221–230 of 253 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are posts on this site at least once a week about something Apple is doing that folks feel to be "evil", just like Google.
I don't think that removing the headphone jack from a phone is really "evil", no matter how you feel about headphone jacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that removing the headphone jack from a phone is really "evil", no matter how you feel about headphone jacks.
It seems weird to pick an example I didn't give, and then refute that example, with the implication that you've offered evidence against my claim.
By the way, I used to be exclusive on Opera many years ago and I loved how well it worked and how fast it ran, until Chrome came out.
I wouldn't say Vivaldi is good and Google is evil. I think they differ only on the degree of evilness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't Chromium just a repackaging of KHTML from the KDE project?
Yes, and if Google was bad-mouthing KDE then we should call them out for it. What was your point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Patents are a pretty big threat to have hanging over your company -- Google might not sue other companies for using it now, but they could in the future. At least, until the patent expires. I realize Google has created more than PageRank, but PageRank is pretty fundamental technology. If you can't use it for legal reasons, that's a big impediment. I don't know how Bing gets around it. I've never tried using Baidu, bu…
> Google might not sue other companies for using it now, but they could in the future. At least, until the patent expires Google's long term strategy is to not do this. So for this to happen they'd have to end up with a CEO who wants to make a huge pivot. > I realize Google has created more than PageRank, but PageRank is pretty fundamental technology. If you can't use it for legal reasons, that's a big impediment. I…
Duck duck go isn't an independent search engine, it's a layer on top of Bing. That solves the privacy issue, but not the censorship issue, if you're worried about Microsoft censoring content. (At least we have two major search engines and not one.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They seriously did that as you said? What a bunch of self important twats.
https://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/05/calling-shenanigan... Google's comment was >The mobile web version of Google Maps is optimized for WebKit browsers such as Chrome and Safari. However, since Internet Explorer is not a WebKit browser, Windows Phone devices are not able to access Google Maps for the mobile web. The problem is, mobile IE uses the same rendering engine as desktop IE10, which works. Firefox works…
Windows mobile was a mess last I had to deal with it. As far as I recall, Windows Mobile uses IE11 within an app, or Edge from the browser. Both had either proprietary or buggy touch events. Supporting Windows phone was a nightmare for us (and as it turned out, a complete waste of time).
Not defending Google, just saying my facts are different from yours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ahh, the public offer to help. Great PR move that ignores all Microsoft's other actions against Google throughout time. Competition is fair game. Consider: - the existence of Bing - Every version of IE and Windows starting from over a decade ago has made it more difficult to change the default search engine from Bing. Comically difficult, even - Microsoft's creation/funding of entities like Fairsearch.org, whose prim…
Consider: Microsoft got forcibly fucked by the US government for unfairly damaging their competition. Is that really the path that Google wants to follow?
However, I don't see Google being sued in the USA. Why? Because (per my other comment) prosecution of White Collar crimes dropped over 20% (a whopping amount) when Eric Holder came into power over the DOJ. 20% DROP DURING one of the largest recessions in USA history! Bush destroyed Enron and sent them to jail even though that would kill people's pensions. Meanwhile, Eric Holder brought about the Too Big To Fail era where the DOJ was outright AFRAID of prosecuting big companies.
We basically don't have a government now. We have corporations. And they don't have to wait to be voted in, and they don't have to leave after four years.
Look at how companies like Comcast (after the Telecommunications Act) can now own NBC, and NBC news. They can own the entire chain of wire, to media, to control of information itself. Is it any wonder why, when ~5 companies control 90% of all US media, that we never hear of "big bad evil corporations" anymore? In the 90's everyone was rushing to burn Wal-Marts to the ground for pushing out "the little guy". Now when Google does it, platform liberals and news pundits cry "Free market!". Are we supposed to believe that in ~25 years, the same corporations suddenly became ethical? Why is there never any serious talk of unions (a central tenant of the Democrat platform) anymore? Because they corporations (not Democrats) control the news now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you're manually spoofing your user agent, then Google figures that you know what you're doing and it's "use at your own risk anyway", and that if you get a broken experience, your first thought will be to disable the user-agent spoofing. Actually, some browsers, including Firefox Mobile, now spoof the user-agent by default on some sites, because of Google's broken systems.
Web history repeats over and over. This might lead to an even more interesting browser UA string in the future. Like "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.113 Safari/537.36 MOZILLA IS FUCKING WRITTEN AT THE BEGINNING ANYWAY POOR SUCKERS!" 10 years latter, Firefox will take over the world again (when people will have enough of calling Google evil all day wit…
Google are really shitty with their web browser especially on mobile. If you run Firefox you get a stripped down version of Google Search also with no infinite scrolling for images and low resolution. Use a user agent spoofer like this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/chrome-ua-on-... And it seems to work fine on Firefox. I'm sure their official excuse is that they only support WebKit based browsers on…
Let's not forget the time they refused to make a YouTube app for Windows Phone and when Microsoft made one, Google forced them to remove it. And then seemingly in retribution for making the app, Google blocked Windows Phone from being able to access Google Maps even though the browser was technically capable of using it. Google's reasoning was (similarly to another comment here) "it's too hard to check functionality…
It has its own contracts and obligations with its creators and label companies. When Microsoft's officially branded agent-provocateur-ish version lets you download videos, YouTube can't really independently decide on how to respond.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google might not sue other companies for using it now, but they could in the future. At least, until the patent expires Google's long term strategy is to not do this. So for this to happen they'd have to end up with a CEO who wants to make a huge pivot. > I realize Google has created more than PageRank, but PageRank is pretty fundamental technology. If you can't use it for legal reasons, that's a big impediment. I…
Do you have an example of a non-pagerank based page ranking algorithm that I should look at? Duck duck go isn't an independent search engine, it's a layer on top of Bing. That solves the privacy issue, but not the censorship issue, if you're worried about Microsoft censoring content. (At least we have two major search engines and not one.)
If you're worried that Bing is also censorship, then use Yahoo, or Baidu. They all order results slightly differently. You could argue each censorship til the cows come home. I don't see the point. You could say I'm censoring you right now by not telling you everything I know.
Is there something specific you feel all the search engines are censoring? Or you just suspect they are?