Google makes a browser

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 2:11 pm

Check this out:

http://www.theregister.com/2004/09/21/g ... r_hirings/

Sounds pretty cool.

Maybe we'll get firefox plus google toolbar.

Top Wop · Post by **Top Wop** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 3:31 pm

Number of IE users in the next year:

Downhill.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 3:44 pm

Im thinking: MS is going to put its nose to the grindstone, start generating more revenue, to buy google before google puts out Google OS.

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 4:07 pm

Google is like the Jedi of the Internet. Its an ultimate source of light and good.

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 4:48 pm

Just remember, not all jedi are good.

Sapphire Wolf · Post by **Sapphire Wolf** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 4:55 pm

There are siths... also

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:49 pm

Beo - clearly you don't understand Google is NOT a "light and good" company. They might have been once - but they are now an extremely political company, and have done some VERY dodgey things in the past - and are doing dodgey things right now. Do some digging.

I think the idea of a GBrowser sucks personally. Unless they plan on taking the Mozilla code for a spin, it will simply fracture support for Firefox, which needs all the support it can get. (Kinda like how Nader split the vote and let Dubya into office.)

Any GBrowser better damn well support the W3C spec and web standards, because lemme tell ya, I'm already coding for two browsers, and FUSK GOOGLE if they think I'm gonna code for three!

Of course, any browser which takes market share from IE is a good thing, but not if it hurts Mozilla IN ANY WAY! Sadly, I can't see how Google would manage to convert IE users, given the long, slow, uphill battle Mozilla has had to gain even a toehold on the market.

We know for sure, that any GBrowser isn't going to be released within 12 months from now, and by that time there might be an IE7 to go up against.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:13 pm

Support for Gbrowser will come from IE users, rather than The Other Browsers. Simply because people don't need to do much leg work to find it if google chooses to release it.

The goal is get people to stop using IE, period.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:26 pm

Google kicks too much ass to be evil.

Verran · Post by **Verran** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:44 pm

Avder wrote:Google kicks too much *** to be evil.

w0rd

Long live Google.

I'll still use Opera, though.

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 8:05 pm

Using a lame ass image telling me to STFU makes Google good? Sweeet fusking baby Jebus - you guys are idiots.

Google make a semi-decent search engine - for the stuff they want you to see - PERIOD. They are stuffed-hat wankers when it comes to actually providing an index of the REAL web. There are tens of thousands of sites which google refuses to index, or allow their users to find.

That's a crock of sh1T as far as I'm concerned. It's not up to search engines to censor what we can and can't locate - it's total anathema to the entire concept of the Internet, and yet they embrace this philiosophy whole heartedly.

I don't even care that the stuff Google filters out is probably stuff I won't ever look for or find interesting - it's the principle. Whoever controls the Google index has immense power, and I feel that power is being used inappropriately.

And remember - despite how big and powerful they are now - if someone launches a better Search Engine (which is distinctly possible) then 3 months later, google could find itself being what Alta Vista is now: an also ran. Certainly, I'd sell my shares in it if I were you.

I find it hard to believe a GBrowser is A Good Thing. It'll be tied into their advertising model, you can lay pretty short odds on THAT - and despite the occasional efficacy of Google Adwords, I do not like the idea of web search, web advertising and web browser being bundled by a single company.

LONG LIVE FIREFOX!!

Nitrofox125 · Post by **Nitrofox125** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:35 pm

Links? Backup? Proofs? (@Mobi)

index_html · Post by **index_html** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:48 pm

I got Firefox since so many people are raving about it. It's a browser, it loads web pages, I could already do that. Yay.

Sage · Post by **Sage** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:50 pm

I am going to use GBrowser! I will also use GMessenger and GOperatingSystem when they make them.

roid · Post by **roid** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 10:43 pm

Mobius wrote:Using a lame *** image telling me to STFU makes Google good? Sweeet fusking baby Jebus - you guys are idiots.

Google make a semi-decent search engine - for the stuff they want you to see - PERIOD. They are stuffed-hat wankers when it comes to actually providing an index of the REAL web. There are tens of thousands of sites which google refuses to index, or allow their users to find.

That's a crock of sh1T as far as I'm concerned. It's not up to search engines to censor what we can and can't locate - it's total anathema to the entire concept of the Internet, and yet they embrace this philiosophy whole heartedly.

I don't even care that the stuff Google filters out is probably stuff I won't ever look for or find interesting - it's the principle. Whoever controls the Google index has immense power, and I feel that power is being used inappropriately.

And remember - despite how big and powerful they are now - if someone launches a better Search Engine (which is distinctly possible) then 3 months later, google could find itself being what Alta Vista is now: an also ran. Certainly, I'd sell my shares in it if I were you.

I find it hard to believe a GBrowser is A Good Thing. It'll be tied into their advertising model, you can lay pretty short odds on THAT - and despite the occasional efficacy of Google Adwords, I do not like the idea of web search, web advertising and web browser being bundled by a single company.

LONG LIVE FIREFOX!!

that's interesting what you say about google's misdimeenors, i have not heard of them. please edumacate us mobi, save us from unseen media monopoly

(i'm not being sarcastic)

Verran · Post by **Verran** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 11:11 pm

Google uses Linux. I am happy.

TigerRaptor · Post by **TigerRaptor** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 11:25 pm

I was going to give my opinion on the Google. But Iâ??ve been holding this in for far too long. Can't you morons ever get your point a cross without using a picture.

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 11:58 pm

hehe, j/k.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:23 am

Mobi, at lease provide some evidence as opposed to mere rhetoric. If you dont, well, just shut up then.

