A gang of engineers from Facebook, MySpace and Twitter has released a new bookmarklet designed to expose how Google’s People & Pages service favours the ad giant’s own Google+ results at the expense of the rest of the web. The Focus On the User group posted a video explaining how the Don’t Be Evil tool works - a reference to …
90 Million Users?
Certainly 90 Million accounts, but Google hasn't revealed how many are active.
90million users and from those 70% are .And now every time you sign up to gmail you have to sign up to google+ so expect the number of dormant google+ accounts to go higher.
Oh Noes! Googles Broken teh Internets
Calm down dear! click on: http://www.bing.com/
- There.. I've fixed it for you.
More to the point.. are Facebook; Myspace and Twitter complaining about how Google monetizes users data? Oh HAHAHA! Presumably this is pure jealousy on their part.
Try these searches...
"Best search engine" - According to bing it's http://www.dogpile.com/, Google gives a comparison page which rates ask.com first.
"Best Operating system" - bing gives a comparison page, starting with windows, google gives a "10 best alternative operating systems"
"Bill Gates" - Bing (After the wikipedia result) gives the Bill Gates foundation, google, (After wiki) gives microsoft.com/presspass/exec/billg/
My conclusion: They are both evil!
>> users aren’t getting the kind of relevance
>> in results they’d expect – or as Google
>> always claims it provides
> Calm down dear! click on: http://www.bing.com/
Bing! Bing! Bing!
Yes, me too. I started using Bing last month. Give me more relevant results.
Back to using AltaVista for my searches then. Either that or Ask Jeeves.
Or, you know, you could just switch the function off like a normal person
Except that, as that article points out, you have to go into the settings to make the change permanent instead of just having to select it once and that's it.
Is what I use..
No it's about a little thing called anti-monopoly laws.
Facebook calling Google Evil?
Don't make me fucking laugh....
As I've said before
Tesco doesn't advertise Lidl.
Re: As I've said before
Tesco doesn't provide a service that allows customers to search for supermarkets.
So, let me get this straight..
Other networks are blaming Google for launching a service that lets people search Google+? If this new search included Twitter and Facebook and pushed them down in favour of G+ then sure, but from what I understand, this is a service for just Google+ users. People do like to jump on Google for breaking their motto for the silliest of reasons...
Only twits and social network junkies actually care about this
When I do internet searches, I am not looking for twits, facebook or myspace trash. I am looking for information. I don't care to hear about some crazy persons opinions, if I did, I could log into myspace or facebook (I refuse to join twitter, I don't see any use for it) and read hours worth of gibberish from people I barely know.
I actually would enjoy never seeing any search result from those three social networking sites ever again, they have no real information.
it is not a monopoly, there are other search engines you can use (although they are pretty crappy).
Agree 2,000 % on that. This "social networking" crap is for brain-dead people with no lives.
If they don't like it...
They can always build their own world class search engine. jesus nothing is stopping them! its not like google is paying people not to search using other engines ;)
Other than the fact that tis preselected as the search engine in most browsers/phones nowerdays, of course no money has changed hands to make that happen nnnnoooooooooooo
@AC 13:20 GMT - Windows
in case you heard of it, comes with Bing by default. You only use Google search if you really want it.
Please be serious!
You're confusing the premise.
* Google pays browser and phone vendors to use Google as the default search engine.
* Google does not pay browser and phone vendors NOT to use other search engines.
Therefore you get Google by default, but you are still given the option to choose a different SE for default instead.
Similar for social networks. Google releases spiders that index any content you throw at it (or that others link to). Farcebook and Twatter are free to open the gates to their gardens and allow the spiders in - and would probably get higher rankings than G+.
However, they don't want to let the spiders into their walled gardens (instead they want the spiders to pay a fee at the gate), therefore Google doesn't index them - at their request. Simples.
There may be a narrow anti-trust case for Google preventing vendors from choosing alternate pre-loaded crap (such as Skyhook - if this accusation is true). However as a consumer, I'm glad they do that; if I want a specific app I'll get it myself from the market thank-you very much.
In any case, it's only the Android name they control, if someone wants to take Android OS and bundle a bunch of crap with it for their devices they are welcome - just don't call it Android - I think that's fair and helps the consumer as much as anything to know just what they are buying.
had not heard back at the time of writing
is google the new apple?
No tracking, Good result - nuff said
Twitter used to provide a tweet feed to Google who were happy to search the results.
Now they don't provide the data, and add noFollow links - which Google honours.
I imagine they'd be screaming a lot louder if Google was 'illegally scraping their site despite their explicit instructions'.
What is that, government by hype ?
That would be Fox news, then.
I believe the word you're looking for is hypocrisy.
As a Vorlon, moreover a confused one, you are forgiven.
Still don't see the problem
If I'm searching the web, I'm looking for information, news, product/service support, etc. NOT that some 13 year old girl thinks OMG Justin Bieber is sooooooo cute!!!111!
Google is a walled garden - has been for some time. The search is no longer neutral, and has not been so for some time. They are just becoming indifferent to hiding the bigger game plan. Google is not the neutral search provider people still think it is.
so many stupid so much advertising opportunities.
(I don't believe I'm about to say this, but) Eric Schmidt is right about one thing.
If I deliberately block Google from spidering my website, I have no grounds for complaint when my site doesn't show up in Google's search results. This is self-evident; if I want my site to appear on Google, I have to let the Googlebot spider my site.
Facebook and Twitter both actively prevent Google from spidering their pages. So they have no grounds to complain when Google's search results don't display them. They have only themselves to blame if their sites aren't showing up.
Who cares ?
No, frankly, is there any reason at all to pay attention to what Facebook, MySpace and Twitter have to say about anything ? One is a company creating ADD patients, the second is well on its way to irrelevance and the third has the brainpower of a canary.
Now I agree that Google has become the Microsoft of the Internet, but frankly the Three Stooges are the last people I would go to for a discussion on anything.
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market