
Subtraction: Design Couldn’t Save Yahoo - brk
http://www.subtraction.com/archives/2008/0204_design_could.php
======
croby
This post doesn't discuss design in context of saving Yahoo at all. Here's a
few excerpts that drive this point.

"In what ails Yahoo, design is a non-factor. Neither search nor online
advertising, the real battlefields on which Yahoo, Google and Microsoft spar,
are meaningfully impacted by how very good is Yahoo’s design acumen."

...

"By no means am I saying that design is without value. Rather, I just think
it’s odd — and slightly disingenuous — of the champions of design strategy to
fall silent when it comes to the failure of a company that’s very good at
practicing it."

I think a better analysis here of Yahoo's design is its design failure -- they
couldn't design search nor online advertising that succeeded, which are what
make up the market value of a company like Google. As such, they weren't much
able to compete with Google on the issue.

Its a bit silly to say design couldn't save Yahoo. It absolutely, without
question could save them, they just haven't figured out how to extend their
/interface design/ skills to be /strategy design/ skills.

------
t0pj
I personally think Yahoo is still a player and has a lot more to offer.
However, I have a couple of questions.

Is it possible that their troubles stem from not quickly rebounding after
making a "wrong" call; the "we're in the media/portal business, not search"
line of thinking?

Is there any correlation between the acquisition of startups and a company
like Yahoo's continued success? How does the number of startups purchased per
year weigh in?

Is Yahoo simply suffering from BigCo Bloat?

