or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google gave original Mac designer free rein on new Google+ UI
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google gave original Mac designer free rein on new Google+ UI

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
Google's new Google+ social networking project departs from the company's usually spartan interfaces with an animated UI designed by original Apple Macintosh team member Andy Hertzfeld.

Update: Hertzfeld has written a Google+ post giving credit to his colleagues who also contributed to the service's user interface. While he admits to having "almost single-handedly" designed the Circles editor, he also notes that he wasn't responsible for the design of the entire product. "Now some people are saying that I'm responsible for the broad visual refresh now rolling out across Google, which couldn't be further from the truth - in fact, I'm not even sure I like it," he wrote.

The search giant announced its Google+ endeavor on Tuesday. After the design of the service quickly drew praise, it was discovered that Hertzfeld played a significant role in developing it.

A self-described "Software Wizard" while at Apple, Hertzfeld joined the company in 1979 and was instrumental in the design of the Macintosh's graphical user interface. After leaving Apple in 1984, he co-founded several companies and founded Mac history website folklore.org, before starting work at Google in 2005.

The company appointed Hertzfeld as the design leader for Google+, which was codenamed "Emerald Sea." Given that Google is known for its stripped-down design ethos, Hertzfeld has at times felt "constrained," Steven Levy
post #2 of 46
Wow, Google with design flare! What a change. I guess everything they do comes back to Apple in the end.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #3 of 46
You wont catch me joining a social network created by google ever.
post #4 of 46
I'm liking what I see so far.

But the chances of it getting my wife away from Facebook? Slim.

It's one of those catch-22 things.

Even if it is better you aren't going to move unless your friends do.

Plus do folks really want to manage all these circles? What if you post something to the wrong circle? It's the reply to all fiasco all over again.

With Facebook you know everyone is watching so always have that "filter" on.

And what if you see a photo in one circle and want to tag it for a friend in another circle? How does that work?
post #5 of 46
Circles combats one of the major issues I've had with social networking sites. Good job.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #6 of 46
Facebook is getting annoying with the "liking links without permission" feature which is causing everybody on my Friend's List to "like" various porn and spam websites since some sites are abusing that functionality.

Google's been pretty slick with their products thus far, so I'll have to check it out.
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trip1ex View Post

I'm liking what I see so far.

But the chances of it getting my wife away from Facebook? Slim.

Still anything that has a chance of killing facebook must be cheered. I may have occasional vague distaste for some google products but I despise the book of faces. Myspace died so clearly it is possible, but you're right - facebook won't be easy to dethrone.
post #8 of 46
Twitter said no, Facebook said no.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Sparks tracks a user's interests and recommends content it thinks he or she will like.

Dumb people who can't figure out what they like or want all by themselves will like that feature I'm sure. Soon, even lobotomized people will be able to surf the internet, since they won't have to choose anything or make any decisions for themselves.

Sometimes when I search for something in Google, especially foreign words, the retarded Google algorithm will override my request and it will show the results for something else that I didn't ask for. They're arrogantly assuming that I misspelled my search query and it shows me the results for a similar word that has more hits, when what I really wanted was exactly what I was searching for. I don't need the help of a dumb computer in the cloud helping me out, especially when I didn't request it.
post #10 of 46
deleted
post #11 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow, Google with design flare! What a change. I guess everything do comes back to Apple in the end.

Wrong.

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....
post #12 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Wrong.

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....

good design by hiring former Apple employees and putting them in charge
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


Sometimes when I search for something in Google, especially foreign words, the retarded Google algorithm will override my request and it will show the results for something else that I didn't ask for. They're arrogantly assuming that I misspelled my search query and it shows me the results for a similar word that has more hits, when what I really wanted was exactly what I was searching for. I don't need the help of a dumb computer in the cloud helping me out, especially when I didn't request it.

Chill out, it's a hugely helpful feature that stops you having to correct your typos every time you hit a Google search. It saves Google millions of wasted searches a day, probably trillions a year. If you want exactly what you typed in there's an 'arrogance' removal link underneath the search field when you get you results. Only a very unusual word would wrongly be corrected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Wrong.

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....

