Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ask Slashdot: Can Yahoo Actually Stage a Comeback?

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the titans-versus-dinosaurs dept.

Businesses 260

Nerval's Lobster writes "Fresh off purchasing Tumblr for $1.1 billion, Yahoo has moved to the next stage of what's becoming a company-wide reboot: fixing Flickr, the photo-sharing service that it acquired in 2005 and subsequently allowed to languish. Yahoo boosted Flickr accounts' individual storage capacity to one free terabyte, revamped the Website's overall look, and launched a new Flickr app for Google Android, among other tweaks. Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer clearly wants her company to fight toe-to-toe on features with Google and Facebook, but she faces a long road ahead of her: not only does she need to streamline Yahoo's cumbersome corporate structure and product portfolio into something that resembles fighting shape, but she needs to reverse the general perception that Yahoo is teetering on the edge of history's trash-bin, with an aging customer base and unexciting features. The question is, could anyone actually pull it off? Is Yahoo capable of an Apple-style turnaround, or are its current actions merely delaying the inevitable?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787721)

Headlines Slashdot would've run in 1996, and the comments would've resoundingly been "no."

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788055)

More relevant: Can slashdot stage a comeback?

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788113)

Answer is also "no." It's so far gone, people don't even ask the question anymore.

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (1)

jimmetry (1801872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788499)

Of course it can. Eventually someone will get pissed off and ask to get involved. ....k, I just looked at their job listings...

http://slashdot.org/job_board.pl [slashdot.org]

How on earth could this website take that many people to run?!

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (1)

jimmetry (1801872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788663)

Oh herp derp. That's for OTHER companies.

So then who maintains slashdot code? CmdTaco? samzenpus?

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (1)

MrEdofCourse (2670081) | about a year and a half ago | (#43789025)

"More relevant: Can slashdot stage a comeback?"

NO, and if they don't revert their last design overhaul, I'm going to delete my account!

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (5, Interesting)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788351)

There's always an exception somewhere. Steve Jobs, love him or hate him, was a uniquely talented individual, and if Apple hadn't brought him back the way they did, they would indeed have died years ago. I seriously doubt this Marissa Mayer is this sort of uniquely talented person. Moreover, Apple has always had a bit of a cult around it due to the qualities of its products (remember, their whole goal was to make computers that regular people could use for work and everyday tasks, hence their extreme focus on UI and UX from way back when Jobs toured PARC). Yahoo doesn't have anything like this; its whole claim to fame was that it was a web portal back in the days before Google and search engines; essentially it started out as a giant web directory. This whole concept is totally obsolete now, so they tried to pitch themselves as a "front page" to the internet, but not many people care about that any more.

The only way I see them surviving is if they use the cash they still have and re-invent themselves into something different, mostly abandoning this "web portal" crap. I have no idea what that would be, however, and since really revolutionary ideas (like Facebook, Twitter, etc.) never come from large, established corporations, but rather from tiny start-ups, I think their days are very numbered.

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788545)

The only way I see them surviving is if they use the cash they still have and re-invent themselves into something different, mostly abandoning this "web portal" crap. I have no idea what that would be, however, and since really revolutionary ideas (like Facebook, Twitter, etc.) never come from large, established corporations, but rather from tiny start-ups, I think their days are very numbered.

Just buy the right start-up? Buy any start-up and pray one of them generates enough hype and money to make you relevant? Are we in Bubble 21.13?

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788521)

Headlines Slashdot would've run in 1996

That would have been an interesting trick, considering Slashdot didn't exist until 1997.

Re:Can Apple Actually Stage a Comeback? (1)

flimflammer (956759) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788963)

Are you actually trying to make a point somewhere?

How are we supposed to know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787743)

"Could anyone actually pull it off? Is Yahoo capable of an Apple-style turnaround, or are its current actions merely delaying the inevitable?"

How are we supposed to know?

Re:How are we supposed to know (1)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787961)

Re: How are we supposed to know (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788161)

But it's an Ask Slashdot question! That should be an indication that it is the opposite of a rhetorical question. What is the question being asked of slashdot if not the questions I quoted?

