Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[kinboshi]

"Profile-Raising", "Brand-awareness" advertising does not require hits. Vodafone, GE, Sony, Honda, Coca-Cola, da de da, would pay an absolute fortune to get on that home-page. But google refuse to allow it, costing themselves billions of $$'s per year. Which I think is a marvellous thing. Don't you?

And risk losing even bigger billions when people switch to someone else because "the ad makes the page load too slowly"

Google tend to do things for 2 reasons - to sell ads on the space, or to gather information about people to allow them to sell more targeted ads.

In most ways they are quite superb. And free-to-user.

FYP

Google aren't philanthropists.

"AdWords is Google's flagship advertising product and main source of revenue ($16.4 billion in 2007)."

http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

[Bongo]

Free in terms of doesn't cost anything, but there is a cost in privacy. Much like supermarket loyalty cards.

...and their results can be manipulated - if you have the resources.

Interestingly it's this that's likely to keep google on top of the tree. Most web pages are built to try and rank highly on google, so how does anyone else have a chance to do search better when everyone else is marching to google's drum?

[tikay]

"Profile-Raising", "Brand-awareness" advertising does not require hits. Vodafone, GE, Sony, Honda, Coca-Cola, da de da, would pay an absolute fortune to get on that home-page. But google refuse to allow it, costing themselves billions of $$'s per year. Which I think is a marvellous thing. Don't you?

And risk losing even bigger billions when people switch to someone else because "the ad makes the page load too slowly"

Google tend to do things for 2 reasons - to sell ads on the space, or to gather information about people to allow them to sell more targeted ads.

In most ways they are quite superb. And free-to-user.

FYP

Google aren't philanthropists.

"AdWords is Google's flagship advertising product and main source of revenue ($16.4 billion in 2007)."

http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

I never suggested they were. They are extremely aggressive commercially. But it's completely free to me, & almost everyone takes their superb product for granted. We no longer need telephone books, Yellow Pages, maps, atlases, (that must be incorrectly spelt?) reference books, dictionaries, or a million other things. It's a stunningly efficient gateway to a world of knowledge.

[kinboshi]

Free in terms of doesn't cost anything, but there is a cost in privacy. Much like supermarket loyalty cards.

...and their results can be manipulated - if you have the resources.

Interestingly it's this that's likely to keep google on top of the tree. Most web pages are built to try and rank highly on google, so how does anyone else have a chance to do search better when everyone else is marching to google's drum?

Well, it is and it isn't.

The ability to subvert the results pages means that the results aren't necessarily the most relevant to the user.  This is a bad thing, and it's the relevancy of Google's searches that have meant that it's become synonymous with 'search' on the web.  Sometimes the relevancy of the results aren't brilliant, but the ineptitude of Microsoft and Yahoo! to provide a valid alternative means that Google has less competition.

In the US, Google accounts for a little over 60% of the search market.  In the UK, it's over 80% and rising.  

[kinboshi]

"Profile-Raising", "Brand-awareness" advertising does not require hits. Vodafone, GE, Sony, Honda, Coca-Cola, da de da, would pay an absolute fortune to get on that home-page. But google refuse to allow it, costing themselves billions of $$'s per year. Which I think is a marvellous thing. Don't you?

And risk losing even bigger billions when people switch to someone else because "the ad makes the page load too slowly"

Google tend to do things for 2 reasons - to sell ads on the space, or to gather information about people to allow them to sell more targeted ads.

In most ways they are quite superb. And free-to-user.

FYP

Google aren't philanthropists.

"AdWords is Google's flagship advertising product and main source of revenue ($16.4 billion in 2007)."

http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

I never suggested they were. They are extremely aggressive commercially. But it's completely free to me, & almost everyone takes their superb product for granted. We no longer need telephone books, Yellow Pages, maps, atlases, (that must be incorrectly spelt?) reference books, dictionaries, or a million other things. It's a stunningly efficient gateway to a world of knowledge.

...and you're certain that the information being presented isn't that of the highest bidder and is completely 'neutral'?

[tikay]

Free in terms of doesn't cost anything, but there is a cost in privacy. Much like supermarket loyalty cards.

...and their results can be manipulated - if you have the resources.

Interestingly it's this that's likely to keep google on top of the tree. Most web pages are built to try and rank highly on google, so how does anyone else have a chance to do search better when everyone else is marching to google's drum?

Ah, now the truth emerges. As with Microsoft, everyone despises successful businesses, in fact the EC tries to legislate aganst them. Because they are too good at what they do. I'm curious how that came to be a crime?

Market forces, & the laws of supply & demand, will never be beaten by the EC or anyone else. But t's a shame that a gullible public fall for the EC's rhetoric.

[tikay]

"Profile-Raising", "Brand-awareness" advertising does not require hits. Vodafone, GE, Sony, Honda, Coca-Cola, da de da, would pay an absolute fortune to get on that home-page. But google refuse to allow it, costing themselves billions of $$'s per year. Which I think is a marvellous thing. Don't you?

And risk losing even bigger billions when people switch to someone else because "the ad makes the page load too slowly"

Google tend to do things for 2 reasons - to sell ads on the space, or to gather information about people to allow them to sell more targeted ads.

