Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 311 posts

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#201

Post by vacri »

bad_user wrote: post #103
serge2k wrote: post #56

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.

Personally I believe this is only fair, because such websites are abusing the inner workings of Google's crawler while displaying to users something else that the crawler doesn't see. I always wondered why such tactics aren't penalized, such as websites placed behind a paywall by means of Javascript, like the Experts-Exchange of old or these websites that show slimy full page ads, sometimes with broken links. And don…

There was a time when the circumvention for the Experts-Exchange paywall was "scroll down a bit" - the data had to be visible to the googlebot, and they made it look obscured at the top, but it was all there and readable a few 'pages' down.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#202

Post by kuschku »

georgemcbay wrote: post #167
jbigelow76 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what about an OS vendor that "curates" a particular default browser and destroys a competing browser provider in the process? I seem to remember that happening a few years back. It's not so much the curating that's the problem, nobody would care if Duck Duck Go did it, the problem is with the regulators that view Google to be the only curator out there.

The problem in the Microsoft case was use of near-monopoly in one market (operating systems) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers), though even that seems a bit outdated already since the idea of shipping an OS without a browser built-in seems ludicrous today. In any case, that concept of using monopoly power in one market to bolster power in another doesn't really apply here with Google. I share a lo…

This applies directly to Google.

Remember them pushing Chrome on you? having ads directly on Google.com? To this day forcing you to use Chrome for Hangouts? And so on?

Do you seriously think Chrome would have caught on if it weren’t for this push of advertisements?

This is direct abuse of near-monopoly in one market (search engines) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers).

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#204

Post by kuschku »

Someone1234 wrote: post #57
madsushi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continued: "So we're making them, and we're penalizing any dealerships that are still selling black cars."

Unfortunately your continued use of that analogy has backfired. If a car manufacturer used to sell black cars, then added other colors, if their own dealers refused to sell the additional colors, it would be entirely reasonable for the manufacturer to step in (since it hurts the manufacturer's brand). So in that analogy, the manufacturer is right. The reality is that Google aren't a car manufacturer, they're more lik…

As some report, you can reproducably get the ads even today.

So Google is punishing competitors for something they do themselves.

This is all looking like Google just wants to make the EU regulators angry.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#205

Post by bbcbasic »

kuschku wrote: post #160
bbcbasic wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wont cost them money if they have a double opt-in. But you will punish those without the double opt-in by pushing them up to the next tier in the payment plan sooner. The amount of money they waste one one dodgy email address is minuscule though. What is more funny is that they will see @ . when scrolling through their list, and you could even send them a 'message' this way. E.g. WhyTheHellYouMakeMeSignUpForThisRu…

You can sign up their personal facebook accounts, though – if the user is facebook.com/username123, you can register username123@facebook.com, facebook will throw the mails into the spam folder, and report them to spam lists, and the newsletter ends up getting blacklisted earlier.

Wouldn't want to meet you in a dark alley.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#206

Post by kuschku »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #174
rubyn00bie wrote: post #157

tldr; Cool... but shouldn't google stop policing the internet and abusing, what some might call, monopoly powers for trivial gains. ====== I'd be willing to bet, this will one day be in an FTC/DOJ report about monopoly practices at Google... Google seems to have forgotten they don't want to be looked at as a monopoly or abusing their power for the small things. While this is consumer friendly, at least at first glanc…

This isn't an anti-trust issue. Google's not using its market dominance to move into a new market. It's more like a common practice by retailers: using their market share to force changes by their suppliers. For example, Tesco (the largest UK supermarket) recently banned certain sugary drinks targeted at children.

But Google is, even today still using these same interstitial ads for Gmail.

That means it will most likely end up in some antitrust trial.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#207

Post by kbenson »

zorpner wrote: post #90
toomuchtodo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do as I say, not as I do."

Relevant: https://twitter.com/danbarker/status/439125570115223552

I fail to see how providing a short except that is fully attributed and links back to the original source is a problem. If anything, it steers even more traffic to wikipedia.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#208

Post by kuschku »

bbcbasic wrote: post #205
kuschku wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can sign up their personal facebook accounts, though – if the user is facebook.com/username123, you can register username123@facebook.com, facebook will throw the mails into the spam folder, and report them to spam lists, and the newsletter ends up getting blacklisted earlier.

Wouldn't want to meet you in a dark alley.

Well, as a girl, I learnt judo to be able to defend myself.

One of the most important lessons of judo is that you never use force yourself – you just redirect the force of the other person so they hurt themselves.

Using that philosophy in life makes stuff a lot easier ;)

And, funnily, it fits here, too. Using their own newsletter to get it blacklisted. The more they send, the less are received.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#209

Post by dragonwriter »

kuschku wrote: post #206
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an anti-trust issue. Google's not using its market dominance to move into a new market. It's more like a common practice by retailers: using their market share to force changes by their suppliers. For example, Tesco (the largest UK supermarket) recently banned certain sugary drinks targeted at children.

But Google is, even today still using these same interstitial ads for Gmail. That means it will most likely end up in some antitrust trial.

Or Google will stop doing it before it starts applying the penalty.

Or Google Search will penalize other Google sites that use those ads. It wouldn't be the first time Google-owned sites have run afoul of Google Search penalties.

Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads

#210

Post by jbigelow76 »

reilly3000 wrote: post #133
saidajigumi wrote: post #41

Ugh, maybe this will finally push forums to burn those infernal Tapatalk interstitials. Forum owners: I'm looking for one piece of information from a web search, not a whole dumb app that will completely ignore my search goals.

I've never actually taken the bait. What is the app like?

I must be in the minority but the Tapatalk app seems okay to me. It takes the cruft and ads out of the forum you are on and just presents you the content in a relatively stripped down format.

Maybe my use case is out of the ordinary compared to a lot of HN, I use it for a single forum that I am an active member of, and I can't recall the last time I googled something and was redirected to a result that was a forum entry that redirected to a Tapatalk ad (99% of my google searches end up at stackoverflow or blog entries).

Post reply on HN