10, the highest - Captured BI turned CI keeps Yahoo! ahead the "Search" curve\n\nor \n\n1, being the lowest, the Info BOOM is like the BIG BOOM in reverse, so its anyone's ball game\n\nIt's no secret, or maybe it is, business intelligence software is only as useful as 1. the particular innovation used to capture data and 2. the competitive intelligence of the analyst that transfers that captured data in to knowledge. Yahoo! is an intellectual data stronghold, even more so with a Q & A community that resembles 'smarter' search query conventions.
132091
I'd go with 1.  The search engine field is still relatively new and people with better technologies and marketing will move ahead over time.  Google has gained a lot of market share over the last few years.\n\nThe Answers here aren't really worth that much.  There is so much junk and garbage that gets through, along with many of the "Best Answers" just being plain wrong.  There are some good answers here and there but I don't really see Answer ever being that great a source for solid information.
652985
Partially:\n\nInternet Information >> Popularity ranked by number of links >> Google's own algorithms that are x% better than other search engines >> The greatest reach in search engines >> network economics for the google consumers: advertisers, information publishers, and people adding search capability to their intranets.\n\nGoogle's annual report breaks down revenue by category, to see the value chain by % of Google's activity.\n\nAnother value chain broke into the desktop (taking from Microsoft).  So, the reach from the Google search bar,  and their other mini-apps increases their market dominance.\n\nThere is a secondary market for Google rankings, so instead of advertisers purchasing Google ads or changing website content to get a higher Google exposure directly, it's a third-party provider that specializes in this.\n\nGoogle's other services (maps, images, Froogle, blogger, gmail, etc.) further increase their reach, therefore giving them a greater value for their consumers.\n\nAlso, the breadth of services gives Google Ads the finest-grained ideas of what people are using different Internet services out there, giving another value add.  \n\nAny discussion I made of Google's value chain would be driven by discussions of network value (value/customer ^ size of network), reach, and marketing granularity (custom fit of Google for advertisers and other revenue generation by Google).
42
Their respective market caps are too close for this to ever happen.\nInterestingly, many reporters, analysts and tech pundits that I talk to think that the supposed competition between Google and Yahoo is fallacious, and that they are very different companies with very different strategies. Google's true competitor is often seen as being Microsoft, not Yahoo. This would support your claim that they are complementary.
567164
wal-mart is using the worlds most efficent database TERADATA , which means 10 to the power of 12  , by which it is capable of using "active data warehouse" 24/7 availabality best backup and recovery mechanisums. Predicting the coustomer requirement according to the past data (like for instance the \n" catalena " wal-mart is the only store to predict the requirement acc to past records)
6616
Let's do a Pro and Con comparison with respect to Google:\n\nPros of Google:\n\nAs a seach engine, google has the best relevance and presents the results in a way that I find easy to decide what pages are best for me. Its the best in terms of researching information.\n\nFor makin money, a #1 on google is worth many times more than a #1 on yahoo. Yahoo! blocks the top of the SERPs with sponsored ads.\n\nGoogle also has a neat interface. Yahoo is not bad too, but its interface is not that neat. The reason for that being it to be a portal. I think a nice interface is very important since people will come back more often if so.\n\nThe relevance of search results make its 'Feeling Lucky' feature pretty useful. Firefox address bar by defaults goes to 1 site listed on your search results.\n\nGoogle has tried to stay away from Spam/ misleading sites better than other search engines.\n\nCons of Google:\n\nHowever, few problems with google, its web crawler dosen't capture hyperlinks from PDF files stored on net, a feature which Yahoo provides.\n\nAlso, Google at present does not provide an index for video aggregation through the web crawler, a feature which Altavista provided since 1999. The problems include accuracy of the media file. That is the reason for providing Google Videos where users have to submit videos.\n\nDue to a larger share of 'searching' community, Google has been targeted by bloggers by planting Google Bombs. Because most bloggers mention the word failure with President Bush's name, the #1 site on searching Failure is the website of President Bush.\n\nYahoo is doing pretty good research in Search Technologies, for example Grokker.\nhttp://www.grokker.com/grokker.html?query=Anirudh%20Koul&Yahoo=true&Daypop=true&numResults=250
95985
As stated above, I don't think Yahoo is concerned with the Internet Browser market.  What many Internet companies are focasing on now is the concept of the "run from anywhere" application.  Look for example at the Yahoo Mail Beta interface... looks a lot like something you'd see with a desktop mail application.  I see Yahoo expanding with "office-like" applications, especially now that Google has hinted at their development of such things, plus the possibility for unlimited online storage!