Re: How are we supposed to know (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788515)

Yeah this is a giant fail because the whole point of "Ask Slashdot" is to ask solvable problems that are too geeky for your usual places, stuff like "How can I record securely in my car" or like the problem I had with a customer whose computers kept getting hacked i asked in the comments where it turned out his router had been compromised, its for questions which can actually be ANSWERED.

Whether Yahoo can pull off a come back or not should really be under general, not under Ask Slashdot. As for the question itself, if they continue to not be MSFT? Its possible, I've been making countless Yahoo accounts for customers pissed off at MSFT killing Live Messenger and Hotmail so they could pick up those users and run with them as long as they don't shit all over the UIs like MSFT does.

Re:How are we supposed to know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788341)

Read your own link, it's not a rhetorical question unless they are trying to make a point, not ask for an answer or opinion.

In this case it's just a question that doesn't have a definite answer yet, like "will I win the lottery?" A rhetorical question would be more like "why does Yahoo! still bother?"

Of course (5, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787785)

Yahoo *could* stage a comeback, but why? What makes a product or service from Yahoo unique?

Can't answer that question? Of course not. Yahoo is a holding company made up of numerous acquisitions. [wikipedia.org] If there's an identity buried in there somewhere, it's a Frankenstein's monster, stitched together out of spare parts. There's nothing cohesive about Yahoo, nothing that makes it special as a company, and there never was.

Re:Of course (3, Insightful)

sribe (304414) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787865)

Can't answer that question? Of course not. Yahoo is a holding company made up of numerous acquisitions. [wikipedia.org] If there's an identity buried in there somewhere, it's a Frankenstein's monster, stitched together out of spare parts. There's nothing cohesive about Yahoo, nothing that makes it special as a company, and there never was.

That's all true. But the question is whether or not that can be changed ;-)

Re:Of course (-1, Troll)

Tough Love (215404) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788035)

Yahoo can't stage a comeback with Marissa Mayer at the helm. Case in point: cancelling all remote working while the rest of the word is learning how to adapt to and benefit from it. Expect more such idiocy with this overrated bimbo in charge.

Re:Of course (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788129)

Wasn't that just a stealth layoff to avoid announcing a layoff, since many remote workers cannot relocate.

Re:Of course (4, Interesting)

longk (2637033) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788137)

IMHO that's just her way of waking everybody up and making it clear this boat is changing its course. With time, I'm sure people will be working remotely once again.

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788719)

IMHO that's just her way of waking everybody up and making it clear this boat is changing its course. With time, I'm sure people will be working remotely once again.

Way to go. Irritate and annoy your best and brightest, some of which will leave thanks to the stupidity. It doesn't matter if you're the CEO. Stupid is as stupid does. What she's done here is make it clear she'll be issuing edicts from above and leaving people who have special circumstances or prior arrangements out in the cold. Many who can leave will. Those who can't become disgruntled. IDIOT!

Re:Of course (1, Insightful)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788175)

I understand the "overrated" part, but why the "bimbo" part?

Re:Of course (4, Informative)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788369)

Because she's a female. If she were a man, we could call him an "overrated bozo". You wouldn't call a woman a "bozo", since that's a reference to Bozo the Clown, who was a man.

Re:Of course (1)

oldhack (1037484) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788607)

And also, calling a girl "bozo" would be offensive to women, and that would be uncivilized. Right?

Re:Of course (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788603)

Why not? Would you have objected to a similar insult to a man?

Re:Of course (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788231)

Watch Seinfeld on the concept of working from home. I'm pretty sure that's the same problem they had.

Re:Of course (1)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788289)

cancelling all remote working while the rest of the word is learning how to adapt to and benefit from it

Google doesn't allow much remote work either. Are you claiming Google is also run by idiotic, overrated bimbos?

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788415)

cancelling all remote working while the rest of the word is learning how to adapt to and benefit from it

Google doesn't allow much remote work either. Are you claiming Google is also run by idiotic, overrated bimbos?

Well it was, before she moved to Yahoo.. ;-)

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788543)

>Google doesn't allow much remote work either.
[citation needed]

Re:Of course (2)

pauljlucas (529435) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788413)

... cancelling all remote working while the rest of the word is learning how to adapt to and benefit from it.

I talked to someone who works for Yahoo who told me that, out of the roughly 11K employees, this affects only around a couple of hundred. Of those, many will simply get a desk/cubicle at the office (thereby meeting the "on site" requirement), but actually still work at home most of the time. The reality is that this is basically a non-change.

