Well as a user of both, it's certainly factual. I have no problem with this. For reference, I hate both companies equally!
Why do you hate them? I love them.
Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
61–70 of 178 posts
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#62Why should Google be exempt from criticism? I think its good that a big company like Microsoft is making this kind of privacy an issue.
Whatever they think will work for them. It's just not striking a chord with the HN audience, clearly. I find it difficult to believe that it would strike a chord with any large audiences, but perhaps their focus groups say otherwise.
For me the Scroogle site gives off the same sort of vibe that a conspiracy theory site does. It doesn't look like it came out of Microsoft. Perhaps it's not meant to. Perhaps they want it to look like a grassroots movement against Google. In the end everyone sees the Outlook logo, though. Then it feels a little deceptive.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#63It's unfortunate that the marketing folks at Microsoft are looking to take this stance to unbelievable levels. I would rather see relevant ads than irrelevant ads. I used to work at Microsoft. I heard second hand that some exec (I believe they said it was Ballmer) in the last couple of years made the decision that Microsoft would make privacy a competitive differentiator. This sounds great on the surface, but it has…
Even since when Microsoft was good at common sense?
Microsoft is good in getting sales, not common sense.
As you said, privacy to them is a strategy, not something that is really important or part of the company culture.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#64It's unfortunate that the marketing folks at Microsoft are looking to take this stance to unbelievable levels. I would rather see relevant ads than irrelevant ads. I used to work at Microsoft. I heard second hand that some exec (I believe they said it was Ballmer) in the last couple of years made the decision that Microsoft would make privacy a competitive differentiator. This sounds great on the surface, but it has…
I hope that Microsoft does succeed in making privacy a competitive differentiator, but I feel they lack tact and common sense in many cases..
There is no love lost between them, and IMO Microsoft will get some traction because Google is desperate to increase revenue and keep their PE at over 20.
Their shopping is 100% ads and probably 90% of most transactional query pages are ads. Search for a commercial item and you are greeted by so many that "unbiased" search is drowned out. Google has ruined their product in search of short term profit thanks to Larry Page.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#65This site suffers many ailments, but I think the biggest problem is that the examples are not very compelling. They all amount to Google's contextual ad algorithm not being perfect and getting the context a bit wrong. The (supposedly devastating) effect of that is that if you bother to read the ads, the ad won't be relevant like it's supposed to be.
It feels like this initiative came top-down at Microsoft, probably starting with Ballmer's quote about "Google reading your email." I wonder whether Ballmer has even used email. It feels as though they're fighting an imagined problem that doesn't end up being much of an issue in practice.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you don't want it, don't use Gmail. I'm pretty sure that is exactly the point Microsoft are making with this campaign. They are using the fact you can't opt out of a "feature" as an excuse to opt out of a "product". They are leveraging peoples perception of 'Privacy' to do that. Really do you think buying an Audi will mean you can kiss the girl at Prom? Or by wearing Calvin Klein you'll look amazing from every a…
You are conflating two different issues, "I don't like seeing ads" and "algorithms reading my mail is a privacy breach". If you don't like seeing ads, I think even Gmail themselves would tell you not to use Gmail. But it's not a breach of privacy ! Or are you trolling?
I'm not conflating anything, I'm pointing our privacy was just a vehicle that was being used to deliver a message, and that message is valid:
"If you don't want gmail splashing ads all over your messages, switch to outlook."
No need to be a jerk about it and accuse me of trolling.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#67This is definitely not the best way to base a marketing campaign on privacy issues.
That said consumer products are traditionally ad supported, and regular consumer appear to tolerate it, mostly.
Internet advertising is quite unlike TV or print advertising though, and consumers are definitely not sufficiently informed of how much they're being tracked, particularly by products of companies like Google and Facebook, that live on advertising in one way or another.
Google Web Analytics (reportedly used on half of the websites on the net) and the "like", "tweet" and "+1" buttons are arguably much more likely to track your interests than GMail, even if you have never signed up for a single Google, Twitter or Facebook service. My guess is the creatives who build the campaign either had no idea or didn't know how to communicate it in a personified way, which has more emotional impact.
So Microsoft's campaign sucks, and I have a fundamental anti-Microsoft bias that stems from their despicable business conduct in the 80s and 90s, but Google isn't any better these days, Schmidt's comments on the "creepy line" make me shudder. Perhaps it can be a good starting point for discussing privacy issues.
Privacy shouldn't be a competitive advantage, it should be a sacred right of anybody who has children or financial/health/private issues.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#68If anyone doubts that this is anything other than a cynical PR attack do consider the source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/technology/microsoft-battl...
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-03/did-mark-pen...
And are we to conclude that Microsoft doesn't provide spam/scam protection as we are led to believe that they don't scan email contents?! when they use terminology that suggests human intervention they lose all credibility.
It’s also pathetic how increasingly they mention Google in their PR/marketing campaigns, it’s as if they believe it’s the only way for them to remain relevant.
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are conflating two different issues, "I don't like seeing ads" and "algorithms reading my mail is a privacy breach". If you don't like seeing ads, I think even Gmail themselves would tell you not to use Gmail. But it's not a breach of privacy ! Or are you trolling?
I'm not conflating anything, I'm pointing our privacy was just a vehicle that was being used to deliver a message, and that message is valid: "If you don't want gmail splashing ads all over your messages, switch to outlook." No need to be a jerk about it and accuse me of trolling.
> I'm pointing our privacy was just a vehicle that was being used to deliver a message, and that message is valid
The vehicle is not, though. There is no issue of privacy. They might as well have said "Gmail kills babies, switch to outlook", it's exactly as true (which is, to say, not at all).
Re: Aggressive negative advertising by Microsoft against Google.
#70If anyone doubts that this is anything other than a cynical PR attack do consider the source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/technology/microsoft-battl... http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-03/did-mark-pen... And are we to conclude that Microsoft doesn't provide spam/scam protection as we are led to believe that they don't scan email contents?! when they use terminology that suggests human intervention t…