It's been designed by someone who spent 26 years at Apple. It says so clearly in the article. He's being silly, probably deliberately, but he has a point of sorts. Kool-aide notwithstanding.
post #14 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

It's been designed by someone who spent 26 years at Apple. It says so clearly in the article. He's being silly, probably deliberately, but he has a point of sorts. Kool-aide notwithstanding.

It was more like 5 years - Hertzfeld left Apple shortly after Macintosh was released.
post #15 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Wrong.

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....

WebOS design? Google+ design? Head Twitter app designer? Flipboard? LinkedIn? Pixar?

There is little question that design is heavily influenced by Apple's products and their alums. If you look at most of the ex-Googlers, the companies are very net centered and less design centered. Twitter, Foursquare and Instgram come to mind. Each impressive but Apple really does show off its strength in teach and understanding design.

Though I have no idea what happened to Android.
post #16 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Wrong.

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....

Andy was key at Apple, I think I was perhaps too subtle for you. Andy's signature is inside the case of a Mac I have on the shelf.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

Chill out, it's a hugely helpful feature that stops you having to correct your typos every time you hit a Google search. It saves Google millions of wasted searches a day, probably trillions a year. If you want exactly what you typed in there's an 'arrogance' removal link underneath the search field when you get you results. Only a very unusual word would wrongly be corrected.

I'm chillin' like a villain, thank you very much. I can fully understand that there is some mechanism in place which identifies typos and helps sloppy people and people with fat fingers get more accurate search results. I just think that there should be an option where you could turn off all assistance if that's what somebody wanted.
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow, Google with design flare!

Flare? Does that mean it's going to crash and burn?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Still anything that has a chance of killing facebook must be cheered.

Just about anything but Google. Google has demonstrated a clear disregard for privacy or intellectual property and I refuse to feed the beast.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #19 of 46
Meh. "Circles"??? MobileMe's soon to be retired Web 2.0 interface is way better, far more interactive.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm chillin' like a villain, thank you very much. I can fully understand that there is some mechanism in place which identifies typos and helps sloppy people and people with fat fingers get more accurate search results. I just think that there should be an option where you could turn off all assistance if that's what somebody wanted.

Put your search in quotes and that should solve your problem.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Put your search in quotes and that should solve your problem.

I already use quotes when searching for a specific phrase that contains more than one word. "hot redhead woman" gives completely different results than hot redhead woman, for example. That I do know about. That was just an example. I obviously have no interest in searching for hot redhead women online.

Do quotes make a difference on a single word though?

Is there a difference between apple and "apple" ?

I just tried it myself and I found out that there is a difference, I didn't know that applying quotes to a single word made a difference. I guess that I will apply quotes to all of my search phrases from now on, even if it's a single word.

Thanks.
post #22 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

It means that good design does actually exist outside of Apple.

When they hire Apple engineers.

Quote:
If you can't see that.....then keep drinking the kool-aide....

It's better than the motor oil you're drinking, at least.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #23 of 46
Too late. The ship has sailed on this and Google was left standing on the pier.

Just like iTunes will never be dislodged as the dominant music site, Facebook will never be knocked off its perch in the social arena. It's good enough and people are too lazy to bother learning the ins and outs of a new social website, much less go through the agony of porting all their personal content.

I love the Circles feature though, but guess what, Facebook will just copy it.
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Too late. The ship has sailed on this and Google was left standing on the pier.

Just like iTunes will never be dislodged as the dominant music site, Facebook will never be knocked off its perch in the social arena. It's good enough and people are too lazy to bother learning the ins and outs of a new social website, much less go through the agony of porting all their personal content.

I love the Circles feature though, but guess what, Facebook will just copy it.

I remember hearing the same thing from avid myspace users back in the day, They'd NEVER leave myspace, because FB was for old people to socialize.....Now they're all on facebook, and myspace is "old" and "crappy".
post #25 of 46
I was starting to think that it was more rumors. But Google did make Circles. I wonder if any of the stuff I sent in my proposals to Google 2+ years ago is on Circles. No matter, I think Apple would like to hear from me. I like that Google is actually trying to make Circles fun, or so it seems. Has anyone tried out Circles, if so let me know what it is like.
thanks,
lance damon bliss
7slocal
post #26 of 46
I'm having a good chuckle at the Google +1 count on these articles! It's like the Google fanboys are the only ones +1'ing stuff

FYI guys, it's not supposed to work like that. The reason Google is getting into social is because the social graph is the next big search engine optimization. All you're doing is polluting the Google search results with an overly positive Google spin.

If you want to help out Google you should be +1'ing well written informative articles, not just the stuff you "like".


For the record...
Adobe courts video professionals in wake of uproar over Apple's Final Cut Pro X
+1 count = 0

Apple's iOS more secure than Google's Android, says Symantec
+1 count = 1

Needham sees Apple shipping 30M iPads, 17M Macs in 2011
+1 count = 0

Xserve users report performance issues after Apple's Mac OS X 10.6.8 update
+1 count = 0

Android device activations now exceed 500,000 per day
+1 count = 7

Google gave original Mac designer free rein on new Google+ UI
+1 count = 19
post #27 of 46
Jus' sayin'.
post #28 of 46
Social sites are just effing hangouts. My homegirl has like 700 friends but only less than .05% ever write stuff. Huh!
post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Circles combats one of the major issues I've had with social networking sites. Good job.

You can do the exact same thing with Facebook, but it takes a lot more work.
post #30 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You can do the exact same thing with Facebook, but it takes a lot more work.

Watch that change in about three months!

Predictions... Facebook will improve the groups UI within three months and the communications platform before the end of the year. My money is on Skype integration.
post #31 of 46
This is just another example, in a long and continuing series, of Google tools designed to mine personal data from you (with your explicit but frequently underinformed permission) so that they can add to the personal profile they keep on you. Who you are, what you look like, who your friends are, what you say, what you buy, where you go, etc., etc., etc. They then sell that information to people who wish to pitch more crap to you.

Google is in the advertising business. They don't sell anything (but advertising...), they don't make anything. EVERYTHING they do is designed to give THEM more opportunities to gather more of your personal information so they can sell that information to others.

No other company in the world is as focused on gathering data on you. The tools they provide, slick as they may be, are the adult equivalent of the creepy guy your parents warned you about, offering candy to small children...Google+ looks like a big fat lollipop to me!
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhayes117 View Post

This is just another example, in a long and continuing series, of Google tools designed to mine personal data from you (with your explicit but frequently underinformed permission) so that they can add to the personal profile they keep on you. Who you are, what you look like, who your friends are, what you say, what you buy, where you go, etc., etc., etc. They then sell that information to people who wish to pitch more crap to you.

Yes, because Facebook hasn't, won't, and never will sell other's information. Deep within Facebook the goal was not profits or to make it big time, but just to connect family and friends and create a loving connection free from the worlds of corporate grasp.

/s
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexus View Post

Yes, because Facebook hasn't, won't, and never will sell other's information. Deep within Facebook the goal was not profits or to make it big time, but just to connect family and friends and create a loving connection free from the worlds of corporate grasp.

/s

Nothing in my post says others don't also do this. Personally I think Facebook is equally offensive and I don't use it.

That said, Google is far and away the worst offender. Virtually all of the wonderful free tools they provide (and I confess I still use some...) are designed to gather more information from you and provide them more opportunities to stuff targeted advertising in your face. Many organizations gather personal information as part of their operations and provide that information (for some form of recompense) to their business partners. In most cases (Apple and MS for example) it's ancillary to their primary profit centers, hardware and/or software. In the case of Google, it IS their primary profit center.
post #34 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhayes117 View Post

Google is in the advertising business. They don't sell anything (but advertising...), they don't make anything.

BS. They make software. You know, GMail, Google Maps, Android, Chrome, Picassa, etc.

Quote:
No other company in the world is as focused on gathering data on you. The tools they provide, slick as they may be, are the adult equivalent of the creepy guy your parents warned you about, offering candy to small children...Google+ looks like a big fat lollipop to me!

Sorry, but comparing Google to a child molester is kind of sick. Google isn't going to pull you into a van and touch you inappropriately. They're not going to come creeping into your house late at night. They're not going to leave you emotionally scarred for the rest of your life.
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhayes117 View Post

Virtually all of the wonderful free tools they provide (and I confess I still use some...) are designed to gather more information from you and provide them more opportunities to stuff targeted advertising in your face.

Please provide an example of a google service(except youtube) that is insistent on engorging your screen with unwanted ads. Last Time I used Google products(10 minutes ago), the only ads appearing were:

1. Relevant to my interest(though some of them were bad sites)
and
2. Non-intrusive, usually being placed on the side or some small corner.
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

BS. They make software. You know, GMail, Google Maps, Android, Chrome, Picassa, etc.



Sorry, but comparing Google to a child molester is kind of sick. Google isn't going to pull you into a van and touch you inappropriately. They're not going to come creeping into your house late at night. They're not going to leave you emotionally scarred for the rest of your life.

Concur that they do make some software although much of what "they" make is really software made by others that they have purchased and repurposed. My inaccuracy.

As for the other analogy, my intent was to convey that their intentions are not necessarily what they appear and are, in my opinion creepy, just as the creep enticing small children with candy appears to be a nice man who simply loves children. Google is luring you, the trusting adult-child with their toys (gmail, picasa, android, etc.), not because they are benevolent and want you to have good toys, but because they want you to yield information they can sell to others. Don't read more into it than that. I don't know about you, but recognition of the fact that everything google does is designed to get you to yield personal information is pretty creepy to me.
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhayes117 View Post

. . . Many organizations gather personal information as part of their operations and provide that information (for some form of recompense) to their business partners. In most cases (Apple and MS for example) it's ancillary to their primary profit centers, hardware and/or software. In the case of Google, it IS their primary profit center.

You do know the definition of FUD, correct? Where have you read that Google sells any personal information about you to anyone willing to pay for it? They do not.

Any user statistics they have gathered based on how or what you search for are intended to allow the delivery of more relevant advertising and/or results based on what is likely to interest you. In my case I have no interest in exercise for women, and I don't recall seeing ads for that in my searches. My wife has tho. But I have been researching the market for a new truck. And I have seen some ads from Ford and Toyota in the past couple of days in the sidebar of some searches. Since I'm interested in buying a new vehicle I don't find them intrusive. But Google is not selling my name/address, my son or daughters birthdates, the size condom I use or the fact I don't like broccoli, to Ford and Toyota. Google retains the user stats and does the matching and delivery of the ads.

From Google's Privacy Policy:

Google only shares personal information with other companies or individuals outside of Google in the following limited circumstances:

We have your consent. We require opt-in consent for the sharing of any sensitive personal information.
We provide such information to our subsidiaries, affiliated companies or other trusted businesses or persons for the purpose of processing personal information on our behalf. We require that these parties agree to process such information based on our instructions and in compliance with this Privacy Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.
We have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request, (b) enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations thereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, or (d) protect against harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public as required or permitted by law.

If Google becomes involved in a merger, acquisition, or any form of sale of some or all of its assets, we will ensure the confidentiality of any personal information involved in such transactions and provide notice before personal information is transferred and becomes subject to a different privacy policy.
Information security

We take appropriate security measures to protect against unauthorized access to or unauthorized alteration, disclosure or destruction of data. These include internal reviews of our data collection, storage and processing practices and security measures, including appropriate encryption and physical security measures to guard against unauthorized access to systems where we store personal data.

We restrict access to personal information to Google employees, contractors and agents who need to know that information in order to process it on our behalf. These individuals are bound by confidentiality obligations and may be subject to discipline, including termination and criminal prosecution, if they fail to meet these obligations.

The full Privacy Policy link is here:
http://www.google.com/privacy/privacy-policy.html
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #38 of 46
FWIW, Apple appears as likely, or perhaps even more so, than Google to share your sensitive personal data with 3rd parties.

From Apple's Privacy Policy:

Disclosure to Third Parties

At times Apple may make certain personal information available to strategic partners that work with Apple to provide products and services, or that help Apple market to customers. For example, when you purchase and activate your iPhone, you authorize Apple and its carrier to exchange the information you provide during the activation process to carry out service. If you are approved for service, your account will be governed by Apple and its carriers respective privacy policies. Personal information will only be shared by Apple to provide or improve our products, services and advertising; it will not be shared with third parties for their marketing purposes.

http://www.apple.com/privacy/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #39 of 46
deleted
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You do know the definition of FUD, correct? Where have you read that Google sells any personal information about you to anyone willing to pay for it? They do not.

