Lot's of ink has been spilled on these pages about Microsoft's (NASDAQ: MSFT) bid for Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO) and what this might mean for Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) and for the entire search industry. See Gary Sattler's article on his views of how this may play out.

Tech guru, Tim O'Reilly takes a different tack on sizing up the news. On his blog, O'Reilly examines what this merger activity would mean for the whole e-mail industry, not search. "And for Microsoft, it could be a fatal mistake to take the battle to Google on its own ground. That's the very mistake that companies like Netscape made in competing with Microsoft," says O'Reilly.

Instead, posits O'Reilly, the combined Yahoo! and Microsoft should focus on their dominance in the e-mail industry. Yahoo Mail is still an industry leader online and Microsoft has huge assets in the corporate realm with Outlook and Exchange. Says O'Reilly, "Now think about all the possibilities that are starting to be explored in the area of e-mail data as a source of information about users, and a locus for building new services for those users."

This could get very interesting.

Zack Miller is the Managing Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com and a former equity analyst for a leading multinational hedge fund. Author owns a long-term stock position in Google.

Regular BloggingStocks readers know by now that my investment strategies are fairly conservative and relatively coarse. Please don't begrudge me that. Although I don't track my picks in a portfolio, I do mentally track the general performance of the companies I tout, and I believe that overall I've done fairly well.

There are two major differences between my stock-picking efforts and what I perceive to be Warren Buffett's style. First, Mr. Buffett has years of experience that I myself do not have. Second, Mr. Buffett likes to have a greater working understanding of the nature of the businesses he chooses to investment in than I do. I choose my companies of favor with what I call my "big picture" strategy. All that means is that I use a broader view than most of my contemporaries who like to dig right down to the very roots of their picks.

I like to think that my strategy provides solid conservative support, which shall then free an investor to do some aggressive speculating with their profits.

This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and watch out for more Battle of the Brands posts.

I was preparing to make a sandwich recently, which for me is quite an undertaking. The ingredients need to be fresh, sliced to appropriate thickness and of the tastiest varieties. I got out all the fixin's and took hold of the appropriate tools, then I realized that I was missing one key ingredient. I was yet to procure the mayonnaise.

I went into the refrigerator where I knew I'd find the delectably smooth and scrumptious stuff. You can probably imagine my shock when I found not one but two brand new unopened squeeze bottles of mayonnaise right there on the door shelf in between the horse radish and the barbecue sauce. As if that wasn't trouble enough, when I reached in to take one of the bottles for my project, I realized that each of the bottles was a different brand. Oh the sheer unfairness of it, that meant I would have to decide which brand would appropriately bless my sandwich.

Rather than make a rash decision by simply grabbing a bottle and applying the dressing, I decided to carefully weigh my mayonnaise choice. After all, I wanted the perfect mayo for the perfect sandwich. I already knew that the two products were nearly identical in taste and texture. I needed to find the deeper meaning. I grasped both bottles, one in each hand, and carefully initiated my sandwich dressing analysis. Both bottles were plastic and totally squeezable. Each had appropriate tamper protection and a wide, flip-top cap that can be used to stand the bottle inverted. Each had a serving opening designed to apply the mayo in a flat ribbon outlay. The caps were blue and the bottles were clear. So far it was a dead heat.