52974
(Don't Forget MSN!)...\n\nBefore I launch into descriptions of the sites, here's the list of the search engines worth looking at:\n\nGoogle http://www.google.com\nYahoo! http://www.yahoo.com\nMSN http://www.msn.com\nDogpile http://www.dogpile.com\nAskJeeves http://www.askjeeves.com and Teoma http://www.teoma.com\nHotBot http://www.hotbot.com\nAltavista http://www.altavista.com\nGigablast http://www.gigablast.com\nLooksmart http://www.looksmart.com\n\nYou wanted other search engines besides Google and Yahoo!, something clean and effective. Truth be told, they are both clean and effective and have an excellent index of web pages to search from.\nFrom the top:\n\n\nIn the "Big Three" you have\nGoogle http://www.google.com\nThis engine seems to be the top choice for searchers because of its clean layout, record-setting number of indexed pages, and intellegent ordering of results. Also popular about it is the way you can enter questions into it, such as math questions and movie times. You can access a list of all the cool stuff you can do in Google Search at http://www.google.com/help/features.html .\n\nYahoo! http://www.yahoo.com\nis also a popular choice for the exact same reasons. It has a slightly different but just as clean layout. It too, provides excellent results,  Yahoo! also has a large number of in-search features, listed at http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearch/tips/tips-01.html. Some people don't like how the main page for Yahoo! search has other things on it. However, a perfectly clean page which has only Yahoo! search can be found at http://search.yahoo.com .\n\nMSN http://www.msn.com\nTotally revamped in the recent years, Microsoft Search is an excellent search engine with great results as well. MSN also has a "clean" search page at http://search.msn.com\n\nThen the more minor (but still useful!) engines: \n\nDogPile http://www.dogpile.com\nThis engine is not actually an engine at all- the site is a "metasearch" site, which means that it grabs results from a great number of search engine and displays them all. A good choice if you're looking for something that probably won't come up in most engines. However, it is a bad choice for general searches, because you'll end up having the same results as you would have had by asking any of the popular engines.\n\nAskJeeves http://www.askjeeves.com\nAsk Jeeves initially gained fame a while back by letting you search by asking questions and responded with what seemed to be the right answer to everything. Behind the scenes about 100 editors who monitored search logs and programmed the engine to respond with the right answer next time the question was asked. Nowadays it relies on a regular search engine, known as...\n\nTeoma http://www.teoma.com\nIt has a smaller index of the web than Google and Yahoo. However, being large doesn't make much of a difference when it comes to the more popular searches, and Teoma is known to provide relevant results for the searches. Some people also like its "Refine" feature, which offers suggested topics to explore after you do a search and the "Resources" section of results which points you to pages that specifically serve as link resources about various topics.\n\nAllTheWeb http://www.alltheweb.com\nYou mentioned clean and effective. Well, since Yahoo! bought out AllTheWeb, they've used it as a "cleaner" look for the exact same results of what you'd get with Yahoo!\n\nHotBot http://www.hotbot.com\nHotBot simply lists the results from Google, Yahoo!, and Teoma. Unlike a metasearcher, HotBot does not combine the results.\n\nGigablast http://www.gigablast.com\nThis search engine has a very small database, and not much used. The only thing worth mentioning is that it has complete reports on when a page was last indexed and modified.\n\nLycos http://www.lycos.com\nLycos is one of the oldest search engines on the internet. Nowadays, it gathers its results
118242
When doing a general websearch, I typically use Google because I find the layout easier to read.\n\nI am both a Yahoo! and Google member, so I could be biased both ways. As just someone surfing the web, I've found that Yahoo! offers more entertaining and more services in general. I'm a Google member mostly for the webmaster services (e.g. Google SiteMaps).\n\nEach search engine has its benefits, but a lot of the time I go to Google because my personalized search page will display new email and my RSS feeds as well. I don't need this for Yahoo! since I'm back here regularly for many other things.
495129
Excellent Question!!! I'm truly putting this on the watchlist.. because I can't really come with something witty right now... don't take this from me okay? I'm just brainstorming with you: How about saying that given that the company itself has a "sterling" reputation... I look forward to contributing to it with quantitative and community contributions through my enthusiasm, team spirit and hardwork... (cause they like results, eh?)... So in plain terms what you're here for is to deliver results that forwards their company.. after all.. every bit of effort definitely helps! Does this help? I'm still staying tuned to see other answers!! Good luck!
221299
As a Singularity enthusiast, I understand where Google is going with this, business models should be focused on 5-10 years in the future…HOWEVER,  are we a little EARLY. There is no EPaper yet. If I look at these mags, I am not going to get the the AdSense magiv ad serving technology. I am probably going to receive look at a 1and1.com advertisement. Not sure Google is owning that attention the same way they do on-line. \n\nhttp://360.yahoo.com/jcbroogley
441439
it's funny you ask this because I was having this exact thought on the way to work today. And yes, I think about Yahoo! more than I should. lol\n\nps I agree, it IS all chatting!