That being the case, it still makes you wonder (if it's as much or a non-change as claimed by the Yahoo employee I spoke to) why bother? The Yahoo employee has no answer to that.

Re:Of course (0)

gmhowell (26755) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788451)

What does 'bimbo' add to the discussion that wouldn't have been covered by, as just one possibility, the word 'idiot'?

I read AVFM and other MHRA sites daily, and even I have to wonder what your word choice brings to the discussion.

Re:Of course (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788657)

If it had been a man, would have you even commented? I'll admit its not a term i would have used, but only because of the distraction you are providing my white-knighting it.

Re:Of course (3, Interesting)

HockeyPuck (141947) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788101)

Yahoo *could* stage a comeback, but why? What makes a product or service from Yahoo unique?

Can't answer that question? Of course not. Yahoo is a holding company made up of numerous acquisitions. If there's an identity buried in there somewhere, it's a Frankenstein's monster, stitched together out of spare parts. There's nothing cohesive about Yahoo, nothing that makes it special as a company, and there never was.

So what if it's made up of acquisitions...? I doubt there's very many large companies that haven't made a significant number of acquisitions. All three with far more than 100 companies bought or merged with:

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/corporate_development/acquisitions/about_cisco_acquisitions.html [cisco.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Google [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_IBM [wikipedia.org]

By the way, it seems that Yahoo! has the fewest acquisitions of any of the three, including your oh so dear to your heart google.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Yahoo! [wikipedia.org]

How'd you get marked insightful?

Re:Of course (1)

Dahamma (304068) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788467)

Yeah, but Yahoo had some of the stupidest acquisitions, starting with the $5.7B debacle known as Broadcast.com.

The only thing of any note coming out of that deal is the Dallas Mavericks winning the NBA championship (otherwise known as "Thank you Yahoo!... you suckers! Sincerely, Mark Cuban")

Give what Google does not (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788335)

Give me better privacy controls than Google does, and I will make the switch.

I would really like a social network that allows me to either:

a) allow the company to use my personal data for advertising as normal
b) pay a small subscription fee, but stay completely private.

If I pick B and my subscription lapses, the service is SUSPENDED until I pay, it does not default to A.

Furthermore, I can set up a charge list, so anyone who wants to contact me through the network has to pay an upfront fee which gets stored in escrow until:

1) I refund it (at no cost to me)
2) I accept it (goes to my bank).
3) I wait too long (automatic refund).

And I get to set the fee and possibly set a few different fees by category of the contactor. Also, obviously, I can whitelist people on my contact list so they can always contact me for free (but membership to the whitelist does not automatically whitelist).

I could go on, but why? This is far too awesome to ever be made available to us serfs.

Re:Of course (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788477)

I was employed with Yahoo when they made the WFH change. We were lied to even within the company. It was initially communicated permanent WFH employees would no longer be able to WFH to help drive innovation. 160-something permanent WFH people out of ~16,000 employees were suppose to make a HUGE impact on innovation?? It became clear shortly after the announcement that it was BS. The real reason was communicated a few days later. They made the decision after looking at the VPN logs and saw people WFH weren't even logging in. Not necessarily the permanent WFH people, just in general. It wasn't a stealth layoff, it was a get people to actually do their work.

Do I think Yahoo will make a comeback? Absolutely not. There is way too much dysfunction in that company to fix.

Re:Of course (2)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788793)

Yahoo *could* stage a comeback, but why? What makes a product or service from Yahoo unique?

Frankly, you could ask the same question, substituting "Google", and give the same answer.
 
The only real difference between them is Google is (and inexplicably remains) a darling of the soi-disant technorati. Hence the constant stream of comments like yours and those in the summary. In reality, Yahoo! is much like Facebook, doing decently despite the fact that a narrow and shallow demographic disapproves of it.
 
What's going to kill Yahoo! though is Mayer's misguided attempts to make it hip and kewl and l33t and taking on Google rather than keeping it functional and improving the dodgy and bodgy bits. The Flickr 'upgrade' is nothing but flash and sizzle that's added nothing, dropped existing functionality, and ignored some longstanding problems. Worse yet - ads are coming...

