you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 28 points 11 months ago (8 children)

The bigger weight is anything that MS can sell for ad revenue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    but in this example clearly Wikipedia and probably IMDB are not paying them right? Or is it their attempt to disguise selling out by always preferring the buyable option even when it's at 0$?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    IMDB might be, they're covered in trackers and ads. MS is a donor to Wikipedia (via Microsoft Matching Gifts Program) so they're getting what they paid for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    but IMDB is owned by direct Microsoft competitor - Amazon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    They're not really competitors across both enterprises. If they were then you'd need some conspiracy theory-level mental gymnastics for things like:

    https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/defender-for-cloud/quickstart-onboard-aws?tabs=Defender-for-Containers

    https://aws.amazon.com/windows/products/

    https://about.ads.microsoft.com/en/blog/post/october-2025/unlocking-more-opportunities-for-partners-and-customers-through-collaboration-with-amazon

    And finally

    https://advertising.amazon.com/library/news/microsoft-amazon-dsp-partnership

    This isn't Coke vs. Pepsi for computer boops. This is about ad revenue! They can partner up to cut Google out of the mix!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments