or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google blames supposedly buried iTunes links on technical difficulties, fix on the way
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google blames supposedly buried iTunes links on technical difficulties, fix on the way

post #1 of 75
Thread Starter 
Hours after media outlets caught wind of a potential search issue relating to direct iTunes App Store links, Google has issued a statement saying the problem has to do with fetching pages from iTunes' web servers.

Duplicate
As noted by Search Engine Land, a Google search restricted to Apple's iTunes server for "WhatsApp" returns regional results separately.


The search giant told The Verge late Tuesday that a server issue is to blame for a problem in which searches for iOS apps buried direct iTunes links in pages of results.

Google's statement:

We've been having some issues fetching pages from the iTunes web servers, and as a result some people may have had problems finding iTunes apps in search easily. We're working with the team there to ensure search users can find what they're looking for.


According to Danny Sullivan from Search Engine Land, the issue could be a "duplicate content problem" on Apple's side.

"With duplicate content, you have two or more pages that are virtually identical to each other," Sullivan said. "That can confuse search engines and sometimes have the effect of 'splitting the vote' when it comes to ranking, so that neither page wins."

However, the fault may not entirely lie with Apple, as an identical search on Microsoft's Bing returns no duplicate content.

Ouriel Ohayon, co-founder of AppsFire, first discovered the anomaly earlier on Tuesday after noticing a direct iTunes link to his WhatsApp messaging app was difficult to find when doing a basic Google search.
post #2 of 75
This was the most likely reason.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #3 of 75
They found a way to blame Apple.
post #4 of 75
Difference between Apple and Google.. Apple admits when they did wrong .. Google just blames everyone else!!
post #5 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The search giant told The Verge late Tuesday that a server issue is to blame for a problem in which searches for iOS apps buried direct iTunes links in pages of results.

Of course. It was a server issue - the issue is that Google's servers were programmed to downgrade Apple pages.

Does ANYONE believe the garbage that Google says any more (other than the paid shills, of course)?
"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 #6 of 75
Google is being evil as usual.

The European Union should investigate Google on this latest attempt to shore up its Monopoly.
post #7 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Of course. It was a server issue - the issue is that Google's servers were programmed to downgrade Apple pages.

Does ANYONE believe the garbage that Google says any more (other than the paid shills, of course)?

You are so quick to discharge any hypothesis if there isn't a mountain of verifiable proof to back it up but now you're claiming it was done maliciously by Google. Does not compute!

Consider what you're suggesting. Google had some meeting where they conspired to make anything by Apple not sure up for several pages just to reverse that a few hours later. Do you think they didn't expect anyone to notice that one of the most heavily searched for domain names and products on the internet was coming up with bad results? Do you think Google expected the world to suddenly forget Apple, the tech company with the most mindshare, to be instantly forgotten? They rely on their searches to be accurate and if they are not they can lose that position to competitors. If they put anything about Apple several pages back people would go to other engines, not stop buying and using Apple's products. No matter what the scenario this hurts Google.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #8 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You are so quick to discharge any hypothesis if there isn't a mountain of verifiable proof to back it up but now you're claiming it was done maliciously by Google. Does not compute!

Consider what you're suggesting. Google had some meeting where they conspired to make anything by Apple not sure up for several pages just to reverse that a few hours later. Do you think they didn't expect anyone to notice that one of the most heavily searched for domain names and products on the internet was coming up with bad results? Do you think Google expected the world to suddenly forget Apple, the tech company with the most mindshare, to be instantly forgotten? They rely on their searches to be accurate and if they are not they can lose that position to competitors. If they put anything about Apple several pages back people would go to other engines, not stop buying and using Apple's products. No matter what the scenario this hurts Google.

I doubt this was an actual conspiracy, but it does seem like Google always makes sure its own products or services appear high on its rankings. I think this is a conflict of interest and abuse of market power, and should raise antitrust concerns. This is just the latest example where Google makes sure its service is ranked higher than a competing one.
post #9 of 75

Translation:  We didn't think anyone would notice or call us out on it.

 

This from the same company that claimed they couldn't fix the bogus Santorum "definition" at the top of their search results during the last election.

