191–200 of 311 posts
What ad network is it that serves up ads that actually open up the iOS App Store, without having tapped on anything? That's super annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Per http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/09/mobile-fr... "After November 1, mobile web pages that show an app install interstitial that hides a significant amount of content on the transition from the search result page will no longer be considered mobile-friendly. This does not affect other types of interstitials." This implies the answer is No, since that's another type of interstitial (not an app instal…
Perhaps they're approximating by analyzing the page as a mobile user agent and a non-mobile user agent, then comparing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we have an idea about their business model? How much do they pay the music labels for the right to display half-quality tabs? I've always assumed the labels asking for money were the reason why there was so much advertising on those sites and why no plain-text site ever survived.
That's something I wonder as well. Ultimate-guitar must be in bed with labels somehow, or otherwise operate their business in a very shady way. If it's the latter, they are very lucky to get away with it AND get top-notch treatment in Google search.
This is a little curmudgeonly, but this is how I feel... If your developers are not capable of making your website mobible friendly in 2015, any app they develop is likely worse. This is especially true when your app demands access to everything on my phone even though it doesn't need any of it to function.
You're suggesting that you can make something as usable on a mobile browser as you can with a native app. That's just not true; if it were, there wouldn't be any native apps. For many use cases (games, highly interactive experiences, camera or microphone using app, etc.), a native app may just be better, and guiding users there might be a better experience and a better conversion funnel. Yes, you can make a website m…
http://mobile.weather.gov/ would disagree with you.
Does that mean they'll block youtube? Try playing a video on a phone that does not have the youtube app installed, it's just about impossible to get it right, it's a roulette that's rigged with more than half the links going to the youtube app page on google play. Highly annoying since there is no reason why the youtube page of some video should even have that app installation link at all.
Yes, most likely they will downrank youtube until the youtube team fixes it
The EU investigation committee is going to love this.
You know, at some point (and we are around that point) Google does cross a line where they are abusing their near monopoly on search. This is a pro consumer move, but it's another instance of Google saying do things our way or we punish you.
I'm not sure what makes this abuse. Curating the content you serve isn't just okay ; it's one of the key value propositions of a search engine. The problem is when a content provider, for whatever reason, intentionally curates in a way that provides less value to the consumer.
It could be hard to argue that an interstitial pushing an app (especially an app specifically for the site the user is visiting that gives them enhanced features compared to the mobile web version of the site) is more annoying, distracting, or otherwise harmful to a user than any other kind of blocking interstitial.
Thus, one might try to conclude that Google's actual interest here is trying to keep users from using apps to access content instead of using the web site where Google is more likely to be the ad provider.
I have no idea if this could rise to the level of an antitrust violation, but it's the first place I'd look for one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google would break if it were transparent. I'm frustrated by the status quo; I run a site where users who found it through search contact me to say that it should've been higher in the search results. I think this would only get worse if it were transparent, though. Gaming Google would become predictable and mechanized. The outcome would be ugly.
Fraud doesn't become legal just because someone has a clever idea for SEO. You're scenario only works in a totally unregulated environment. Internet businesses are not magically except from the types of regulation found in every other industry. The entire point of a regulation is to place limits on behaviors that harm society when left on their own. However, focusing on my suggestion of transparency and verification…
To your broader point, I agree that it's reasonable to want Google regulated to some degree, though I do fear regulators will take on that "transparent algorithm" point of view, which will just make search terrible. Governments generally aren't very good at regulating tech businesses.
Does that mean they'll block youtube? Try playing a video on a phone that does not have the youtube app installed, it's just about impossible to get it right, it's a roulette that's rigged with more than half the links going to the youtube app page on google play. Highly annoying since there is no reason why the youtube page of some video should even have that app installation link at all.