Evil Google makes some good products December 29, 2006Posted by sk in Computers & Internet, Google, Technology and Software.
When several people tell you something is good, it must be good, right? Lately, I’ve been reading a lot about how good Google Reader is. So I finally decided to try it out myself yesterday. And my verdict? It rocks. It truly does. I spent a couple of hours transferring my feeds from live.com and arranging them properly. I liked Live.com but it’s good for a few rss feeds. It took me a while to figure out, though, that the key ‘j’ is for next feed and ‘k’ is for the previou
s feed. I would have preferred ‘pg up’ and ‘pg dn’ but it’s a minor annoyance. Another minor annoyance I have is that sometimes my feeds are not marked as read even after I’ve read them. Overall, I think it’s a very easy to use rss aggregator with a clean interface. So, now I’m officially using Windows Live Writer for writing posts and Google Reader for reading them.
Anyway, one of the first feeds that I added was that of Mike Torres, who works in the Live Spaces team. He wrote a post about how Google may be compromising its ethics. The gist of his argument is this: when you search the keyword “blog” on Google, Google Blogger doesn’t figure among the top results (and not even in the first 5 pages). However, right below the sponsored links, there’s an orange blogger icon with the text, “Tip: Want to share your life online with your blog? Try Blogger.” Mike has this to say about it:
For a company that prides itself in its integrity (or at least used to) this is a pretty messed up thing to do. I can’t even find Blogger in the organic search results; I stopped looking on page 5. Which means that instead of earning its spot on page 1 (or any other page for that matter) they decided to promote their own service in a way that no one else can do at the top of the organic search results. This makes it look like Blogger is actually more popular than TypePad, Windows Live Spaces, Yahoo 360, and WordPress.com when in reality, according to Google’s own algorithms, it isn’t.
Ultimately, the folks who end up suffering the most are the Six Apart guys who are paying Google to run ads against the word “blog”. Now, if you were in charge of Six Apart’s advertising strategy, would you continue to pay for this ad when your competition has an unfair advantage? Which one would you click on? The one that looks like an ad or the one that looks like a friendly tip from your friends at Google HQ?
Come on guys. You can’t have it both ways – you’re either biased or you’re unbiased. But don’t say you’re unbiased and then sneak little orange B icons above your competition. Especially after saying you don’t ‘smooth the way’ for your own ads.
I initially didn’t pay much attention to it. After all, Mike is ultimately a Microsoftie. 🙂 but Mike provides a link to Blake Ross’s blog (a Firefox developer). Blake has this to say:
Google lost me today.
Google is now displaying “tips” that point searchers to Google Calendar, Blogger and Picasa for any search phrase that includes “calendar” (e.g. Yahoo calendar), “blog” and “photo sharing,” respectively. This is clearly bad for competitors, and it’s also a bad sign for Google. But I generally support anything that benefits users, including monopolistic packaging. I believe, for instance, that shipping Internet Explorer with Windows was a good move.
Google is predicated on the idea that the democratic structure of the Web will push the cream to the top. Search for “photo sharing” and you should already get the highest quality services. According to Google, Picasa is not one of them. These “tips,” then, can only be a tacit admission of failure: either the company does not believe in its own search technology, or it does not believe its products are good enough to rise to the top organically. I’d guess the latter.
Paul Thurrott linked to this article on Blake Ross’s blog and added his own comments at the end:
This is just the tip of the iceberg. From Google’s sad IE 7 toolbar that actually prevents users from changing the browser’s search preferences to the EULA in Google’s phishing filter that admits it makes no attempt at all to perserve your privacy, Google is pure evil. That makes their corporate motto both ironic and hypocritical, but mostly it makes us all chumps for using their services. And yes, I use GMail. I’m an idiot.
My take on this: I think Google should simply abandon its “Don’t Be Evil” motto. I don’t know if it’s possible for any company to survive in corporate America without being evil to a certain extent. Yes, Google is evil, just like Microsoft or Yahoo!, but they make some great products, so, big deal.