Quite stressed with too many work-projects.

So, instead of a blog of substance, here’s a 1983 video of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs playing a dating game.

And if anyone gets the McLovin’-Superbad reference, you’re great.

Rumours are rapidly floating around the ‘net that Microsoft’s Live Search will be replaced by a new model.

Techcrunch report that a source within the company has confirmed that it will be re-branding and increasing it’s focus upon search, and although no-one really knows what will be replacing Live, the name being banded around a hell of a lot is Kumo.

Kumo is apparently Japanese for “cloud” or “spider”, and it’s even being alleged that Microsoft have bought the kumo.com domain name. It’s a good move by the company, especially in the wake of the Yahoo fiasco, to be increasing a focus upon search, but let’s not forget that Google owns the market and they’ll have a hard time taking any of that away, even with a fancy name.

Quite literally, art made using windows desktop paint. Not just any art, but album covers!

 This was a great competition from the Guardian… Not entirely sure how I managed to miss it; I’m kind of disappointed that I did. At least it’s all still online!

… Time for some visuals… An old, well-worn image from Hugh MacLeod at Gaping Void. It makes me smile, anyway.

Hmm. Talking of upgrading design, has anyone else found their hotmail account (with no warning) suddenly looks like it belongs in this century?

Mine appeared overnight, like a lovely early christmas present.

New, sexy Microsoft Azure.

Hope it works.

Last week Yahoo announced a riduculous number of job cuts.

I didn’t find this the least bit funny, but it amused me that they shunned Microsoft’s massive offer of $CRAZY million dollars a few months ago, and now the company’s shares have plummeted vastly below what they refused.

Now, even Microsoft is looking a bit panicky though, this morning releasing news that they’re expecting online revenue growth to slow to between 6% – 10 % in the next quarter, with display advertising being dramtically affected by the economic environment. Note: Display, NOT Paid Search, which could mean great rates for advertisers.Despite this slightly pessimistic prediction, Micrcosoft’s online functions still just made a cool $770m (£495m) these past THREE months and, a slight slap in the face for Yahoo, Microsoft just posted quarterly results of $21bn MORE than Yahoo’s entire market cap of $17.5bn (£11.2bn).

A new breed of begger is about to be born? Spare some change, anyone?

In case it’s escaped anybody’s attention – possibly those without a computer or any form of intelligence – Google are celebrating their tenth birthday.

So, from humble beginnings a decade ago, Google turns double-digits and simultaneously is recognised as the worlds most powerful global brand, as charted by research-consultancy firm, Millward Brown. Interestingly, out of the top-ten brands on this list, four are computing-based: Alongside Google (1), there sits Microsoft (3), IBM (6) and Apple (7). Furthermore, China Mobile (5) and Nokia (9) bulk up this techno-team. Unquestionably, this is a reflection on the importance of technology in modern everyday life, but perhaps any questions should be directed towards Google and the massive monopoly they’re building for themselves?

There are hundreds of articles and blogs floating around surrounding the ethics of Google, particularly in their data-collecting/retaining methods. Whilst I’m totally for companies being allowed to make profits, no matter how big the amounts involved, I like to try and understand the motivation behind the cash. When Google bought DoubleClick, I was worried – and partly, I still am – that the biggest search engine on earth was buying one of the biggest measurers of ad-trafficking and measurement. Not only does this possibly stamp out competition, but the issues raised surrounding data and the fact that Google will soon be Big-Brother-esque in their knowledge of users. (Therefore able to increase revenue even further). It just seemed to be a bit bullying when it happened, and a far cry from the informal Google “Don’t be evil” slogan. Other stuff happened this year, such as Brand-protection no longer being allowed on PPC-ads, so competitors could appear on each other’s terms; another money-maker for the company.

Whilst Google undeniably do a great deal of good, both online and off, (from free source coding and decent email through to setting up a $1bn charity fund and uniting knowledge-sharing), it nevertheless remains that some of it’s business practices can be viewed to sway slightly away from what the company preaches.

In an effort to improve it’s advertising revenue, Yahoo has decided to get a new image…
And about time too.

I’m actually quite a big fan of Yahoo – possibly because they seem to be an underdog, caught between the world domination battle of Google and Microsoft – but their fussy, over-cluttered homepage has always irritated me slightly. As web 2.0 continues it’s development, and with 3.0 already arguably upon us, site design is all about simplicity, with the user’s personal needs in mind. A great example large corporations realising this, and actually doing anything productive about it, is the BBC, where, to mark the beginning of 2008, they gave their retro 90’s site a complete (and long overdue) makeover. Worryingly, although the BBC has great digital content, it’s traditional core is hardly based online, so why is it often ahead of equally as huge, solely digital-based companies? For me, that’s not really a can of worms I want to open just yet; I merely wanted to share my genuine enthusiasm that Yahoo has finally decided to embrace the concepts surrounding usability.

It seems the basic idea is that Yahoo will “choose” random users, who will provide instrumental feedback, which will then be used for redesigning the site that allegedly 300m unique people visit each month. With their last foray into design change going back to mid 2006, Yahoo seem to have finally grasped the concept that to try and rival the likes of iGoogle, they need to step up the mark. Actually, I made that last sentence up – it’s what I want to believe. In reality, it seems that following the fiasco the world witnessed when Microsoft tried to unsuccessfully buy Yahoo for $44.6bn, Yahoo is going down the path of belief that by making their site and services more user-friendly, they will both capture more users and more prominently/directly be able to advertise. Therefore new site design = greater chance of increasing ad revenue. Logically, this will probably work, and although I’m happy that change is happening, I’m disappointed it’s mainly for revenue purposes, rather than aesthetic reasons.