Im also looking forward to a GMessenger thing. Supposedly theyre basing it on an existing protocol--Jabber, I think. Everyone is saying that a Google messneger client would absolutely slaughter MSN, Yahoo and AOL.

Lobber · Post by **Lobber** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:47 am

wow, somebody to hate other than me

Sage · Post by **Sage** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:58 am

I will even buy GToiletPaper...... NO WAIT make that MS Toilet Paper because I want to put terds on it.

Topher · Post by **Topher** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:38 am

Mobius wrote:That's a crock of sh1T as far as I'm concerned. It's not up to search engines to censor what we can and can't locate - it's total anathema to the entire concept of the Internet, and yet they embrace this philiosophy whole heartedly.

....what?

No one is pushing Google down your throat. Don't use it.

Saying that because a search engine can't search 100% of the Internet is censorship is like saying because you can't have sex with 100% of women out there is prejudice against you. No one is censoring content, a search engine simply can't encompass 100% of websites on the Internet.

Be our guest and put your money where you mouth is: don't use one. The URL bar knows no censorship.

roid · Post by **roid** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 8:58 am

not correct, they routinely censor wares sites and other non-consequential sites.
they just don't come up on searches.

but mobi seemed to be elluding to something else, something bigger.

Sage · Post by **Sage** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:26 am

if your search the word "porn" on google you get a bunch of links to Churches and "breaking porn addiction" websites.

DigiJo · Post by **DigiJo** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:22 am

The URL bar knows no censorship.

heh you know that 9 of the 13 worldwide dns-route servers are located in the usa or? if i recall right in late april this year lybia (.ly) completely disappeared from the internet for a while.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/13 ... s_off_net/

the url-bar knows censorship very well.

another example, look for verisign and redirect to there own searchengine on wrong typed urls, or internetexplorer with smarttags and hardcoded redirects to msn.

Pandora · Post by **Pandora** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 12:41 pm

Today on slashdot "Does Google Censor Chinese News?"
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/09/22/00 ... =217&tid=1

Iceman · Post by **Iceman** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 12:51 pm

I love Google ...

Sage · Post by **Sage** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:35 pm

Me too. I love it so much I'd buy GConsole! Google's new game console! (When they finally decide to make it) and their fabulous line of new weekly games you can download to the console based on whatever the Google logo changes into that week.

KompresZor · Post by **KompresZor** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:18 am

Google Censorship

Google as Big Brother

1. Google's immortal cookie:
Google was the first search engine to use a cookie that expires in 2038. This was at a time when federal websites were prohibited from using persistent cookies altogether. Now it's years later, and immortal cookies are commonplace among search engines; Google set the standard because no one bothered to challenge them. This cookie places a unique ID number on your hard disk. Anytime you land on a Google page, you get a Google cookie if you don't already have one. If you have one, they read and record your unique ID number.

2. Google records everything they can:
For all searches they record the cookie ID, your Internet IP address, the time and date, your search terms, and your browser configuration. Increasingly, Google is customizing results based on your IP number. This is referred to in the industry as "IP delivery based on geolocation."

3. Google retains all data indefinitely:
Google has no data retention policies. There is evidence that they are able to easily access all the user information they collect and save.

4. Google won't say why they need this data:
Inquiries to Google about their privacy policies are ignored. When the New York Times (2002-11-28) asked Sergey Brin about whether Google ever gets subpoenaed for this information, he had no comment.

5. Google hires spooks:
Matt Cutts, a key Google engineer, used to work for the National Security Agency. Google wants to hire more people with security clearances, so that they can peddle their corporate assets to the spooks in Washington.

6. Google's toolbar is spyware:
With the advanced features enabled, Google's free toolbar for Explorer phones home with every page you surf, and yes, it reads your cookie too. Their privacy policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa lost a class-action lawsuit when their toolbar did the same thing, and their privacy policy failed to explain this. Worse yet, Google's toolbar updates to new versions quietly, and without asking. This means that if you have the toolbar installed, Google essentially has complete access to your hard disk every time you connect to Google (which is many times a day). Most software vendors, and even Microsoft, ask if you'd like an updated version. But not Google. Any software that updates automatically presents a massive security risk.

7. Google's cache copy is illegal:
Judging from Ninth Circuit precedent on the application of U.S. copyright laws to the Internet, Google's cache copy appears to be illegal. The only way a webmaster can avoid having his site cached on Google is to put a "noarchive" meta in the header of every page on his site. Surfers like the cache, but webmasters don't. Many webmasters have deleted questionable material from their sites, only to discover later that the problem pages live merrily on in Google's cache. The cache copy should be "opt-in" for webmasters, not "opt-out."

8. Google is not your friend:
By now Google enjoys a 75 percent monopoly for all external referrals to most websites. Webmasters cannot avoid seeking Google's approval these days, assuming they want to increase traffic to their site. If they try to take advantage of some of the known weaknesses in Google's semi-secret algorithms, they may find themselves penalized by Google, and their traffic disappears. There are no detailed, published standards issued by Google, and there is no appeal process for penalized sites. Google is completely unaccountable. Most of the time Google doesn't even answer email from webmasters.

9. Google is a privacy time bomb:
With 200 million searches per day, most from outside the U.S., Google amounts to a privacy disaster waiting to happen. Those newly-commissioned data-mining bureaucrats in Washington can only dream about the sort of slick efficiency that Google has already achieved.

Search for my company (Scott's Carpentry) on Google
Now search for it on Yahoo

On Google you can't find my website, on Yahoo I get the second and third spot

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 11:09 am

Sage wrote:Me too. I love it so much I'd buy GConsole! Google's new game console! (When they finally decide to make it) and their fabulous line of new weekly games you can download to the console based on whatever the Google logo changes into that week.

You should be the google poster boy...