Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Microsoft bought Skype

cringely.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#81

Post by netcan »

patrickk wrote: post #77
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #14

I don't believe that at all. Google doesn't need Skype. Microsoft bought Skype because they have large amounts of cash in Europe that they cannot repatriate without taking a huge tax hit. For some strange reason, Ballmer has that obsession with hyperactively pursuing the same consumers that Google and Apple have. That's why he didn't see anything else to buy in Europe (Actually there isn't a whole lot). But there is…

Would Microsoft be able to afford SAP? According to Google Finance, they have a market cap of $77.04bn and Microsoft would have to pay a hefty premium over this. http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:SAP Also, what would the European Commission say about this? I don't think they would look favourably on this. They're not exactly fond of Microsoft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_compet...

Good point. SAP is an order of magnitude bigger than Skype but the point about getting into this space if they're serious about getting into a different space is a good one. Netsuite, intuit & salesforce are trading @ $2.3b, $16.75b & $17.9b. They could conceivably buy all three with just this 'overseas cash' they supposedly need to spend and still have change. Thinking about MS's available cash in terms of companies they could buy really puts some perceptive on it - huge.

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#82

Post by netcan »

barrkel wrote: post #19
cletus wrote: post #15

Am I the only one who has had terrible experience with Skype? I live in New York but my family is from Australia so I use video-calling them to them all the time. I've tried using Skype but basically it's terrible. Poor audio, choppy frame rates and at some point it will start giving messages about "degraded performance" and we'll lose video. My setup is a 50Mbps cable line using wireless (N) from a Macbook Pro. The…

Australia has small and expensive pipes to the rest of the world, and it shows up as caps and high prices. I'd be surprised if Australian telcos weren't working hard to degrade VoIP generally. For my own part, I use Skype for almost every outgoing phone call. I spend perhaps 5 GBP/month on threshold auto-credit. The biggest problems with it happen with concurrent upload activity, especially torrents.

I'm in Melbourne and I've just got unlimited adsl2+ for $50 pm. Last plan was 40gb adsl2+ for $60.

Skype (video & skype-2-phone) usually works very well (not always, but lately usually better than land lines for overseas calls).

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#83

Post by brown9-2 »

bambax wrote: post #2

> Microsoft bought Skype to keep Google from buying Skype. Except Google wouldn't buy Skype, according to a recent story: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/05/11/google.skype.wire... ...?

That "recent story" details something that happened in 2009.

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#84

Post by patrickk »

netcan wrote: post #81
patrickk wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would Microsoft be able to afford SAP? According to Google Finance, they have a market cap of $77.04bn and Microsoft would have to pay a hefty premium over this. http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:SAP Also, what would the European Commission say about this? I don't think they would look favourably on this. They're not exactly fond of Microsoft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_compet...

Good point. SAP is an order of magnitude bigger than Skype but the point about getting into this space if they're serious about getting into a different space is a good one. Netsuite, intuit & salesforce are trading @ $2.3b, $16.75b & $17.9b. They could conceivably buy all three with just this 'overseas cash' they supposedly need to spend and still have change. Thinking about MS's available cash in terms of companies…

According to this article, Microsoft are sitting on a $50bn (!) pile of cash, $42bn of which is located ouside the US:

http://blogs.forbes.com/ericsavitz/2011/05/10/microsoft-with...

They could do nearly six Skype-sized deals, just using cash (without issuing bonds or using stock!) Incredible. They could probably buy SAP, but their cash pile would be gone, plus they would have to give up a significant amount of stock as well. Doubt Ballmer would be willing to risk this.

I've heard elsewhere that Apple is sitting on a ~$35bn cash pile. One wonders when the US Government will declare some sort of 'tax holiday' or window during which these companies can repatriate all this cash.

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#85

Post by alexbowman »

nl wrote: post #78
rmccue wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher speeds seem a lot more ubiquitous in the US as opposed to here though. I live in one of the largest cities in the country, and my choices are dial-up, ADSL (to an exchange 5+km away), or cable from a single provider (who charges relatively highly for their services). From what I can see, the US appears to be much better in this regard. I have family who are on 2GB plans for $50/mo, and they regard that as fair…

I have family who are on 2GB plans for $50/mo, and they regard that as fairly good. That's not good at all. I suspect that's the Telstra BigPond "ignorance tax" package. Almost any provider will give them a better deal. Eg, I get 30Gb/month on Internode for $40. (I live in Australia) I'd recommend looking at iiNet and Internode packages for them.

>> I have family who are on 2GB plans for $50/mo, and they regard that as fairly good.

> Eg, I get 30Gb/month on Internode for $40. (I live in Australia)

Is one of you talking about bandwidth (and types 2GB instead of 2Gb) and the other talking about data quota?

