I have to admit… Google+’s new features make this a really compelling place to hang out for social features. I like the technical approach more and more, but it’s too bad that it’s hard to get people on to it.
I was reading the blog post over at Microsoft from the fellow… Oh, I forget his name already. Anyway, he was explaining why Microsoft is filing a complaint with the European Commission about Google’s unfair business advantages and whatnot.
At first, this whole thing comes off as a company entering legacy mode. Microsoft reminds me of the RIAA, MPAA and the newspaper industry. They clearly feel the edge is blunted and their technology is dying. They are unable to adapt. As a result they are engaging in a strategy of sue and destroy.
Back to the blog post from the executive. One of the complaints is that Google purchased YouTube in 2006 and has made it difficult, if not impossible, for search engines to index the content. Apparently this is a progressive action.
I do believe that when you are as big as Google, you have a responsibility to allow openness of this nature. However, I’m rather disturbed by the complaint. Essentially, Microsoft is saying that if Google were to put in a robots.txt file on a website they own to block search engines from indexing content this should be illegal. Uhm, what?
A great many people have employed the use of robots.txt throughout the web’s history to prevent indexing of pages. Could Microsoft’s complaint set a precedent for companies complaining about the use of robots.txt to force the hands of web masters?
I’m just asking the question. Sometimes I wish Microsoft would just quit whining and get back to making great software like they used to. It seems more and more that will just not happen. When a big company out-innovates them or outsmarts them in business, their first reaction is to sue.
Reminds me of the RIAA, MPAA and the newspaper industry. Get back to solving hard problems, Microsoft. Stop wasting your time and money on lawsuits. Are you a software company or a whiny bitch?
It just occurred to me while I was visiting the Thinking Chamber earlier today:
If the big three tech companies were characters in Back to the Future, they would be…
Microsoft == Biff
Apple == Marty McFly
Google == Doc Brown
When NetNewsWire went with Google Reader syncing, the hair stood up on the back of my neck. I swore off Google Reader quite some time ago. Indeed, I was using NNW to avoid Google Reader. Now I’m being forced back?
It was time to look into splitting up with NNW.
I haven’t used RSS support in OS X since Safari 3, so I decided to give it a new try in Safari 4. Part of my original problem with RSS support in Safari was no conceivable way to sync the read status across Macs. Well, turns out they put that support into bookmark sync over MobileMe, they just didn’t notify me. Thanks, Apple.
Anyway, I was researching how to do this on the net and it looked painful. Everyone’s steps included loading up Firefox, attaching the Sage plugin to it and importing/exporting yadda yadda… blah, it should NOT be that hard.
So I opened NetNewsWire and just casually dragged a feed title into the bookmark bar in Safari. I was shocked to discover that Safari took the bookmark just fine. Once I opened it, it processed the bookmark as a feed and started syncing it.
That was easy.
You still have to open the bookmark one time before it starts syncing it automatically, but just do the “open in tabs” thing and you’ll be fine. Screw all that Firefox/Sage import/export garbage. It’s just a drag and drop. Enjoy.
Related articles by Zemanta
This kind of bothers me.
I noticed on Google Adsense that daily traffic to my website had increased by 4 times the amount of regular traffic.
I poked around the stats to look at why this might be and what I found there makes me stop and think:
Stop and think about why people would be searching all over the net for this meme.
No, just stop and think about it for a minute.
Yeah, if I were you, I’d go change those bank security questions now. NOW.
Continuing my recent tradition of expressing what are likely to be fairly unpopular opinions with my peers, tonight I’m going to rag on Google‘s “Chrome” project and tell you why this is a Bad Idea ™. I’ll try to keep this short (update: I failed). This is considered to be a discussion starter, not a final statement. I’ll probably elaborate on these discussion points on the next NO CARRIER, so be sure and give me some feedback here.
The Browser War is Pointless
Anyone who still thinks the browser war is anything worth fighting is absolutely delusional. The whole point of having a web browser is to serve as an open portal to content, not to give your company the biggest tool at the urinal. The web was created for serving content regardless of what application you used to view that content. In that spirit, what’s the point of fighting over this?