 

"Don't be evil", my arse.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #10 of 75

Another reason I no longer use Google

2004 PowerBook G4, 2005 PowerMac G5, 2008 MacPro, iPhone 4, 2011 MacBook Pro, White iPhone 4s

Reply

2004 PowerBook G4, 2005 PowerMac G5, 2008 MacPro, iPhone 4, 2011 MacBook Pro, White iPhone 4s

Reply
post #11 of 75
I noticed this several weeks ago but thought that the few instances I noted were isolated.

Given the various nefarious practices in which Google has previously engaged I am inclined to believe this was not a server error.
post #12 of 75
I hate to say this but perhaps it is time Apple considered purchasing a search engine.
post #13 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

I doubt this was an actual conspiracy, but it does seem like Google always makes sure its own products or services appear high on its rankings. I think this is a conflict of interest and abuse of market power, and should raise antitrust concerns. This is just the latest example where Google makes sure its service is ranked higher than a competing one.

A lot of their services are very popular so I don't think that's unreasonable. I have personally noticed over the years that Google's own services don't always come up first. The first time I noticed this was with their Maps. I distinctly recall MapQuest ranking higher for quite some time after I had moved to Google Maps.

That isn't to say that there isn't some finagling going on make Google's result look more attractive — they certainly have done some very dubious things over the years — but to all of a sudden push Apple's results back a half dozen pages makes absolutely no sense for a business standpoint. It could be an asshole engineer that maliciously made a change on his own behalf and Google is covering up that fact to save some face in how easily results can be manipulated (just a scenario; I have no idea how easy it is to do that) but it's certainly not Google the company sitting around looking for ways to not include Apple in their search results.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #14 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

A lot of their services are very popular so I don't think that's unreasonable. I have personally noticed over the years that Google's own services don't always come up first. The first time I noticed this was with their Maps. I distinctly recall MapQuest ranking higher for quite some time after I had moved to Google Maps.

That isn't to say that there isn't some finagling going on make Google's result look more attractive — they certainly have done some very dubious things over the years — but to all of a sudden push Apple's results back a half dozen pages makes absolutely no sense for a business standpoint. It could be an asshole engineer that maliciously made a change on his own behalf and Google is covering up that fact to save some face in how easily results can be manipulated (just a scenario; I have no idea how easy it is to do that) but it's certainly not Google the company sitting around looking for ways to not include Apple in their search results.

I agree. I more think Google is potentially guilty of inflating its own ranks, and am specifically referring to the whole Google+ thing from a while back.

The potential for abuse is too high, proof or not, and Google really needs to be split into a Search Company and a Services Company.
post #15 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You are so quick to discharge any hypothesis if there isn't a mountain of verifiable proof to back it up but now you're claiming it was done maliciously by Google. Does not compute!

Let's see if we can figure this out:

1. Google has many years of search experience and presumably knows what they're doing.

2. It just happens that results of their largest competitor in the mobile space (and, arguably, the largest threat to their overall business) sees its results downgraded and Google's competing products upgraded - even though Apple's products are significantly more popular.

3. This only started appearing a couple of years after Google started competing with Apple (it never happened before) and a year or so after Google started facing serious legal issues with Apple.

4. It doesn't happen to anyone else - just Apple.

Yeah, I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Some gremlin climbed into their system and upset the search results without any direction from Google management. Absolutely a coincidence as you're implying.

Right.
"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 #16 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

This was the most likely reason.

I guess that is why Bing has the same pro... Oh, wait. Bing does not have the same problem.
post #17 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Let's see if we can figure this out:

1. Google has many years of search experience and presumably knows what they're doing.

2. It just happens that results of their largest competitor in the mobile space (and, arguably, the largest threat to their overall business) sees its results downgraded and Google's competing products upgraded - even though Apple's products are significantly more popular.

3. This only started appearing a couple of years after Google started competing with Apple (it never happened before) and a year or so after Google started facing serious legal issues with Apple.

4. It doesn't happen to anyone else - just Apple.

Yeah, I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Some gremlin climbed into their system and upset the search results without any direction from Google management. Absolutely a coincidence as you're implying.

Right.

1) I've bee getting email from Apple successfully (for the most part) for more than a decade so presumably Apple knows what their doing and yet they still have email delivery issues. So it's just a temporary inconvenience when it happens with a longstanding Apple service but when it happens to Google it's some sort circuitous conspiracy hatched by Dr. Claw?