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#86

Post by wedesoft »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #47
Raphael_Amiard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're still the ones who make the most used OS in the world. They're not the ones innovating and creating new markets and paradigms. But were they, ever ?

I've waved the "What did Microsoft ever invent?" flag plenty in my life, so let me try and advocate for the devil: Microsoft basically invented the hardware-agnostic software platform. Before Microsoft, there were a variety of hardware platforms, each with their own libraries and languages... not unlike the situation today with phones. Developers had to choose what to target... not only Mac vs PC, but different video…

Interesting comment. IMO using a virtual machine to abstract away the hardware is what an operating system is all about. Microsoft has done a lot of work to prevent any competing middleware (Java, Internet browser, Flash, OpenGL, ...) from challenging their position.

http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepape...

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#87

Post by nl »

alexbowman wrote: post #85
nl wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have family who are on 2GB plans for $50/mo, and they regard that as fairly good. That's not good at all. I suspect that's the Telstra BigPond "ignorance tax" package. Almost any provider will give them a better deal. Eg, I get 30Gb/month on Internode for $40. (I live in Australia) I'd recommend looking at iiNet and Internode packages for them.

>> I have family who are on 2GB plans for $50/mo, and they regard that as fairly good. > Eg, I get 30Gb/month on Internode for $40. (I live in Australia) Is one of you talking about bandwidth (and types 2GB instead of 2Gb) and the other talking about data quota?

Sorry, no, that was a mistyping on my part. I meant GB.

Here's the Internode plans: http://www.internode.on.net/residential/adsl_broadband/easy_... (I actually don't have one of those plans, but you can see the 30GB for 39.95 unbundled).

And I suspect this is the plan the OP was referring to: http://go.bigpond.com/broadband/9-plan/ (Unbundled it's $39.95 for 2GB)

Telstra Bigpond used to sell the same plan with no bundling discount. It wouldn't surprise me if some people are still on it.

AFAIK no one in Australia caps on speed, except in special circumstances. You get ADSL as fast as it can go up to your data cap, and then it slows.

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#88

Post by stcredzero »

joe_the_user wrote: post #75
lurker20 wrote: post #55

Here is what Microsoft should do with Skype and it's 140Million-member social network : Beat Facebook. Turn Skype into Diaspora. (Specifically, take Skype's persistent chatrooms into the next dimension) Integrate Skype with Windows Photo Album, Movie Maker, Spaces, blah blah. Mayke Skype a local application for managing your personal content -- photos, videos, thoughts, whatever. Leverage Skype's encrypted P2P infras…

Wow, that's a great idea for a company that users trust. If only a company like that had bought Skype...

Wow, that's a great idea for a company that users trust.

If only a company like that had bought Skype...

The thing is, Microsoft only has to get people to trust them as much or more than Google, Facebook, Sony,...

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#89

Post by mambodog »

Raphael wrote: post #51
cletus wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was true 10 years ago but a lot has changed and it's fairly damning evidence of just how much the US has stood still on Internet access in the last decade. Consider iiNet, Australia's third largest ISP: http://www.iinet.net.au/broadband/plans.html 200GB/month ADSL2+ for $50/month (+$30/month "phone tax"). In NY I have Time Warner Cable 50Mbps but it's basically capped at 250GB and I think I pay $80/month for it.…

But if the overseas pipes are the bottleneck, improved local infrastructure would mean more are fighting to use them.

This is not the case. barrkel's statement is outdated and inaccurate.

"Each of the four networks that will be providing the bulk of international connections for Australia is capable of carrying at least a terabit per second of data. The total international capacity in use for the Australian market in 2009 is estimated to be around 300 gigabits per second. Accordingly, total capacity usage could double, then double again, then double again, and then double yet again before the capabilities of those networks was exhausted. It would therefore be difficult to say that international networks are a capacity bottleneck in the Australian market."[1]

Another cable link currently under construction will double Australia's current capacity. [2]

[1] http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/358578/nbn_101_float...

[2] http://www.techworld.com.au/article/354838/aus_network_bandw...

Re: Why Microsoft bought Skype

#90

Post by rbanffy »

abecedarius wrote: post #69
rbanffy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Microsoft basically invented the hardware-agnostic software platform Digital Research did that. You could run a CP/M program on any CP/M-capable computer. Microsoft tried that with MSX (and failed) and then with MS-DOS (and succeeded on a different hardware platform). Only then, different graphics cards and printers became relevant. > Other than that, I don't think Microsoft invented much Visual Basic is one thing…

Note that VB was an outside acquisition.

Oh... So was MS-DOS...

Well... Not very surprising. That company has been sick for decades.

Post reply on HN