13 posts • joined 30 Jun 2008
Yup, the UK price is a total rip-off
...but then even if it matched the dollar exchange rate, it would still be an over-priced locked-in piece of crap.
I wouldn't take one if Mickey$oft paid *me*.
When I post a comment on a YouTube video I don't WANT it appearing on Google+ to stimulate discussion. The discussion should be limited to the intended forum - i.e. the video on YouTube. If you want to see what is new on YouTube, that is what direct subscription is for. If you want a feed aggregator there are plenty around. It doesn't need all the baggage that having a G+ account brings with it.
There is one reason, and one reason alone why Google have done this. To FORCE users to interact through G+, to add them to their relationship and identity database and stimulate data generation for same.
"We note that dictionaries including Merriam-Webster and the OED define the uke as being a type of guitar. -Ed"
And you felt the need to get pissy about it? Ordinarily I'm with ElReg, but this was unnecessarily ascerbic.
Re: So what
The only way you are not Facebook's product is if you are not a Facebook member.
Re: Clearly I am out of touch ..
It's the "anthropic principle" not "anthropomorphic" (which would be the projection of human intent onto the universe - a pretty tall order).
Why does Amazon do anything?
Because they can...
Re: Anyone want to bet...
ICANN is supposed ot be internationally neutral, but it originated in America, and is run from America. I will be very surprised if any other government than the US could achive such a thing.
Isn't this the problem with any independent service provider
Google is particularly bad. They're so big the just throw their weight around and no-one has the inertia to stop them. (A bit like IBM of old times.) But whereever you get a service from, there are no guarantees it will last forever. In Google's case, of course, potential customers are - if they have any sense - going to become increasingly wary of starting in with one of their services, lest it be consigned unceremoniously to the tip.
Not much of a leap of imagination
"However, this would also be expensive, as they would buy the tickets at the same cost as the consumers, then have to add something to make a profit.
Still, having seen the prices at Expedia and Lastminute, they may well be doing this."
According to these articles, that's exactly what Easyjet are alleging the screen scrapers do. And indeed that is exactly how a screen-scraped interaction works. Dead easy with Python, Perl, PHP or similar.
1001 uses for a used limitation
"Hang on why make a Ltd co for your hobby?"
Because money is changing hands, and there are costs to be borne, and creating a limited liabilty company does exactly that - limits the personal liability of the operators if it all goes Horribly Wrong(tm).
Plenty of people run Limited companies as vehicles for hobbies, often with a view to stepping up to a full-time paying career, but not always. You see them at comic cons, book trades and computer fairs.
Screen scraping? Old news.
"72 hours later and I'm still waiting, and having read this article I suspect they screen scrape car hire websites as well as airlines."
Of course they do. Expedia are not the first people to develop their business by screen-scraping others, and definitely not alone even now, just amongst the most famous. Aggregators have been around for a long, long time, in the travel trade, since the before earliest days of retail web operations when the principal means of selling was the High Street, and the main business channel for travel agents was viewdata. Screen-scraping was often used to cherry-pick information (often from the opposition) either for reformatting for republishing or for importing into proprietary business systems.
These days most major operators (both operators and retailers) will co-operate using rather more efficient methods of interaction. But not always, and the rebuffed aggregator will often resort to screen scraping (sometimes bearing a strong resemblance to a DDoS) because the significantly greater resource cost is borne largely by the operator. The retailer still gets their product at the same price, and sells it for the same profit margin. It's a bully tactic to try to force suppliers to "behave" and enter into the commission-selling relationship the retailer wants.