2) How do you know that it didn't affect any other search results? All you know is that it affected Apple's results, which certainly has the highest mindshare and therefore would easily be noticed. Let's remember that you claim that Google Maps can't be better than Apple Maps unless you test every possibility so where is your detailed testing suite of at least a handful of other companies with huge server load?

3) Seriously think about your finger-pointing. You have no proof, Google hurts themselves in every way possible with this action, and it's cartoonishly foolish if it is on purpose. It simply makes no sense. If they were going to do it don't you think they'd be a little more subtle about it than sticking Apple's results on page 6 or 7? There is no Monty Burns touching his fingertips saying "Excellent."

4) Again, Google doesn't benefit from this gaffe. In every possible way it hurts them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by macaholic_1948 View Post

I guess that is why Bing has the same pro... Oh, wait. Bing does not have the same problem.

So if something happens to Google and doesn't simultaneously happen to Microsoft then Google is lying? How the **** does that make sense?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #18 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post

I hate to say this but perhaps it is time Apple considered purchasing a search engine.

 

Why bother with that when Siri can be molded to much of that function, and likely is on that path

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #19 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) I've bee getting email from Apple successfully for more than a decade so presumably Apple knows what their doing and yet they still have email delivery issues. So it's just a temporary inconvenience when it happens with a longstanding Apple service but when it happens to Google it's some sort circuitous conspiracy hatched by Dr. Claw?

2) How do you know that it didn't affect any other search results? All you know is that it affected Apple's results, which certainly has the highest mindshare and therefore would easily be noticed. Let's remember that you claim that Google Maps can't be better than Apple Maps unless you test every possibility so where is your detailed testing suite of at least a handful of other companies with huge server load?

3) Seriously think about your finger-pointing. You have no proof, Google hurts themselves in every way possible with this action, and it's cartoonishly foolish if it is on purpose. It simply makes no sense. If they were going to do it don't you think they'd be a little more subtle about it than sticking Apple's results on page 6 or 7? There is no Monty Burns touching his fingertips saying "Excellent."

4) Again, Google doesn't benefit from this gaffe. In every possible way it hurts them.
So if something happens to Google and doesn't simultaneously happen to Microsoft then Google is lying? How the **** does that make sense?

 

You're absolutely right.  Since Google makes money through search, they want popular search results to be on top regardless of whether those pages belong to a competitor.

 

jragosta, why would Google intentionally downrank iTunes results?  iTunes doesn't compete with Google services.  Apple users download through iTunes while Android users download through the Play Store.  An iPhone owner isn't going to start using Google Play because it appears in search results.  It doesn't work that way.

post #20 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Why bother with that when Siri can be molded to much of that function, and likely is on that path

Sir's backend appears to have it's own search functions but a great deal of it is offloaded to other specific services. However, the majority of topics will ask you to search in Safari which defaults to your pre-selected search engine. I wouldn't mind Apple giving this a go but first I would like maps.apple.com to launch with a web version of their mapping software. I say release and perfect one of these services at a time.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #21 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

You're absolutely right.  Since Google makes money through search, they want popular search results to be on top regardless of whether those pages belong to a competitor.

jragosta, why would Google intentionally downrank iTunes results?  iTunes doesn't compete with Google services.  Apple users download through iTunes while Android users download through the Play Store.  An iPhone owner isn't going to start using Google Play because it appears in search results.  It doesn't work that way.

Well if the android version is closer to the top/front, the naive user would think the app is only for android. Google makes money on ads. The more pages, the more ads, the better chance of user clicking an ad.
post #22 of 75

I have noticed stuff like this for a while now from Google. One of my apps has a fairly unique name and a few million downloads and doesn't even appear on the first page in Google. Whereas Blekko come up number one as it should.

post #23 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

They found a way to blame Apple.

Like when Schmidt blamed Apple for apps they hadn't submitted yet?

"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 #24 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Well if the android version is closer to the top/front, the naive user would think the app is only for android. Google makes money on ads. The more pages, the more ads, the better chance of user clicking an ad.