I understand the key differences between browsers and that some browsers have perceived advantages over others. I understand that all too well. One of the things you used to give up when you made a conscious decision to be a Mac or Linux user was the fact that the de facto browser on the net that had no intention whatsoever of conforming to a standard is no longer in your pocket. Being a Mac or Linux user means you have more than one browser installed and you use the right tool for the job. The fact is, the right tool for the job shouldn’t matter because HTML…er, XHTML or whatever it is this week is a standard, right?
Companies do not live or die based on whether or not you use their browser. Well, unless you’re Opera, maybe. But I digress.
We all know Microsoft is starting to wake up to this fact and has indeed promised to help further this idea. That’s great. It only bolsters my argument then. It used to be that the browser war was about dominating in your interpretation of the standard. Now that’s less and less important because standards are being followed (well, in general). So… why bother? What does it do for Google to compete in this browser market?
I know the answer to this and so do you. We’ll talk about that later. But for now, just believe me. This market share thing is pointless. I felt the same way when Steve Jobs declared war on IE with Safari on Windows. That just upset me. All that does is tie a huge steel ball around Apple’s ankle and toss it in the ocean. Apply that to Google now too.
Browsers are “planet” apps
Browsers are becoming “planet” applications with lots of satellites (plugins). For example, I use MobileMe which hooks into Safari or IE for bookmark synchronization… but not Firefox! Many people I know and love prefer Firefox because of the various plugins that “better” their browser.
The point I’m trying to make here is that the browser is not a monolithic application. You spend time adding whipped topping and chocolate shavings on top to get it just the way you want to work with it. You’ve now installed satellite applications that better your experience for you.
Now along comes a new browser with no support for those satellites. You have a new planet that will support no moon. Are you going to pack up your cheese and move to it? What happens when Chrome doesn’t support your favorite plugins? Okie, fine. I know they have said they plan to support Firefox plugins. But will MobileMe bookmark sync work? Probably not. That’s so crucial for me that it’s a deal killer.
As a matter of fact, there’s a good solution to this – and it would help out everyone’s favorite argument: security. Don’t support these plugins. Just be monolithic and require extra functionality to be external to your application. That would change the game entirely… for the better.
A New Security Nightmare
The story you didn’t read the other day was how enterprise administrators everywhere were groaning about the release of Chrome. While they salivated about using it at home perhaps, what’s happening in the workplace is a whole nutha story.
Google woke up and unleashed Chrome on the world this week and millions of people downloaded it. I’ll bet a great deal of those people were at work when they did it. I bet they installed it on their work PC’s.
So. You’ve just taken a brand new application with no record of security (and let’s face it, Google’s security record is not clean)… an application that is now your portal to the most insecure and infested part of the Internet and added it to your company’s PC. You’ve just made your PC a tremendous liability and your enterprise administrator is likely ready to kick your ass.
Indeed, within hours of release, Chrome was proven to be subject to a carpet bombing flaw. Look it up if you don’t know what that is. I’m too fired up to bother linking it 😉
A Cloud OS Should be Standards Based
Now we get to the strategic part of the discussion. This is where Google’s motive comes in. They’ve been building the “cloud OS” so to speak for years now. They envision a world where you can sign in with a single username and password from anywhere and use applications just as you would your desktop, complete with the data you work with. Chrome is their method of furthering that agenda.
That’s great, except that the cloud as a business data model hasn’t really shaken out to be a good idea.
I still do not know of any large enterprise business willing to put their data up on the public web. Better yet, I do not know of any large enterprise willing to compromise on SLA’s for their critical data. They’d better start thinking about that if they plan on moving to the “cloud.” The “cloud” has already shit itself more than once. Google, Amazon, Apple and all other types of cloud computing folks have had severe troubles recently. It’s an unproven model and with the way you hear people talk about it like it’s the second coming… you’ve got another dotBomb shaping up here.
Open Source – Who Cares?
A lot is being ballyhooed about the fact that Chrome is open source. Hooray! Why is that a win, exactly? Because you can send patches to Google? Think they’re going to include your code in their release when they have a fairly clear agenda?
Red herring, folks. They could give a shit about your code. They just wanted something else on the PR. Honestly, what does it buy them to be open source for this project?
It sure bought them an interesting blog post (see: security) about how everything you type is sent back to the Google mothership, including sites you visit. Shivering yet? Woo, aren’t you glad you installed that on your CORPORATE PC!?!?
Just in case you’re still wondering what the purpose might be of the Chrome browser and why you’re using it…
Google’s business model is advertising.
Think about it, H.I.