*Words of Wisdom From The Elder

Interesting post.

I think the real story is about revenue here. Google trumps Live in revenue because Google trumps Live in search. Search is an amazing cash cow that beats other forms of internet advertising. So when you see that 1% of live.com users are using search.live.com, that's - to me - the story and engine behind the Yahoo! acquisition, etc.

Very interesting breakdown of some fairly obtuse statistics, Keith. One thing I think we can attribute to the amout of mail traffic on live.com is the fact that it is STILL hotmail. If you direct your browser to www.hotmail.com, it will now resolve to mail.live.com.

I honestly think it's a shame that more people aren't using maps.live.com. I've taken to sending people directions with it and I get almost unanimous feedback that, "Wow, this is much cooler than Google." Oh well, these things take time to gell I guess.

Denny
look me up on Twitter: @dboynton

These are my opinions only and based only on my own recollection of the past 10 years ... but I digress:

Hotmail.com was the longtime predecessor before the revamping of the site name into Live.com. We must not forget that ALL 3 sites, Hotmail (even way before it was bought by Microsoft/MSN), Yahoo Search, and Yahoo Mail, were ALREADY MORE than well established (for mor than TEN years!!) in terms of popularity and widespread use, long even before Microsoft/MSN decided to focus more on improving their search engine (which was only the last 2-3 years!!) thus forming Live.com. So, TEN long years of solid consumer and more importantly, business traffic ... ALL going through Yahoo and AOL! Before the recent re-awakening and re-vamping of MSN's Live.com service, I'd say that did alot to expand the popularity and established much in the way of "normative browsing habits" for all that time, amongst the worldwide browsing populace. Also another thing to remember is that Yahoo Mail also had separate custom nationalized editions (ie: mail.yahoo.co.uk, mail.yahoo.ie, mail.yahoo.au, mail.yahoo.fr .... etc...) ALL tailored according to many more countries/cultures than either generation of Hotmail.com OR the newest Live.com EVER HAD, at first.

There was also quite a long while before Microsoft/MSN even HAD any big *public* internet e-mail service, as before Hotmail, MSN's own mail service was very limited, similar to how AOL's was: available only to paid dial-up subscribers -- what I am saying is, before MSN/Microsoft bought Hotmail.com, there was never any "publc free beta" of any new email servive akin to how Gmail started out.

And (with the exception of AOL since the "ancient of days"), Yahoo had their whole web portal designed and all sites and services ALL fully inter-operational with each other, long before ANYONE else even thought of WHAT EXACTLY a web "portal" site should be.

Yes, see, this is "The [Borg] Microsoft Way", as LIVE.com was never anything that Microsoft even developed originally on their own! NO, like the Borg, they "assimilated" and "integrated other's technology with their own" [another famous Borg saying, hmmm]. The only reason Microsoft stands as big and as diversified as they do today, AND THE ONLY REASON why Live.com can meagerly afford to trump anyone, even if Alexa's statistics are somehow BAKED (and from what I do remember, does not Microsoft own shares in Alexa?? ... so I find these results rather questionable) is because Microsoft is ONLY the Walmart of Software Technology, gobbling up all the little ingenue mom and pop software programming shops for years ... just like the Borg of Star Trek horror fame, have done in the movies and TV series: assimilation after assimilation.

And even if you talk to anyone (those who are any bit aware of Microsoft's corporate culture), you will find out in short order, that much of Microsoft as a company is still grossly guilty of myopic "hive-think" behavior (their employees are maybe brainwashed to be or think this way?). They do not know any other way to deal with rivals in a technological sphere that addresses their own premature inequalities, or how to compete on an even floor, other than to tilt the scales with their limitless bank accounts to thus "innovate by assimilate" and buy all the intellectual property and/or "brain-share" of smart thinkers and workers, that they need. To my mind, this despicable habit hardly gives them any merit at all. IF you want to dole out where the real merit is due for just WHY Live.com seems to only now trump Google's results, within Alexa's findings? Then I say: dole out merit to all the victims of corporate buyouts and hostile take-overs: all the countless small-time, extremely bright, unsung software engineer talents, and all the many barely-seeded Venture Capitalist start-up pre- and post-bubble dot-com firms that Microsoft greedily gobbled up and thus assimilated in its path to power and global hegemony.

Live.com, even if growing in usage or popularity, is a FRAUD perpetrated by a raucous company hell-bent on dominating anything it gets its ugly hands on. The only real people who should be proud of it's success are the original microsoft employees, who gave of their time and effort to institute original technology (borne only out of the original rooted halls of Microsoft itself), into making Live.com what it is today. And aside from them, unless any of the other programmers were handsomely paid for their work (and chances are, they all were), then I doubt any of the "mom and pop shops" that were homogenized could admit to any pride of having all their life's work literally ripped off from them for only a mere "fistful of dollars".

Again, as I earlier stated, these are my opinions only and based only on my own recollection of the past 10 years. I use Microsoft products only as necessity requires, but never from ideal choice or preference. I definitely admit to no small amount of bias, as if there were ever a situation (as rumor used to suggest) where Google would present it's own free Linux distribution, I would likely fully cross over the Rubicon, to the other side, and leave all semblance of the "Evil Empire" of Microsoft, behind, for good.

I like birds eye view on maps.live.com. That's all I have to say about live.com.

The factors that are determinant in a website’s www.alexa.com/.../main?url=www.fortunehotels.in Alexa rankings apart from the data collected from the users of the Alexa toolbar are no where clearly mentioned. This somehow brings in a question of doubt and credibility issues as far as the Alexa rankings are concerned. However, even today the Alexa toolbar has the largest chunk in determining the ranking of a website.