 

Are you suggesting that Google wants popular results to be several pages deep?  Does that not contradict the entire basis for their success in the web search industry?  They got to the top by giving relevant results.  Users would stop using Google if it didn't provide them with the best results first, so it's entirely within their future interest to keep users happy, even if it comes at the expense of showing fewer ads immediately.

post #25 of 75
duckduckgo.com
post #26 of 75

^

post #27 of 75

I think Google was up to something but the results were a little more extreme than they expected. I have no doubts that Google modifies search results to bring their own products up sooner (or those of paid advertisers). They have also been investigated for this. I also noticed this with Youtube where I searched for a video I know exists but can't seem to find on my iPhone when the exact same search terms entered on my browser finds it right away.

 

This tells me that Google has some sort of internal software system where they can "adjust" results. They can't re-write their search algorithms on the fly, so they must have a set of rules they can modify to alter results as they see fit. Come to think of it, I know for a fact they have this ability. They have, for example, down ranked sites that deal in pirated materials.

 

I think perhaps an over zealous employee might have been doing some "fine tuning" in regards to Apple and by accident (or maybe on purpose) it caused a huge drop in iTunes rankings when the "desired" result was to make a slight adjustment.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #28 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

I think Google was up to something but the results were a little more extreme than they expected. I have no doubts that Google modifies search results to bring their own products up sooner (or those of paid advertisers). They have also been investigated for this. I also noticed this with Youtube where I searched for a video I know exists but can't seem to find on my iPhone when the exact same search terms entered on my browser finds it right away.

This tells me that Google has some sort of internal software system where they can "adjust" results. They can't re-write their search algorithms on the fly, so they must have a set of rules they can modify to alter results as they see fit. Come to think of it, I know for a fact they have this ability. They have, for example, down ranked sites that deal in pirated materials.

I think perhaps an over zealous employee might have been doing some "fine tuning" in regards to Apple and by accident (or maybe on purpose) it caused a huge drop in iTunes rankings when the "desired" result was to make a slight adjustment.

Let me go get my tin foil hat.
post #29 of 75

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/23/13 at 2:27pm
post #30 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


4) Again, Google doesn't benefit from this gaffe. In every possible way it hurts them.
So if something happens to Google and doesn't simultaneously happen to Microsoft then Google is lying? How the **** does that make sense?

 

I don't think your #4 is correct, or at least not a full picture.  I think we saw in the 90s that greed and short-sightedness can make a company do bad things for their users that seem to benefit the company's bottom line.  Maybe that happened here, maybe it didn't.  But I can imagine a world in which Google manipulates its search results to help Android and/or hurt Apple.  

 

Since the article and Google's statement implies Apple is to blame for some of these issues, it is weird and somewhat fishy that Bing isn't also affected.  Again, I am not necessarily saying Larry Page is a "Mr. Burns" character.  But it certainly would not surprise me that a company that makes billions of dollars a year off watching what you do on the Internet and then serving you ads based on that history would do some shady shit.  

post #31 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


You are so quick to discharge any hypothesis if there isn't a mountain of verifiable proof to back it up but now you're claiming it was done maliciously by Google. Does not compute!

Consider what you're suggesting. Google had some meeting where they conspired to make anything by Apple not sure up for several pages just to reverse that a few hours later. Do you think they didn't expect anyone to notice that one of the most heavily searched for domain names and products on the internet was coming up with bad results? Do you think Google expected the world to suddenly forget Apple, the tech company with the most mindshare, to be instantly forgotten? They rely on their searches to be accurate and if they are not they can lose that position to competitors. If they put anything about Apple several pages back people would go to other engines, not stop buying and using Apple's products. No matter what the scenario this hurts Google.

 

Google devalues sites all the time for several reasons. This is a daily thing by Google and is well known and documented in the SEO world. (BTW, this is not a dup content issue) So this might not have been the top ranks making this happen, or it could have been. 

post #32 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

I think Google was up to something but the results were a little more extreme than they expected. I have no doubts that Google modifies search results to bring their own products up sooner (or those of paid advertisers). They have also been investigated for this. I also noticed this with Youtube where I searched for a video I know exists but can't seem to find on my iPhone when the exact same search terms entered on my browser finds it right away.