59184
I don't think the Yahoo stock is going to crash. Its reputation, strong financial competences and great experience in the new economy are the most relevant aspects in evaluating Yahoo as an investing option. The opinion of non-experts isn't so important.
15990
According to news sources, it seems that the kind of information given to the Government under subpoena was a sample of search queries without any individual user identifying information.\n\nI would guess that it is the kind of information disclosed by Yahoo and Google popular search queries only including all kinds of queries, just not popular queries.\n\nhttp://buzz.yahoo.com/\nhttp://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html\n\nHere is Yahoo's privacy policy:\n\nhttp://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us/
193926
With pay per click marketing sometimes the top ad will be overpriced by aggressive competitors overbidding. In competitive markets from a return on investment standpoint sometimes ranking #2 - #5 is best.\n\nAs far as organic search goes, since their is no real cost to getting more traffic the higher you can rank the better.\n\nCTR also depends on relevancy. A better page title may cause a #2 or #3 listed site to get more traffic.\n\nAtlas OnePoint showed stats for CTR by position for pay per click ads about 1.5 years ago. Graphics of those stats are in the attached. Also keep in mind that for most queries most of the traffic goes to the organic search results.
605276
Media Relations Home - Info Center Home  \nThe History of Yahoo! - How It All Started...\nYahoo! began as a student hobby and evolved into a global brand that has changed the way people communicate with each other, find and access information and purchase things. The two founders of Yahoo!, David Filo and Jerry Yang, Ph.D. candidates in Electrical Engineering at Stanford University, started their guide in a campus trailer in February 1994 as a way to keep track of their personal interests on the Internet. Before long they were spending more time on their home-brewed lists of favorite links than on their doctoral dissertations. Eventually, Jerry and David's lists became too long and unwieldy, and they broke them out into categories. When the categories became too full, they developed subcategories ... and the core concept behind Yahoo! was born. \n\nThe Web site started out as "Jerry and David's Guide to the World Wide Web" but eventually received a new moniker with the help of a dictionary. The name Yahoo! is an acronym for "Yet Another Hierarchical Officious Oracle," but Filo and Yang insist they selected the name because they liked the general definition of a yahoo: "rude, unsophisticated, uncouth." Yahoo! itself first resided on Yang's student workstation, "Akebono," while the software was lodged on Filo's computer, "Konishiki" - both named after legendary sumo wrestlers. \n\nJerry and David soon found they were not alone in wanting a single place to find useful Web sites. Before long, hundreds of people were accessing their guide from well beyond the Stanford trailer. Word spread from friends to what quickly became a significant, loyal audience throughout the closely-knit Internet community. Yahoo! celebrated its first million-hit day in the fall of 1994, translating to almost 100 thousand unique visitors. \n\nDue to the torrent of traffic and enthusiastic reception Yahoo! was receiving, the founders knew they had a potential business on their hands. In March 1995, the pair incorporated the business and met with dozens of Silicon Valley venture capitalists. They eventually came across Sequoia Capital, the well-regarded firm whose most successful investments included Apple Computer, Atari, Oracle and Cisco Systems. They agreed to fund Yahoo! in April 1995 with an initial investment of nearly $2 million. \n\nRealizing their new company had the potential to grow quickly, Jerry and David began to shop for a management team. They hired Tim Koogle, a veteran of Motorola and an alumnus of the Stanford engineering department, as chief executive officer and Jeffrey Mallett, founder of Novell's WordPerfect consumer division, as chief operating officer. They secured a second round of funding in Fall 1995 from investors Reuters Ltd. and Softbank. Yahoo! launched a highly-successful IPO in April 1996 with a total of 49 employees. \n\nToday, Yahoo! Inc. is a leading global Internet communications, commerce and media company that offers a comprehensive branded network of services to more than 345 million individuals each month worldwide. As the first online navigational guide to the Web, www.yahoo.com is the leading guide in terms of traffic, advertising, household and business user reach. Yahoo! is the No. 1 Internet brand globally and reaches the largest audience worldwide. The company also provides online business and enterprise services designed to enhance the productivity and Web presence of Yahoo!'s clients. These services include Corporate Yahoo!, a popular customized enterprise portal solution; audio and video streaming; store hosting and management; and Web site tools and services. The company's global Web network includes 25 World properties. Headquartered in Sunnyvale, Calif., Yahoo! has offices in Europe, Asia, Latin America, Australia, Canada and the United States. \n \n\n-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2877
I believe Yahoo! removed Y! Drive because it were easy-use tool to share copyrighted medias (with "Public" sharing feature).\n\nBut YDrive had a good tool for personnal use, as a briefcase between its home and office.\n\nI think that better way is not to create new YDrive... Against, Yahoo! could use AJAX into Y! Briefcase to allow drag'n'drop. Or add drag'n'drop target into Messenger to upload files to Y! Briefcase... I study this idea for Y! Messenger Plus ;op
153486
Yahoo! is definitely the best