Any user statistics they have gathered based on how or what you search for are intended to allow the delivery of more relevant advertising and/or results based on what is likely to interest you. In my case I have no interest in exercise for women, and I don't recall seeing ads for that in my searches. My wife has tho. But I have been researching the market for a new truck. And I have seen some ads from Ford and Toyota in the past couple of days in the sidebar of some searches. Since I'm interested in buying a new vehicle I don't find them intrusive. But Google is not selling my name/address, my son or daughters birthdates, the size condom I use or the fact I don't like broccoli, to Ford and Toyota. Google retains the user stats and does the matching and delivery of the ads.

I know full well the meaning of FUD. I also appreciate prudent realism.

If you will read my earlier post, you will see that I acknowledge that Google asks for your permission. My question back to you, how many people do you really know, outside of a tech savvy community or those directly concerned with internet privacy, really read the myriad privacy notices and end user licenses they are bombarded with...many of which are in legalese and therefore, nearly indecipherable by mere mortals? To google's credit, theirs is more intelligible than many.

"Google only shares personal information with other companies or individuals outside of Google in the following limited circumstances:

-- We have your consent. I suspect that many (most) people give it for the reasons I have stated above. I have only anecdotal evidence but, as an example, look at the whole issue of Apple and magazine subscriber information sharing. Many publishers have agreed to come on board because they've discovered that subscribers ARE willing to Opt-in and share their information.

-- We require opt-in consent for the sharing of any sensitive personal information. Is the fact that you like Ford trucks versus Toyotas sensitive personal information? Is it sensitive information if you searched for "erectile dysfunction"? You might consider it sensitive. How about if you searched for "bankruptcy"? Think your mortgage company would care? Truthfully, I don't think google is out there broadcasting that John Smith is at 123 Main St, Anytown, USA or that John's SSAN is 123-45-6789. I'm not so sure they aren't sharing the fact that IP address 168.0.01 is having sexual functionality problems due to impending bankruptcy...that's how you get those nicely target ads...

Ever wonder how the little unobtrusive ads that pop up are so uncannily accurate? Think they really got that all from one little search query? From your replies I suspect you are a significantly tech-savvy user so I think the answer is no. They put it together from a series of pieces of information they have gathered from your use of all of the "free" tools they provide. Think about the size of the portfolio they might have on you...and those with whom you associate.

Ever ask yourself why google would be so benevolent as to provide such an array of tools...for free? Why go toe to toe with Apple on phones or computers? Why do the same with IE, Firefox, Safari, and Opera? What's wrong with Hotmail or YahooMail that they needed to create gmail? No business I know spends millions of $s designing, providing, and supporting products that provide no direct payback. google gets its payback by using those same tools to harvest information and to in turn sell that information (directly, with your consent, or in aggregate) to companies looking to target their products. Do you really think the only way they make revenue is by selling sidebar ads on their search page? Do you really think the only time information you provided to google comes back to you is on the internet? I don't. They have a goldmine. Look at all the tools they provide: gmail--who you communicate with and what you discuss, picasa--tagged photos of you and the people with whom you associate, Talk--more detail on with whom you associate and what you discuss, Maps--where you live, where you are going, Android--everything you do with your cell phone, chrome computing platform--same thing with your computer... Here's a link to the google products page. Take some time to look through all the products they provide "for free" and then think about why would they be so generous? What is their take? How could they use this app to gather information (since that's what they do for a living).

http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/products/index.html

Finally, get your self an app like "Little Snitch" or install "Ghostery" on your browsers and see how many times you find your computer phoning home to the google mothership.

Bottom-line, feel free to continue to deceive yourself about google's magnanimity. They're a business and I don't believe for a second that they give a damn about you or me personally. They'll do what they must to try and stay off the law's RADAR but nothing more. Regardless of whether they are selling sensitive personal information directly or indirectly, I'm pretty sure they have a digital portfolio on each of us that is greater than any other single organization on Earth, outside of your own personal household. That creeps me out so I choose prudent realism.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google gave original Mac designer free rein on new Google+ UI