01-09-2013 09:14 AM
228 1234 ...
tools
  1. a5cent's Avatar
    Google is not slacking on web standards.
    That sentence isn't specific enough. Google is a huge company with many products and services, some of which are W3C standards-compliant and some of which (likely intentionally) violate those same standards.

    I won't go into all the details again here. I will just say that Google's and Apple's treatment of internet standards often amounts to the misuse of monopoly power. In the 1990's Microsoft went to court for similar behavior and was forced to clean up their act. Apparently, the same standards don't apply today. More on this can be found here .

    Google is certainly slacking on web standards. It doesn't support Windows browsers properly.
    just a small clarification... neither Google nor any other company should be required to explicitly support Windows browsers. They should only be required to abide by internet standards. If websites are standards-compliant, any browser will be able to display the websites content correctly, including IE10, which is one of the best browsers in terms of standards-compliance.

    How does Microsoft give a user choice if it does not allow any browser other than IE on Windows Phone?
    Microsoft isn't giving you a choice of internet browsers, but even if they wanted too, they just can't afford it. Let me explain:

    Mobile Safari and Mobile Chrome are both based on WebKit, and together they are responsible for 95+% of all mobile internet traffic. They are very close to making all other browsers (Firefox, Opera, IE) irrelevant on the mobile web. If Google and Apple were to respect the W3C standardization process this wouldn't be a problem, but as it is now Google and Apple are obviously more interested in running a mobile web dictatorship. The W3C (the organization behind most internet standards) would continue to exist, but would basically adopt anything Apple and Google implement in WebKit as the official standard. As Apple and Google both directly compete with Microsoft, surrendering all control over the mobile web would deal a very strong blow to Microsoft's future ability to compete effectively. The only way to prevent this is by drastically increasing mobile IE's market share on the mobile web. The market share must be large enough to persuade Google, that they can no longer afford to offer a sub-par experience to that many people without noticeably hurting their advertising revenues. IE on WP isn't just Microsoft's last hope of preventing this dictatorship, but also Mozilla's and Opera's.

    Theoretically, Microsoft shouldn't mind too much if IE on WP8 is replaced with Firefox or Opera. Although they would prefer you used IE, giving you that choice doesn't threaten them. Unfortunately, Microsoft can't legally allow those two browsers while refusing Safari and Chrome. Were Microsoft to allow Chrome on WP8, it would amount to Microsoft waving the white flag, and we could all attend IE's funeral shortly thereafter.

    Basically, all consumers are pawns in Apple's and Google's fight for dominance over the mobile web, and Microsoft's hope of preventing that.

    Put yourself in Microsoft's position. Would you allow Safari and/or Chrome on WP8?
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-12-2012 at 09:54 PM.
    HeyCori likes this.
    12-12-2012 09:33 PM
  2. a5cent's Avatar
    Microsoft doesn't ban alternative browsers. There's simply no developer building an alternative browser -- likely because IE 10 is so good.
    They have banned other browsers on WRT. I don't know what their policy is for WP, but the existence of Nokia's Xpress (in beta) proves that at least Nokia can offer any browser they choose (it isn't just a skin).
    Last edited by a5cent; 12-12-2012 at 10:53 PM.
    12-12-2012 09:35 PM
  3. a5cent's Avatar
    Its IE that is way off standards and always needs proprietary hacks to display some of the most simple CSS, etc.
    Times are changing. Up to IE8 I would have agreed with you. Since IE9 this is no longer true.
    brmiller1976 and VanillaFrog like this.
    12-12-2012 09:39 PM
  4. brmiller1976's Avatar
    As much as I love Windows and Microsoft I have to completely disagree with you here.

    As a web designer/developer I can tell you that Google is the best when it comes to web standards and is overall the easiest to develop for. Its IE that is way off standards and always needs proprietary hacks to display some of the most simple CSS, etc.

    Also, Chromes' update process is the best. Having notable "versions" of a browser like IE does creates fragmentation nightmares for web developers and allows for users to naturally fall generations behind in the browser they use.