Betteridge's law of headlines (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787789)

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

Re:Betteridge's law of headlines (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787825)

Ya, but this isn't really a headline... it's an Ask Slashdot question.

Can they? (1)

tftp (111690) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787791)

It all depends on people. We (outsiders) don't know what caliber of people Yahoo has and what they are thinking. Therefore we cannot answer the question.

Re:Can they? (2)

game kid (805301) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788935)

Plus between trade secrets and accounting wonkery there's simply no way for anyone short of a spy behind a Bloomberg terminal to have an idea what'll happen.

In brief, this article is SOP for the Lobster [slashdot.org] .

Sure they can! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787813)

It's just very unlikely!

the new flickr interface (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787841)

is a complete and utter disaster.

Re:the new flickr interface (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787851)

is a complete and utter disaster.

No, it's not.

Re:the new flickr interface (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787967)

Yes, it is. It's a horrible Metroised mess of pictures that trades function for shiny.

Re:the new flickr interface (0)

longk (2637033) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788167)

Function doesn't make money per se. Shiny often does.

Asking around, most people in my corner of the world seem to like the new interface.

Re:the new flickr interface (1)

rwa2 (4391) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788669)

So what's better?

I'm kinda annoyed that Google+ automatically uploads everything from my phone's camera gallery, but there's not really a good way to pull down from my Picasa albums shared on Google+ to my phone's Gallery, without swimming through a bunch of third-party apps.

FWIW, the only "third party" picture interface app that I've really liked is "Floating Image", which can pull from various feeds including Facebook and Flickr and probably Picasa / Google+ / or whatever passes for Google's photo service du jour. But it pulls to its own cache dir rather than to your Gallery.

Maybe... The problem is going to be MS. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787843)

They really really have to get their own search engine going again.

How quickly can they de-crap their products? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787879)

Yahoo's offerings seem like a trashy, awful version of Google's and MS's services.

Look at gmail. Clean. Simple. Functional.
Hotm- Err Outlook.com Like gmail, but more elegant and stylish. (Not a huge MS fan, but they really have stepped it up on a lot of their products)
Look at yahoo mail. Hey! You know what? I really missed that old 90s AOL feel. All those sidebars and banners really are something. Best, I like the site trying to force-install the yahoo toolbar at ev- (That sound your hearing is my brain trying to escape out my eye sockets so it can strangle me and prevent me from completing this tasteless joke)

Point is, yahoo needs to abandon it's entire image and start from scratch. Stop trying to monetize every pixel on the screen with increasingly obtrusive, tasteless, and gaudy crap. Treat your users like they actually have someplace else to turn to. Because they do. And they are. Yeah, I know google and MS are also making money off me by watching my every twitch.. But at least they're nice and subtle about it.

The question is not what more can Yahoo do, but what less.

Re:How quickly can they de-crap their products? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787895)

This is a totally off-topic rant. How does this answer the question "Is Yahoo capable of an Apple-style turnaround, or are its current actions merely delaying the inevitable?"

Re:How quickly can they de-crap their products? (5, Informative)

tompaulco (629533) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788201)

Look at gmail. Clean. Simple. Functional.

Well, with g-mails latest changes (admittedly a year old now), the question in my mind is whether yahoo can maintain status quo long enough for Google to shoot themselves in the foot by making their product more crappy.

Re:How quickly can they de-crap their products? (1)

mrmeval (662166) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788453)

I agree with the other poster. Goggle will fuck up gmail. They've already driven me from the web version. I predict they'd trash pop/imap access within six months either with much more intrusive adspam or just turning it off.

Wall Street's answer (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787891)

If you look at this chart [yahoo.com] , things look pretty good.

Things get progressively rosy so when you then click on the 2-year, 5-year, and Max historical perspective on the same page.

Re:Wall Street's answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787963)

oops s/rosy/less rosy/

YAHOO! ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787945)

I have never used Yahoo! !!

I do not know what Yahoo! does !!

Do you ??

Re:YAHOO! ?? (4, Informative)

Spy Handler (822350) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788931)

i used it all the time. It used to have a human-submitted and maintained tree directory of the internet.

Think about that for a second.

So if I wanted to find a good website about DOS games, instead of googling for "DOS Games", I would go to Yahoo and select a top category. It might be "Entertainment".

