Just wonder what is your mean Google give PR0 for them yahoo.com > PR9 msn.com > PR8 microsoft.com > PR9
I think the thread starter is dumb...their is a system for PR itself, so it means it must be followed... also, it doesn't matter? visitors doesn't care about PR...they just search.
That might not put them in good image for their users/customers. Yahoo exists well before Google was born. So to think they will not have cached it, will only hurts Google's own credibility.
Google want to give Yahoo and MSN a high PR to tempt them to sell links. If they take the bait they can then ban them.
According to here Microsoft to buy Yahoo Google could likely get away with pushing to have them removed from their Directory. After all, it is standard practice of DMOZ to remove sites after a change in ownership due to it being a "short cut". Though I do not see Google tweaking anything to do with PR to any of their competitors.
Giving msn and yahoo PR 0 won't make them any good since PR is just a number plus the bad publicity so not worth it Plus from my side of view is funny to see your competition trying to beat you and you don't do nothing to them
Lol the reason for this is that all 3 of them rely on each other and also they use something called an algorithm which is what you probably refer to spiders, crawlers, or bots and what this does is crawl through servers all over the world and index information like urls and pictures. the reason Google is the best is because they have a better algorithm which uses rules based on seo to index people giving the little websites some sorta chance to compete and not favoring pay per clicks they also have better servers. but with out yahoo and msn the search results would not be as good as they are. another thing about the pr is yahoo and msn are huge the bigger the site the better the chance of a good rank also they been around forever this plays a roll in page rank as well.
nice logic man anyway, I think google just wants to play fair, thats y google isn't giving any bad PR to sites like yahoo, msn, live etc
Because they would gain almost no advantage from doing so and it would make them look very evil, which contradicts their corporate policy.