 

This tells me that Google has some sort of internal software system where they can "adjust" results. They can't re-write their search algorithms on the fly, so they must have a set of rules they can modify to alter results as they see fit. Come to think of it, I know for a fact they have this ability. They have, for example, down ranked sites that deal in pirated materials.

 

I think perhaps an over zealous employee might have been doing some "fine tuning" in regards to Apple and by accident (or maybe on purpose) it caused a huge drop in iTunes rankings when the "desired" result was to make a slight adjustment.

 

Google does not modify searches. What they are able to do is better match their own domains/pages to the algorithm they use. 

 

They do not re-write algos on the fly as there are too many reifications doing this. Heck, when they do release an algo change there are usually 2-3 minor fixes. This is not a simple process. They can, and do, manually value up and devalue pages. 

 

This is as simple as adding a -10 to the domain or pages and they will drop by 10 for any results. 

post #33 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

Since the article and Google's statement implies Apple is to blame for some of these issues, it is weird and somewhat fishy that Bing isn't also affected. 

Google and Bing should be using different algorithms and methods for page ranking, no? Are you saying if there is a bug in Google+, Facebook should have it too?

And I don't think Google is "blaming" Apple, just explaining what could be triggering this case.
post #34 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeiteasy View Post


Google and Bing should be using different algorithms and methods for page ranking, no? Are you saying if there is a bug in Google+, Facebook should have it too?

And I don't think Google is "blaming" Apple, just explaining what could be triggering this case.

 

No, what is being said is if Google stated they could not crawl Apple's servers, then presumably Bing would not be able to also. 

post #35 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Does ANYONE believe the garbage that Google says any more (other than the paid shills and the Verge, of course)?

Fixed. :)

post #36 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

You're absolutely right.  Since Google makes money through search, they want popular search results to be on top regardless of whether those pages belong to a competitor.

jragosta, why would Google intentionally downrank iTunes results?  iTunes doesn't compete with Google services.  Apple users download through iTunes while Android users download through the Play Store.  An iPhone owner isn't going to start using Google Play because it appears in search results.  It doesn't work that way.

That might be correct - if Google were looking at things the way they claim - ranking sites purely by popularity. But they also have a corporate goal of promoting Android, so it's not as simple as "most popular comes first". Heck, they've been found to move paid advertisers up on the list, as well.

Google will do whatever is best for them. Sometimes (as in the case of trying to promote Android and Android apps), that involves penalizing competitors.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Like when Schmidt blamed Apple for apps they hadn't submitted yet?

Exactly. They have a long history of deceit and misdirection.
"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 #37 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Consider what you're suggesting. Google had some meeting where they conspired to make anything by Apple not sure up for several pages just to reverse that a few hours later. Do you think they didn't expect anyone to notice that one of the most heavily searched for domain names and products on the internet was coming up with bad results? Do you think Google expected the world to suddenly forget Apple, the tech company with the most mindshare, to be instantly forgotten? They rely on their searches to be accurate and if they are not they can lose that position to competitors. If they put anything about Apple several pages back people would go to other engines, not stop buying and using Apple's products. No matter what the scenario this hurts Google.

 

While your arguments seem plausible and have a certain anti-conspiracy-theory emotional appeal, they ignore the fact that Google does this sort of thing all the time. Unless you can explain the dumpsters, the burden of proof here lies heavily on Google, who, as usual, is blaming everyone else and telling us it was "inadvertent".

 

This is, once again, Google behaving badly, getting caught and lying about it. That's a clear behavioral pattern with them, so no one should be surprised. 

post #38 of 75
Microsoft's response: "Doh! I wish we'd thought of that".
post #39 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


4. It doesn't happen to anyone else - just Apple.

 

 

Can you back that statement up with proof?

 

It will take some doing as there are plenty of examples where previous front page links suddenly fell off.

post #40 of 75
Why do you guys bother coming up with these elaborate conspiracy theories when Google encounters a bug in their system?

We've seen that Apple keeps web pages in their servers but merely deactivates their visibility. When they were first working on the password bug they hid the page but people were still able to access it if they knew the direct link address. Only after Apple noticed this they decided to shut down the server.

Everyone in here loves to hang Google for anything it does wrong but when someone calls out an Apple flaw, they're trolls, fandroids, etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google blames supposedly buried iTunes links on technical difficulties, fix on the way