And find subcategories, such as Games -> Computer Games -> Legacy Games -> DOS

And look through the listings.

The plan (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787949)

1) Make copycat Internet company (say... copy Pandora)
2) Name it after a verb with a grammatically incorrect "er" (how about... Castr)
3) Get bought by Yahoo
4) Profit!

Both of coursee (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787951)

Is Yahoo capable of an Apple-style turnaround, or are its current actions merely delaying the inevitable?

Obviously a turnaround is possible and obviously that will only delay the inevitable. Yahoo won't be around forever. Neither will Apple. But with the right management and good fortune then they might both outlast us.

No. (1)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#43787959)

TLDR: no.

Longer answer: No.

Why?

Leadership. There is none.

So... no.

--
BMO

Comeback? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43787997)

That implys they had something once...
And.... no.. no they didnt. this is yahoo we're talking about here.

The ultimate 'metoo' company. You have search? we have that too! metoo! You have email? metoo! stock info? metoo! blogs? chat? dating? metoo!!!!!

The sad part is that for all their attempts at... everything... they've never once done better than half assed lame copy attempts at being trendy/cool/popular...

The only way they could have something that DIDN'T suck would be to buy hoover and produce a vacuum.

That didn't stop... (0)

Molochi (555357) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788273)

Apple.

no it can't (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788019)

yahoo will be gone within 5 years. mark this post.

YHOO stock is up almost 100% since Marissa came on (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788033)

That is already quite the turn around.

Re:YHOO stock is up almost 100% since Marissa came (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788427)

Any fuckwit with an MBA(sorry, that's redundant) can boost stock at a large publicly traded company.

Just fire a bunch of people. Short term profits jump as you burn off the 4-6 months of residual work benefit from said canned employees, without having to pay them. The stock market fucking loves this.

Of course this benefit is only temporary, and the company suffers in the long run.. But hey, in two quarters you can always fire some more people, make your bonus gain.. And when people finally catch on, several iterations down the line, you exit with your golden parachute and make even more money.

Ever wonder why some people think America is doomed?

Re:YHOO stock is up almost 100% since Marissa came (1)

KGIII (973947) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788523)

I looked recently and IIRC their stock is about back to where it was five years ago.

Still nothing about the ipad? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788077)

They redesigned their webpage? Well great, approximately no one was complaining about the page being ugly. Meanwhile flickr has yet to embrace this tablet trend. That's right, there's still no ipad app. If you want to use your ipad to look at your photos... you can do that. Using the iphone app. Half resolution.

I'm really surprised at that. Tablets are good for little more than looking at pictures and video, and the ipad is the most popular tablet. Annoucing a revamp of flickr by redesigning the front page and not by improving tablet support is a little like announcing you're going to fight street crime by enforcing jaywalking laws and saying nothing about drugs, guns, or gang activity.

Posterboy for corporate failure (1)

BeCre8iv (563502) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788177)

Once upon a time... one website was so well funded and ubiquitous it was like it was like hotmail, ebay, facebook, match.com, with the social vocabulary of youtube. all rolled into one.

Somewhere along the line they have been reduced to paying Murdochesque sums for last-gen products. having destroyed everything it ever created for itself.

At least the extra special yahoo trolls are still around

Re:Posterboy for corporate failure (0)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788295)

>At least the extra special yahoo trolls are still around

Yeah, the groups are even more of a sewer now than they were before.

The MSFT board on finance.yahoo is unreadable. It used to be populated by smart people (11-12 years ago) but it has since devolved into flamewars about concrete among other things, and if you ever want to find out what an Unreconstructed Southern Democrat thinks, go there.

*gag*

--
BMO

Not really.. (1)

Travis Repine (2861521) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788179)

If you ask me, it's too little too late. I think that Mayer has potential to make it for a company, just not Yahoo. Google on the other hand..

Destroyed Flickr (1)

Beer_Smurf (700116) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788195)

The new Flickr update turns it into Facebook. It is now totally worthless as a photo site. There are hundreds of pages of scathing posts in the comments on the new layout.

Come back to what? (1)

longk (2637033) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788197)

Can it grow? Sure. Can it grow significantly? Sure! Can it be the next Facebook/Google? Maybe.. doubtful.

Re:Come back to what? (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788251)

Facebook can't even be the next Facebook, these days.

Open Letter to Marissa (1)

Seumas (6865) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788217)

If you really want to improve the perception of the Yahoo! brand, you need to make HardGay an official part of your company's imaging. Why this didn't happen years ago, I have no idea!

HardGay Goes To Yahoo!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSD8edviajE [youtube.com]

Re:Open Letter to Marissa (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788655)

too bad he came out of the closet and admitted he was straight.

delaying the inevitable... (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788229)

Well, of course it's actions are delaying the inevitable. That's all any company's actions do. Just like, we're all dying, just some faster than others.

Can you buy a comeback ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788247)

No. Comebacks don't start by acquisition.

Reform the current operation before trying to graft on something else.

If Yahoo was going to trying to acquire talent in order to bolster their management (ala Disney buying Pixar), then do it. But from the get go they've said that Tumblr will stay independent, which probably means no sharing of the management...

Tumblr, meet Flikr, GeoCities and Summly...

Re:Can you buy a comeback ? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788407)

"Reform the current operation before trying to graft on something else."

The need to start by firing everyone on the executive floor of the offices. the Board needs to hire all new blood that has a clue how to run a technology business.

They blew a golden opportunity (3, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788261)

Yahoo had the perfect opportunity for roll-your-sites and social networks. Geocities and related services were popular in the late 90's, but they didn't improve the products, such as making them more click-to-build etc. so users didn't have to learn HTML. They sat on it and it rotted. They also had a reputation for crappy customer service. They could have been the next Facebook + Google.

Parts can... (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788281)

Parts of Yahoo can certainly survive and thrive, but the problem is, Yahoo has no cohesion when compared to Google/MS. Parts of Yahoo are actually quite good like Flickr, but then there's parts of Yahoo that are absolute crap when compared to Google and Microsoft's offerings such as their e-mail service.

Re:Parts can... (1)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788487)

It's true.

No. (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788389)

Not with the complete Moron CEO they have. That woman has no idea how to run a business. You do NOT insult your customers to gain market share...

Her Comments , “There’s no such thing as Flickr Pro today because [with so many people taking photographs] there’s really no such thing as professional photographers anymore...”

I really hope someone told her that she was a complete idiot for saying those words at a press conference.

Re:No. (2, Insightful)

Bohnanza (523456) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788823)

She is hot, though.

i used to cyber with her (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788961)

on yahoo chat, it was awesome - still have screen caps. But im not a dick to release them.

Re:No. (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788891)

Indeed. Apple, EA, MS, Facebook, AT&T, Verizon and Sony for example all insulted their customer bases in various ways, some of which were outright insults in press conferences, and immediately went belly up. ~

Flickr can, in fact, get rid of the high-power users in exchange for more of the instagram crowd and gain marketshare and profits. The changes seem to be aimed squarely at that. Yahoo undoubtedly has far more data on their users than we do. Whether the decision is based on a reasonable interpretation of that data or whether they're all braindead idiots (or some combination) only time will tell, but I don't think it's certain that insulting a small part of their user base in a press conference will doom them.

*** IT IS TIME FOR REVOLUTION *** (1)

jimmetry (1801872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788393)

This means they can FINALLY drop that stupid fucking question mark! :D

Re:*** IT IS TIME FOR REVOLUTION *** (1)

jimmetry (1801872) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788409)

Wait. Exclamation mark.

Dammit.

Re:*** IT IS TIME FOR REVOLUTION *** (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788779)

Who's the stupid one now, bitch?

With Facebook integration as bad as this... (2)

Tommy Orndorff (2925193) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788441)

To add facebook to my Flickr account, it _only_ wants access to this: Yahoo! would like to access your public profile, friend list, News Feed, birthday, work history, status updates, education history, events, groups, interests, current city, religious and political views, personal description, likes and your friends' birthdays, work histories, status updates, education histories, events and current cities. Yahoo! would like to post on your behalf. O.o Get with the times

Raise the pirate flag. (1, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788519)

The new and improved Yarrrrhoo! can embrace a new synergy of proactive distributed cloud sharing. 'Rissa Dot Com, CEO for a new era.

Re:Raise the pirate flag. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788899)

I just wanted to know how you type while sucking off a guy. You must be a pretty skilled dick smoker.

