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

You know, Google, the web already had this feature

blog.vrypan.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 444 posts

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#291

Post by OGinparadise »

city41 wrote: post #236
OGinparadise wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be evil? Pfeh. The only thing left of Google that they haven't managed to screw up or cause outrage over is search. The only thing they can't afford to change, for fear people will stop using it. Search is gone too, virtually all ads: http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/google-sear... http://www.click-conversion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/g...

Your two examples are "get credit card" and "Nike shoes on sale"? Try "geomorphology" or "big o notation" or anything not consumer related. Quite frankly if I searched for "Nike shoes on sale" then those ads are exactly what I'd want to see.

in related news....my point was not that they are ads but that ads are probably 90% of the page. To the unsuspecting user, those seem like unbiased results (not as ads) and to everyone they start the "Google tax" price increase for everyone.

Try "geomorphology" or "big o notation" Go and buy those keywords and see what happens. Google posts ad for bought keywords and that usually includes every commercial word. If the defense is that not sure if you're helping them.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#292

Post by jezfromfuture »

blhack wrote: post #114

You guys in this thread whining about google: It isn't google that has changed, it is the whole world which has changed. Look at the things that some of you champion; the iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything made by apple computer, the company that is pushing the hardest against openness on the internet. Oh, you want some basic browser functionality like uploading files? Spend time learning objective C,…

Lol and your post reads like a google PR post.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#293

Post by voyou »

This does suggest that they really did shut down Reader in order to push people to use Google+. This suggests that somebody at Google is a fucking idiot, because Google+ is in no way a substitute for Reader. Google+ (like Facebook or Twitter) gives me a stream of stuff that's happened recently - it's ephemeral, in that if I don't make a conscious effort to bookmark something I see there, I'll forget it. An RSS reader, on the other hand, remembers (and categorizes) everything unless I make a conscious choice to mark it as forgettable.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#294

Post by voyou »

metaphorm wrote: post #191

I'm not so fond of Google+ either, but really this is a lame post. RSS was just not that good of a technology and has been in zombie status for a couple of years now already. Its about time somebody took steps to put it out of its misery. Google+ is a shitty replacement for RSS and I don't even think its going to catch on, but at least now we have more of an opportunity to try and get open content syndication right.

"RSS was just not that good of a technology"

What was wrong with it? I mean there were problems with the twenty slightly different versions, or whatever, but they were solved by Atom. What do you want in open content syndication that wouldn't naturally build on Atom?

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#295

Post by reinhardt »

jezfromfuture wrote: post #292
blhack wrote: post #114

You guys in this thread whining about google: It isn't google that has changed, it is the whole world which has changed. Look at the things that some of you champion; the iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything made by apple computer, the company that is pushing the hardest against openness on the internet. Oh, you want some basic browser functionality like uploading files? Spend time learning objective C,…

Lol and your post reads like a google PR post.

I'd love to read a PR piece mentioning "yeah, google does some shitty things. Google+ is obnoxious. Some of the stuff happening with youtube is obnoxious".

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#296

Post by PavlovsCat »

iand wrote: post #269
white_devil wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apples complete joke of a mobile operating system How could you possibly think iOS is a "complete joke".. without being a raging GooGoo fanboy, that is?

There should be an equivalent of Godwin's law for the word fanboy and its derivatives. When I see it I immediately know rational conversation is over.

Then actually look up Godwin's law. It says something about the probability of a Nazi comparison occuring, but nothing about that loosing the argument or ending the conversation. And that's just as well, because why would it be otherwise? Because Godwin said so? What, is he Adolf Hitler or something?

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#297

Post by mdellabitta »

There's a false equivalence fallacy the author commits here where he assumes that the effort required to get a useful number of websites that also have Google+ pages to commit to embedding a specific tag is equal to the effort required to create this Chrome plugin that phones home, or that either of those two tasks could be accomplished by the same people.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#298

Post by cyborgx7 »

rimantas wrote: post #285
blhack wrote: post #114

You guys in this thread whining about google: It isn't google that has changed, it is the whole world which has changed. Look at the things that some of you champion; the iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything made by apple computer, the company that is pushing the hardest against openness on the internet. Oh, you want some basic browser functionality like uploading files? Spend time learning objective C,…

> Look at the things that some of you champion; the > iPhone, the iPad...anything running iOS, anything > made by apple computer, the company that is pushing > hardest against openness on the internet. What a bunch of nonsense. Even the first iPhone had a browser which supported more of HTML5/CSS3 than desktop browsers at the time. It was not Google, it was Apple who brought canvas, css transforms, css animations to…

>Even the first iPhone had a browser which supported more of HTML5/CSS3 than desktop browsers at the time.

Except for the feature that most people mainly use plugins for: audio/video-playback. Only supporting proprietary codecs can hardly be considered open web support.

>How about 60 000 apps ditched by Google?

I don't think you can compare a curated marketplace with a walled garden. There is a difference between jailbreaking and tapping a checkbox to allow third party apps.

All that said I can't agree with the first comment either. I used to be a fanboy of Google but I'm having a harder and harder time justifying it with some of their recent moves.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#299

Post by nkorth »

zevyoura wrote: post #50
DanBC wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do they need to do to fix YouTube? (I'm really asking. I think some of it is broken, and maybe people can pass information onto YouTube people.) 1) Default to 240: I want to be able to always watch videos in the worst resolution possible. I want the lightest bandwidth possible. I'd sometimes be happy with just the audio. It seems that I can't default to 240, no matter what I click. 2) Small elements in UI: There…

> Default to 240: I want to be able to always watch videos in the worst resolution possible. I want the lightest bandwidth possible. I'd sometimes be happy with just the audio. It seems that I can't default to 240, no matter what I click. Strange you mention this, because just minutes ago I changed a video to 240, and it prompted me to save my preference (the text was headlined with "Slow Connection?"). Maybe a new f…

I have that option enabled, and it just defaults to 360p. As far as I can tell, that option just makes it not increase the resolution when you click full screen.

Re: You know, Google, the web already had this feature

#300

Post by felipebueno »

pseut wrote: post #126
felipebueno wrote: post #21

I used to be a Google fan as well. Not a BIG fan but a fan. In late 2010 I decided it was time to move on from Google. It took a while but I already went back to Firefox (nightly), started moving my emails to fasmail.fm (with my own domain so I'm not tied to anyone), I'm trying to use only DuckDuckGo (it's difficult... I have to admit that Google is unbeatable yet), stopped using google+ and Google Reader (since 2011…

FYI you can get xmpp through fastmail too. That sounds almost exactly like my experience too.

Hey, thanks, man! I didin't know that. :)
Post reply on HN