836 posts • joined 29 Oct 2009
"If it does provide this service, then the US$50 a year plus $100-$500 hosting costs of other domains may suddenly start looking a little steep."
In many places predatory pricing is deemed anti-competitive and is illegal.
At what point does offering free stuff - or "free stuff with lots of extras (eg: huge storage space)" become anti-competitive?
"new security tools to help Google Apps users take more control of their security online"
Yup, all about giving users more security. Absolutely nothing to do with the fact it's yet another data stream for Google to harvest. No sir.
Re: Precedent has been set...
"One does not HAVE to type http://google.com into the address bar and press return. With MS, there was no alternative installed."
Key word - "installed". Back in the browser wars era, even with IE bundled, I could have searched for and installed Firefox or Opera.
Similarly, if I were to install Chrome right now, I could type "http://www.duckduckgo.com" into the address bar and search from there. However, if I enter something that isn't a web address, it goes through Google's search.
There were browser choices then, and there are search engine choices now. What there is very little choice in, however, is what happens when you are on the web - and this is the crux of the problem. Regardless of what search engine you use to get there, the chances are that the site you're visiting will have Google analytics and tracking. So regardless of what search engine I've chosen to use, the chances are that Google have data about me.
Hell, the entire SEO industry is founded on the principle of trying to second-guess how Google wants your web page to behave and jumping when they tell you to. I don't hear any talk of Duck Duck Go analytics or rankings...
So - coming back to the idea of choice: there were other browsers available, but because Microsoft had bundled IE with Windows, and so the average Joe didn't bother looking any further. In other words, the reason the issue came about was awareness. Now consider searching the internet for something... except we don't search for it any more, do we? We Google it. Yes, just like "Hoover" for example, "Google" is now part of common parlance as an adjective. So people don't learn about choice, they learn about Google, just like when Windows told them to use Internet Explorer (conveniently bundled) whenever they wanted to get online back in the day.
And so we reach the present: Google has managed to get such a stranglehold on the web that major players are forced to bow to their will, or suffer loss of ranking. Other search engine choices get little publicity (or are tainted by their parent company's past), and even if we do use another search engine, unless we go out of our way to avoid it, our data is Google's property if we want to do anything on the web.
Precedent has been set...
The thing is, we've been here before, nearly 15 years ago, when it was decided that by bundling their internet browser with their OS, Microsoft had become a monopoly and were engaging in practices contrary to competition law.
Even now, nearly a decade and a half later, there are many who are all to quick to remind us of how Microsoft took such a massive fall - many of whom are now championing Google.
So not only is the idea of a giant corporation having such access to individuals' data and almost unilateral control of the web a concern to many, but there is also a legal precedent for dealing with a case in which a company in the IT sphere has reached a position where they can effectively prevent any competitors from challenging them.
"Google should just block all European IPs for a week"
... instant proof of Google's monopoly! The damage to business and commerce should easily be enough to invoke all the anticompetitive laws under the sun and ensure Google go the same way as Microsoft when they tried to bundle IE with Windows...
Re: Euro Jealousy
"NO ONE IS FORCED TO USE GOOGLE!!!"
I've said it before and I'll say it again: find me reputable websites where I can do what I need to do - shopping, banking, information lookup etc. - that aren't polluted with Google facilities (tracking, analytics, web fonts and so on), and I'll use 'em.
Like Microsoft with Windows and IE bundling back in the 90s, people are beginning to wake up to the effective monopoly Google have built up and the potential for its abuse. How about a ruling that states that Google's Chrome browser has to offer a choice of search engines? After all, this would follow the aforementioned IE bundling precedent...
@dogged - steady! You can have comments deleted for accusing people of being shills these days*!
* unless they're Microsoft shills - apparently that's still ok.
"Do we need google for everything????"
Google - and their brainwashed masses - are doing their damnedest to try and convince us that this is the case...
"Is it now if you can't beat them, join them to improve the revenue stream?"
The major players recognised just how dangerously powerful Google has become, and made the move in an attempt to redress the balance...
"Google immediately volunteered to stop using the word "free" when games contain in-app purchases"
... and watch the Android piracy rate leap ever higher...
2) Once you apply a piracy rate of up anything up to 95%, only about 4% (at worst case) of the total smartphone market can be deemed "Profitable Android"...
... add to that the huge overheads of fragmentation etc. and it's no wonder that serious developers are quitting Android development.
"just ignore windows mobile"
Of course - it's been pretty much abandoned since 2011.
Re: I take the same doesn't happen
"Perhaps the solution is not to use Google?"
Find me websites that offer the products/service I need without implementing Google tracking/analytics etc. and I'll use them.
Behind closed doors...
"Google don't shove the data they gather in your face."