What would they come back to? (4, Insightful)

AdamHaun (43173) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788569)

Apple started off making computers (or maybe "integrated hardware/software experiences" is a better way to put it). After their comeback, they still made computers. Now their big thing is portable computers -- a big change, but still related to what they always did. Their focus is on design and UX expertise.

Yahoo started off making a hierarchical directory of web sites, then dove into the web portal craze of the late 1990s. After their comeback, they will ___________. Their focus is on ___________.

Fill in the blanks. It's not going to be what they did before, because nobody wants more hierarchical web directories and portals. They have a bunch of people still using their webmail, so that's one option. GMail wiped the floor with them before, but it's been getting clunky lately thanks to G+. Yahoo could try to recapture the clean simplicity of Google's early days. That would be a big challenge indeed -- as a portal company, the idea of leaving blank space on a web page is utterly alien to them.

It looks like they're producing independent news. That's an interesting option -- they could compete with the Huffington Post et al. Online news is still based strongly on newspapers, so there's room for someone to shake up the format.

This all seems like a stretch, though. Yahoo's name has little value, and their current expertise isn't very helpful. All they bring to the table is more money than a startup, but it probably won't be enough to save them. Then again, that's what I said about Apple too.

Re:What would they come back to? (1)

neurovish (315867) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788633)

social and cloud?

Betteridge's Law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788573)

Answer:

No.

Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

Look! Free stuff! (1)

neurovish (315867) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788625)

...in the meantime, they're throwing ads on the site unless you want to pay $50/year (current, well former, cost for Pro with unlimited storage is $25/year), and if you want twice as much space, then that will be $500. Personally, I was fine with the way that flickr was. Now I need a plan to rescue all my photos on there while I wait and see if I want to stick around the new ad-based site.

I am not hip (1)

Taantric (2587965) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788711)

Can someone explain the difference between Flickr & Tumblr? To a jaded old fool like me they sound pretty much the same.

Re:I am not hip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788953)

Can someone explain the difference between Flickr & Tumblr? To a jaded old fool like me they sound pretty much the same.

Fucklr?

The problem yahoo has is (1)

hsmith (818216) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788835)

There is no service they offer I'd go to use. Not search, not email. They don't have an OS. Love or hate MS, they at least have draw. There isn't much that would get me to use Yahoos services.

Yes (0)

sunking2 (521698) | about a year and a half ago | (#43788863)

As soon as Marissa posts her sex pics on a yahoo advertisement driven website. Or maybe she's not really behind the cause afterall?

Yahoo! threw their Flickr users overboard (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788875)

I've been using Flickr since 2004 (Flickr just told me) which was *before* Yahoo! bought it. It's been upgraded and had a few features added over the years, but it's always been a great place to store my photos and share them on the web. I've been a paying user of Flickr for many years.

Today, I got an email about the free terabyte of space I can get and suggesting that I convert my account to a free one while the offer lasts. WTF?! Is that? Why am I paying them? If I switch to free, what assurance is there that they won't just shut down the site one day?

A better question that makes all of this simple: how do I get all my original photos off Flickr and where should I put them?

So far, I've put them in Dropbox and AWS and my own openstack cloud storage, but what's the best place to share them with others?

signed,
disappointed Flickr fan

The Dot-Com v1.0 Poster Boy That wouldn't die (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43788921)

Yahoo is a strange beast, really. Sort of a Web 1.0 poster boy that has substantially ridden its late '90s successes into the modern era. They did make a few smart bets (Alibaba and others) that have given them a fairly large cash horde to play around with (e.g., buy Mark Cuban's rather pointless broadcast.com in the late '90s for $2B (more than Tumblr!) for no good reason and unfortunately made him the billionaire pro ball-owning douche bag he is today. I'm continually puzzled why they're still around and what the heck they are doing. Basically everything they have seems to exist to exploit an ad-serving infrastructure. They still have massive, massive traffic - which obviously has SOME considerable value - but as far as what they are or what they're about, it's utterly puzzling. Terry Semel really took them into a weird direction and very, very richly lined his bank account in the process, attempting to make Yahoo a "media company." For all intents and purposes it's a Silicon Dark Alley, with a few $B in the bank still (much less after the Tumblr acquisition, but still quite a bit), attempting to find its way out of the hole.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?