Live data from Hacker News

Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

scroogled.com

21–30 of 178 posts

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#22
post #13

Registrant: Domain Administrator Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond WA 98052 US +1.4258828080 Fax: +1.4259367329 Domain Name: scroogled.com Registrar Name: Markmonitor.com Registrar Whois: whois.markmonitor.com Registrar Homepage: http://www.markmonitor.com Administrative Contact: Domain Administrator Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond WA 98052 US +1.4258828080 Fax: +1.4259367329 Technical C…

Google may not care about it. Microsoft surely not a competition for Google now. Had it been Apple we may have seen a reply.

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#23
It's just an attack full of misleading information for those who are less informed, spam filters also "read" your messages. I don't see why a computer reading your messages to produce targeted advertisements is bad anyway, it's an automated process the same as spam filtering.

Does outlook.com still put adverts at the end of your emails like hotmail.com used to?

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#24
post #12

Will be pretty interesting. Feels like this is going to massively blow up in their face. Never been a fan of attack adds especially if you can improve your own product instead of making the other one look bad. Just a bad mindset to try to blame the other guy. The irony of Microsoft using privacy/security to attack another company is not lost on me. Guess what, those mails can be read if your OS gets exlpoited over an…

> Never been a fan of attack adds especially if you can improve your own product instead of making the other one look bad. Just a bad mindset to try to blame the other guy.

It's not a one-man product that had to decide whether to focus on improving or attack ads - product people will work on improving it regardless of whether the marketing people decide on positive or attack adverts.

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#25
I kinda liked old content at scroogled.com (now available at http://www.scroogled.com/Shopping/ -- see archive at http://web.archive.org/web/20121201162336/http://www.scroogl... ) because it told me something I didn't know, that the Froogle service had become a set of paid product listings.

(I didn't know they were paid listings.)

This new message I don't find interesting because it tells me something I already know (Google reads all my Gmail mail).

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#26
post #4
post #2

Was this really by Microsoft? It looks unprofessional and scammy, like if someone wanted to make Microsoft look.bad. Granted, from past MS behavior it would not be a surprise if this was really their work...

This is definitely by Microsoft. The site uses the following nameservers, which are under Microsoft control and cannot be forged. ns3.msft.net ns4.msft.net ns1.msft.net ns2.msft.net ns5.msft.net Pathetic stuff.

But google DO go through every message to sell ads. How is this pathetic? Some people don't like the fact that their emails are used in that way, so focusing on that is just marketing.

No different to google running ads for chrome saying "it's faster"... it IS, and some people care about that.

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#28
Microsoft's example in the video proves Google doesn't actually READ the emails they just apply a computer algorithm. The example was of a cat named Calico, and then they showed a free pet exam advert, and then revealed the cat was put down in the email. They made a point to say you wouldn't need a free pet exam if the family pet died.

But it proves Google doesn't invade your privacy; they merely apply a computer algorithm to connect ads with emails.

Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.

#29

So when DDG does it, it's awesome and ballsy. But when Microsoft does it, it's pathetic and scammy?

Who said this is pathetic or scammy?

EDIT: And if someone did say that, who says they're the same people who were in praise of DuckDuckGo?

Post reply on HN