So what exactly do they do with it?
Let's face it - thanks to analytics, it's practically impossible for the average Joe to surf the web without Google mining data. Same with emails, if anyone you know has a gmail account. And I dread to think what data-gathering goes on under the hood of Android...
Suffice to say that Google has probably gathered enough data to be able to ruin anyone in the western world, from an individual to a large company - probably largely without said person/organisation's knowledge.
I can live with a few targetted adverts - so long as I have a cast-iron assurance that that's all my data is being used for...
"it's possible that the talks broke down over the Firefox-maker's stance toward the Do Not Track browser privacy standard."
Typical Google, trying to force their will on everyone and too hell with the general public's privacy and choices.
Mind you, this is a win-win situation: If Mozilla and Firefox thrive in this new situation, it helps prove to the world that you don't have to kowtow to the Googleborg, and if they end up struggling financially and either go back or go out of business, it proves that Google have the power to pretty much dictate what goes on the web, and thus should be treated as an anticompetitive monopoly.
"Is there anybody with an internet connection who doesn't know Google[?]"
The question here is not "how many people with an internet connection do not know Google?", but "how many people with an internet connection do not know how much Google know about them, and what does Google do with this data?"
Here's hoping they're still rolling with their own fork of the AOSP, not the widespread Google poison everyone seems to be happy with these days...
Wait a second...
"Ubisoft gets it right this time"
What, they've stopped using always-online DRM?
Words fail me...
"Do you realize how many websites feed information in to Google? Even El Reg has Google Analytics, Google tag services js on their page."
... and herein lies the real reason behind all this - if the government had access to information on everyone to the same extent Google does, it would pretty much neutralise one of Google's most potent weapons against anything that threatens them, namely the ability to control the visibility of information.
The real question is...
... what were Google trying to slip in under the radar while everyone was distracted with the outcry over indie musicians?
We see the same thing in politics all the time - wait for (or create) a media storm over something, and use it to push through a whole load of nastiness aimed at longer term gain on the sly.
"Complain to your government and request that they NEVER use Microsoft products that store documents on cloud servers."
As if any of the alternatives are any better...
Oh the hypocracy...
Still can't get over the way that last point in the "do/don't" list starts with "respect other's privacy" - a phrase involving a pot and a kettle springs to mind...
However, it's almost a shame that the glass didn't catch on a bit better before people realised what an absolute invasion of privacy it is - it would have made it so much easier for the general public to have then made the connection that spying on people is central to the Google business model and thus got some proper outcry going...
[Insert normal comment about boring, play-it-safe AAA sequels here]
At least we have Sunset Overdrive.
Re: I do just love how the Windows Phone
"You're assuming there's more than one."
Oh my god, Eadon's back!
Re: Lovely hardware
To be fair, the odds of the X "setting the world on fire" were pretty slim.
For starters - yes, it was Android. But it was their own branch of the AOSP, as opposed to the standard Google E3-in-progress that makes up the bulk of the market - so no Play store, and therefore pretty slim pickings on the apps front. Plus the fact that the Franken-face between Android and WP just didn't really work either did not help.
And then Microsoft put the kybosh on it before it had any real chance to get going...
Conspicuous by absence...
"Microsoft's brand has consistently ranked higher than Nokia's (according to Interbrand anyway) and over 110m Xbox consoles have been sold"
Except that Xboxes (360s at least, not yet seen an XB1 in the flesh) aren't conspicuously stamped with "Microsoft". In fact, there are many who claim that the reason the Xbox has enjoyed the success it has is because of its separation from the Microsoft name.
Perhaps if this - and all Windows Phones - had been marketed as the "XPhone" to be a companion device to the Xbox then maybe the whole platform would be doing rather better! But I can't see having "Microsoft" stamped all over doing any favours for the device here...
Probably an EULA clause...
"But the ad giant made no mention of compensation for publishers who lost cash during the outage."
Chances are, just like Gmail etc. users are conned into giving up their personal data by carefully obscured clauses in the EULA, so there is a similar clause for lost profit in the publisher sign-up...
Re: Reap what you sow
"Why are you downvoting ?"
... because it's Microsoft. Surely after having an account on these forums for over five years, you should have learned that there are some people who just can't let go of a 15+ year grudge?
Because someone had to say it...
Can I wipe it and put Windows Phone on it?
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Watched last night on catch-up...
... there's a chunk of my life I'm not getting back.
The last episode since the reboot that measured up to my childhood memories was "Blink". Okay, I know I've got a good few years under my belt, and I'm allowing for a degree of adulthood cynicism, but this last series... really???
I feel sorry for Peter Capaldi - in fact I wouldn't be surprised if he went all Malcolm Tucker on the scriptwriters...