    Gmail, and their other products on the other hand are on par at best. They often leave something to be desired. And Android, well that's just a cluster****.
    Chrome is also spyware. Which is why, if a developer demands that I run Chrome to view his website, I inform him that he's either going to develop something truly open (or go without me using it).
    12-12-2012 11:26 PM
  5. brmiller1976's Avatar
    They have banned other browsers on WRT. I don't know what their policy is for WP, but the existence of Nokia's Xpress (in beta) proves that at least Nokia can offer any browser they choose (it isn't just a skin).
    They haven't banned other browers, just said that any browser on RT has to be a Metro app. Mozilla and Google just want to do a cheap recompile of their existing product and say "voila, Windows RT!"
    12-12-2012 11:27 PM
  6. a5cent's Avatar
    They haven't banned other browers, just said that any browser on RT has to be a Metro app. Mozilla and Google just want to do a cheap recompile of their existing product and say "voila, Windows RT!"
    Although browser developers can build metro styled browsers for WRT, the metro environment doesn't provide access to some of the API's those browser developers claim to require. At one point Mozilla, Opera and Google claimed they won't be able to develop browsers for WRT at all, and that is where the idea of their browsers being "banned" came from. Since them, all have decided to deliver metro styled browsers, so I agree, it isn't the correct term.
    12-13-2012 12:10 PM
  7. KrankyKoder's Avatar
    After 12/21 will any of it matter anyway?
    notebookgrail and VanillaFrog like this.
    12-13-2012 12:32 PM
  8. brmiller1976's Avatar
    Mozilla and Google are lazy and incompetent. Mozilla cannot even support 64 bit browsing, while Google just wants to force users into Chrome to download all their browsing and communications data to resell to advertisers. Neither seems especially interested in delivering a quality experience on the platform.
    12-13-2012 01:56 PM
  9. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Mozilla and Google are lazy and incompetent. Mozilla cannot even support 64 bit browsing, while Google just wants to force users into Chrome to download all their browsing and communications data to resell to advertisers. Neither seems especially interested in delivering a quality experience on the platform.
    Check out Waterfox or Pale Moon if you are interested in a 64-bit custom build of Firefox for Windows.
    12-13-2012 11:50 PM
  10. brmiller1976's Avatar
    Yeah, those offshoots of Firefox pop up and go for a while before getting abandoned... then you're back to square one. And they don't get updated as often with security patches and other things.

    Seriously, the laziness in the tech community as of late really bothers me. Back in the 1990s, you had developers who would code optimized versions of the same software for multiple platforms that were often very different -- MS-DOS, Windows 3.X, Amiga, Atari ST, Acorn Archimedes, etc. Now they cannot even bother to develop optimized apps for the next generation of the same OS they're already developing for!
    12-14-2012 12:53 AM
  11. squire777's Avatar
    The news about Google dropping support for EAS is another reason why I want to get away from that scummy company. Slowly but surely I am getting away from my gmail accounts.
    12-14-2012 04:11 PM
  12. brmiller1976's Avatar
    Yeah, today's news is likely making some of my critics in this thread a bit sheepish. ;)
    12-14-2012 08:12 PM
  13. brmiller1976's Avatar
    This video is a great overview of what you give up when you use Google products and services (including, ironically, the YouTube site that this video is hosted on):

    HeyCori likes this.
    12-14-2012 08:24 PM
  14. notebookgrail's Avatar
    How do you think google and Facebook make all their money .. Its not from ads I know for sure .. Just think when was the last time you purposely clicked on an web ad
    So why do my paid ads in Google Adsense generate so many clicks? Someone is clicking. If not, there is some sinister going on within Google - May be, they have paid folks all over the world to just click ads that they put?
    12-14-2012 09:13 PM
  15. DaveGx's Avatar
    I never understood fully how ads bring in money sometimes, especially on most websites. I guess, to be more clear, I can't believe there are so many people that actually click on ads. I only do when its an accident.
    12-14-2012 09:23 PM
  16. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    I never understood fully how ads bring in money sometimes, especially on most websites. I guess, to be more clear, I can't believe there are so many people that actually click on ads. I only do when its an accident.
    I use Adblock Plus in Firefox to hide most of the ads.
    12-15-2012 12:56 AM
  17. blehblehbleh's Avatar
    I never understood fully how ads bring in money sometimes, especially on most websites. I guess, to be more clear, I can't believe there are so many people that actually click on ads. I only do when its an accident.
    Depends on the business model. There's per clicks, but then there's also per page view or the standard method of paying for the ad to run for a limited time.
    12-15-2012 01:34 AM
  18. brmiller1976's Avatar
    And there's also simply selling user data.

