitrust subcommittee to ensure that it does not harm competition,” Kohn said in a statement.

Kohl noted the Yahoo test followed Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick and a full-fledged alliance “would represent even further consolidation in the Internet advertising market.”

But Microsoft’s purchase of Yahoo also could encounter regulatory roadblocks. While Google dominates search advertising, Microsoft and Yahoo dominate in e-mail. Google has been lobbying against the deal in Washington, seeking support from privacy advocates and others.

Jeffrey Lindsay, an analyst with Sanford Bernstein & Co., said a deal with Google “has a real chance of saving Yahoo.”

In a research note published in September 2007, Lindsay calculated Yahoo could boost its operating income by $565 million in 2008, or as much as 33 percent, if it handed over search advertising to Google.

Wednesday, Lindsay said a deal outsourcing search advertising to Google could raise Yahoo’s stock price to between $39 and $45. That could make Yahoo too expensive, even for Microsoft.

Google Inc on Monday defended a policy of retaining data on Web users for up to 18 months as necessary to improve search results, responding to an EU report that saw no need for search services to keep personal data beyond six months.

A group of data protection commissioners from across the European Union found that computer Web addresses and cookie monitoring are personal information that search services should do more to protect.

The long-anticipated set of recommendations for how European data protection laws should be applied to Web search services was published on Friday and can be found at tinyurl.com/5yukzm.

The report by the so-called Article 29 Working Party calls for increased user notification and warns Web search services that fail to do so may be unlawful.

Cookies are small bits of text that mark the comings and goings of computer users to Web sites. They are widely used by commercial sites to make Web surfing more convenient and by advertisers to measure audiences. But they also raise privacy concerns due to their potential to track user behavior.

“It is the opinion of the Working Party that search engines in their role as collectors of user data have so far insufficiently explained the nature and purpose of their operations to the users of their services,” the report states.

“The Working Party does not see a basis for a retention period beyond 6 months,” the study concludes.

In a statement issued on Monday, Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy counsel, said his company disagreed with key findings in the report and argued that privacy policies must be balanced against efforts to make Web services easier to use.