Re: NSA vs Apple + Google
"Is Big Business bigger than the Government?"
... and don't forget - a company's board of directors is not elected by the general public!
"Office was never ported to C# in the past eleven years, for very good reasons."
Such as...? (Genuinely curious here)
Re: "inserting section breaks"
"If they put all the good stuff in, nobody would pay."
"Nest will stay Nest, the data will stay with us – the data won’t flow to Google and the ads won’t flow back"
Oooh look, a flying pig!
Re: Google Cardboard to the rescue!
"who is going to pay > $150 (guessing here on price) for a headset, on top of an already expensive mobile, just so they can play $4 mobile 3D games in VR 3D?"
Nobody. Android owners don't pay for games!
"People need to wake up."
A big chunk of the problem is that a lot of people have been suckered by Google in a number of ways. The general public have fallen for the age-old carrot of "free stuff".
The trouble is that a lot of "us" ie: the tech community have been equally fooled by a catchy slogan that was saying what (at the time) a lot of us wanted to hear: "Don't be evil". Bringing this to the table just as Microsoft was taking a pounding from the whole browser wars fiasco got a lot of techies on board, believing that Google was the answer to the "evil" of Microsoft.
What's sad is that despite Google now proving to be every bit as evil as Microsoft ever was at their peak, so many people in the tech community are still so hung up on the "Microsoft bad, Google good" mantra - the comments and downvotes on so many posts on here are proof enough of this!
Re: Limted intelligence failure
"I regret that I am not intelligent/courageous enough to create something that was in competition with Google but without the lying, cheating, scare mongery"
I refer you to the case of Laker Airways - back in 1977, a businessman spotted a possible gap in the air travel market, namely low-cost, no-frills flights, and tried (possibly intelligently/courageously) to take make a business out of this opportunity.
Less than five years later, the company went bankrupt. Yes, the recession of the early 80s played a part in this, but the finishing blows were dealt by longer established competitors that deliberately undercut Laker, knowing that they could weather the financial loss until their upstart competitor was out of business.
The argument that someone is not intelligent or courageous enough to create a viable competitor to Google is complete rubbish - Google is the highest value tech brand in the world, and should a competitor look like they are likely to make any kind of inroad into their massive land grab, it would be a simple matter for Google to either buy them out or run them out of business.
You don't know you're born...
I could just see it now: a re-working of Ghosts n Ghouls for mobile, priced at 79p...
Cue a slew on 1-star reviews: "Too difficult!", "Died in 10 seconds, not worth paying for", "Crap controls, couldn't work out how to play"... and so forth.
Same old chips???
If this is par the course for Apple, no wonder code I wrote that runs fine on budget Windows Phone and Android is dog slow on an iPhone!
Should be +100
I sense a disturbance...
So - assuming this can be got working - it'll be a pretty safe bet that Google will have a means of tracking who took one of these pills, and their subsequent healthcare.
Given currently available social networking data and the like, I think it's also safe to assume that Google can figure out connections between people - family, friends etc.
This allows for a whole new breed of evil. Picture the scene - your dear aunt Mildred takes a Google pill and is diagnosed with (say) early stage liver cancer. You're pretty shaken up by this, as you're close with old Millie. Next day, you're surfing the web - and crazy as it may seem, every other page has ads recommending various products, diets and regimes for avoiding liver cancer. Normally, you ignore those pesky ads, but you can't help think about poor old aunt Millie - is she gonna be ok? Is this a genetic thing? Could I end up with the same problem?
Next thing you know, your clicking the ads you'd never normally click - or even dropping the Google pill yourself...
... and all the while, the Googleborg continue to rub their hands together as yet more data and revenue pour into their coffers to fund their next round of lobbying against privacy legislation...
Is every bit of personal data they can get their hands on not currency enough for these hyenas?
To quote John Glenn
"Glad they got that one out the way!"
An AAA title that looks like it actually has a bit of creative licence behind it - at least from a visual perspective.
"And how does google snarf your email contacts if you don't use chrome or gmail?"
Got an Android phone?
"Look at XNA just dumped overnight."
Ah, but therein lies irony. For now, thanks to Monogame, the XNA framework lives on on pretty much everything but the Xbox.
So thank you Microsoft for developing the tools that now ultimately leave me able to code for Playstation 4, and Android and iOS mobile devices...
- Vid Antarctic ice THICKER than first feared – penguin-bot boffins
- Antique Code Show World of Warcraft then and now: From Orcs and Humans to Warlords of Draenor
- iPhone sales set to PLUMMET: Bleak times ahead for Apple
- Regin: The super-spyware the security industry has been silent about
- New Snapchat Snapcash service inspires amateur PORN STARS