In most ways they are quite superb. And free-to-user.

FYP

Google aren't philanthropists.

"AdWords is Google's flagship advertising product and main source of revenue ($16.4 billion in 2007)."

http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

I never suggested they were. They are extremely aggressive commercially. But it's completely free to me, & almost everyone takes their superb product for granted. We no longer need telephone books, Yellow Pages, maps, atlases, (that must be incorrectly spelt?) reference books, dictionaries, or a million other things. It's a stunningly efficient gateway to a world of knowledge.

...and you're certain that the information being presented isn't that of the highest bidder and is completely 'neutral'?

I neither know nor care - I can find what I want, quickly, & easily. That's all that matters to me. It's called "fit for purpose".

[kinboshi]

"Profile-Raising", "Brand-awareness" advertising does not require hits. Vodafone, GE, Sony, Honda, Coca-Cola, da de da, would pay an absolute fortune to get on that home-page. But google refuse to allow it, costing themselves billions of $$'s per year. Which I think is a marvellous thing. Don't you?

And risk losing even bigger billions when people switch to someone else because "the ad makes the page load too slowly"

Google tend to do things for 2 reasons - to sell ads on the space, or to gather information about people to allow them to sell more targeted ads.

In most ways they are quite superb. And free-to-user.

FYP

Google aren't philanthropists.

"AdWords is Google's flagship advertising product and main source of revenue ($16.4 billion in 2007)."

http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

I never suggested they were. They are extremely aggressive commercially. But it's completely free to me, & almost everyone takes their superb product for granted. We no longer need telephone books, Yellow Pages, maps, atlases, (that must be incorrectly spelt?) reference books, dictionaries, or a million other things. It's a stunningly efficient gateway to a world of knowledge.

...and you're certain that the information being presented isn't that of the highest bidder and is completely 'neutral'?

I neither know nor care - I can find what I want, quickly, & easily. That's all that matters to me. It's called "fit for purpose".

You'd complain quickly enough if the government decided what information you see or don't see, wouldn't you?

[Bongo]

Ah, now the truth emerges. As with Microsoft, everyone despises successful businesses, in fact the EC tries to legislate aganst them. Because they are too good at what they do. I'm curious how that came to be a crime?

Market forces, & the laws of supply & demand, will never be beaten by the EC or anyone else. But t's a shame that a gullible public fall for the EC's rhetoric.

I think you're mistaken, I don't despise google but sometimes worry about the amount of power they have and the information they hold about everyone - sometimes without their consent or knowledge.

[MereNovice]

Free in terms of doesn't cost anything, but there is a cost in privacy. Much like supermarket loyalty cards.

...and their results can be manipulated - if you have the resources.

Interestingly it's this that's likely to keep google on top of the tree. Most web pages are built to try and rank highly on google, so how does anyone else have a chance to do search better when everyone else is marching to google's drum?

Ah, now the truth emerges. As with Microsoft, everyone despises successful businesses, in fact the EC tries to legislate aganst them. Because they are too good at what they do. I'm curious how that came to be a crime?

Market forces, & the laws of supply & demand, will never be beaten by the EC or anyone else. But t's a shame that a gullible public fall for the EC's rhetoric.

I'm not sure how the above statement can be used as evidence of despising Google (or any other company). To use a VERY bad analogy (because I think this debate is missing something without one), it's like saying that trains in this country tend to be built with a certain wheel width because that's how far apart the tracks are laid. It would be very hard for someone to start a rail network with wider tracks because the existing trains wouldn't run very well on them.

[kinboshi]

Also, I don't see anyone despising Google.

[Karabiner]

We we're on the subject of "fit for purpose" Tony, how are you feeling after your weekend's exertions ?

[tikay]

Ah, now the truth emerges. As with Microsoft, everyone despises successful businesses, in fact the EC tries to legislate aganst them. Because they are too good at what they do. I'm curious how that came to be a crime?

Market forces, & the laws of supply & demand, will never be beaten by the EC or anyone else. But t's a shame that a gullible public fall for the EC's rhetoric.

I think you're mistaken, I don't despise google but sometimes worry about the amount of power they have and the information they hold about everyone - sometimes without their consent or knowledge.

You really worry about that? You need to get out more. There's far more troubling matters to worry about.

[Bongo]

True, but it is my livelihood too so I plead mitigating circumstances.

I imagine Kin has it worse - what would happen if google took an instant dislike to his site?

[tikay]

We we're on the subject of "fit for purpose" Tony, how are you feeling after your weekend's exertions ?

I'm very much better, thank you Ralph, though I did find the APAT weekend physically tiring, as I always do, even though I don't do anythng really. But whatever ailed me last week - & it was quite bad - is well on the mend, & I feel much, much, better. I need to return to this subject at some stage, as I upset some very dear & special friends by my refusal to go see the quack, but that's anther story, later maybe.

I'm resting up for a few days right now, just taking it easy, & I can feel the enthusiasm for life coming back. I did nothing yesterday, just wrote my Blog & played the Luton jobbie, & apart from a Telecon, I've chilled all day today, after not getting up until after midday.

So, anyway, here's a few pics from a quite magnificent APAT weekend.
(To follow).