    Google can easily be "Axciom on steroids," and sell extremely detailed user profiles. If you have a Google log-in and use Chrome as well as a couple of other Google services, it can report your income, expenses, rent, computer habits, car ownership, sexual orientation, marital status, home ownership status, and a host of other very valuable information to companies who precisely target you -- and tie it directly back to your personally identifying information.
    12-15-2012 01:39 AM
  19. simbadogg's Avatar
    Did you really just say that microsoft should attack google for proprietary ways? I understand that this is a microsoft centric forum, but are you seriously serious? Seriously? Of all companies, they have the least around of room to be making that argument.
    12-16-2012 09:18 PM
  20. brmiller1976's Avatar
    Microsoft is open and cross-platform, Google is closed and restricted-platform.
    12-16-2012 11:34 PM
  21. simbadogg's Avatar
    Microsoft is open and cross-platform, Google is closed and restricted-platform.
    Wow, a guy that literally has no idea what he is talking about.
    12-17-2012 12:04 AM
  22. Rich White's Avatar
    This war of propietary eco-systems has been brewing for a while. There's a reason why Microosft is in bed with ePub and Barnes and Noble, in bed with Nokia and offering their own Surface devices. Microsoft tackled Google in certain strategic areas - Cloud Services, Web Office, and Media Store. Skype and Outlook and integrated messaging Google lacks any real advantage on those areas except a head start which will close in a year.

    Next Generation Search is Voice Search and Vertical Search as in "Thursday Night, Lamb Dinner, Boston" where search will allow the whole process to be completed and reservations booked by voice. Fetch the reviews, restaurant ratings, prices, side dishes, etc. There's a whole new war in search coming for usable human voice interaction and Google's existing algorithms may not win the war. It's not the way they structure data.

    So third party developers can build Google Tools until we get into Twitter/Instagram wars and banning Instagram for proprietary Twitter Filters. This is the new world.
    12-17-2012 12:29 AM
  23. brmiller1976's Avatar
    Wow, a guy that literally has no idea what he is talking about.
    Wow, a personal attack without any real substance!
    12-17-2012 01:30 AM
  24. simbadogg's Avatar
    Wow, a personal attack without any real substance!
    Not an attack, just stating how you've shown a lack of either knowledge of what standards are, or comprehension. Simple and current example, google dropping EAS support saying they're going to move to CalDAV
    Exchange ActiveSync - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    CalDAV - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Although EAS is ubiquitous, it isn't a standard, it's a proprietary msft technology. CalDAV is an internet standard. Which is exactly why you stating that "Microsoft is open and cross-platform, Google is closed and restricted-platform." is a crock. Same with you saying "If a service is proprietary and doesn't support basic standards like IE10, it's closed." I hope you're not implying that IE10 is a standard. But, carry on
    socialcarpet likes this.
    12-17-2012 04:46 AM
  25. dipayanster's Avatar
    MS, just make droids incompatible to windows, lets see how big-G take the fire
    12-17-2012 05:37 AM
228 1234 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-28-2012, 11:26 PM
  2. Microsoft finally sues Google directly for patent infringement
    By 12Danny123 in forum The "Off Topic" Lounge
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-21-2012, 02:14 PM
  3. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 10:47 PM
  4. I think Google just cleared the way for Windows Surface with Nexus 7
    By ninjaap in forum General Desktop, Laptop & Tablet Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-29-2012, 11:11 AM
  5. Microsoft says they're in it for the (very) long haul
    By HeyCori in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 03-03-2012, 08:23 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD