"Inaddition to violating those provisions of the Terms of Service, your application also uses YouTube’s protected trademarks in ways that likely confuse consumers as to the source of the application and whether it is affiliated with or approved by YouTube. The YouTube API Branding Guidelines (https://developers.google.com/youtube/branding) state that you may never use the YouTube logo or theYouTube name in conjunction with the overall name or description of your application, product or service."
There are many many things that won't "kill you" that are still reprehensible, awful, nasty etc. IMO anyone who puts up with advertising is a fool of gigantic proportions.
Personally I'm offended (and sometimes enraged) by the fact that one often gets a 30 second ad in font of a web video clip that is itself only a minute long. If they did that on TV an hour long show would be 30 minutes or less. It's already pretty outrageous that it's only 50 minutes now.
Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception. Adverts are full of lies and half truths, they're usually misogynistic, sexist, violent or insensitive in a variety of other ways.
If you hate ads so much, do you use Adblock on AppleInsider?
Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.
During the trial period some cases of serious injury or death have occurred. If you experience death, stop taking the medication immediately and consult a mortician.
Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception. Adverts are full of lies and half truths, they're usually misogynistic, sexist, violent or insensitive in a variety of other ways.
Quite a generalization. I think you left out the word 'bad' a couple of places. If you made something you thought you could sell would you be a terrible person if told people about it? I too find a lot of advertising very annoying and demeaning, as well as endorsing stereotypes, but generally I'd qualify that as 'bad' advertising. Another issue is where advertising appears, and how intrusive it is. But to advertise ones goods is not inherently evil.
Well, now the shoe's on the other foot. I seem to recall Google trying to build a TV platform by scraping "free" web feeds from the broadcast networks, only to cry foul when the networks began blocking those feeds from Google TV devices. Apparently, the networks didn't care to hand a valuable treasure trove of user data over to Google without getting something in return. Everybody just wants to get paid for their content, but Google's entire business model centers around devaluing everybody else's services by subsidizing their own offerings with ads and trying every angle to distribute content without paying for it.
Anyway, this Google's whining shows that they are really full of crap with their so-called innovations...They are vultures earning money from ineffective adverts and not from quality products or services. They are inflating price of products you pay for. Same as FB.
The only thing I think is fishy is the ability to download; otherwise, I'm guessing the app merely accesses the web, re-skins it, and blocks ads. Didn't think that's illegal.
Nothing really fishy about the downloading. You have to download the video to view it to begin with, this is simply saving the stream to to a file easily. People used to do the same thing by fishing through their browser cache years ago when video streaming was still a new thing. There are a dozen Firefox extensions that will allow you to save videos or audio streams from websites, including YouTube.
Microsoft supposedly values others intellectual property. After all they sued everyone under the sun who uses Android for "stealing their intellectual property", yet here they show their true colors and get caught stealing others intellectual property. Typical Microsoft.
More like typical Google who claim they promote open standards.
They're open as long as they're being paid. I use a Flash blocker on Youtube to get MP4 video loading in Quicktime and I've noticed on a few occasions that the video won't load. If I right-click and restore Flash, it works fine but there's an advert in there that wouldn't show with the MP4 version. It's not a problem that they do that as that's how they monetize content but I don't think they are open enough with their fans about the fact that their number one priority is advertising and when an open standard like HTML 5 doesn't let them monetize content or protect it via DRM, they'll favour proprietary formats like Flash.
It's the fans who go on about Android and Larry Page comes out and says Android actually isn't critical to their success - what's important is that people use their services, whether that's via their own OS or someone else's. The reason Android exists most likely is that Google realised that without smartphones targeting low-end customers (which Apple won't do as they have a minimum quality bar), they'd lose out to someone like Microsoft who certainly wouldn't promote their services. Android fans dismiss the idea that Samsung will drop Android in favour of Tizen because customers won't buy the hardware. If Android was so important, how come Samsung is making 95% of all the profit?:
People are buying Samsung for the hardware not for Android and that's propping up the entire eco-system. If they drop Android, customers will still buy Samsung for the hardware. Tizen runs Android apps through a compatibility layer but gradually, Samsung will convince people to shop at the Samsung app store. That means Android profitability, especially for developers, plummets.
MS should not have to take down their YouTube Client.
Google scans everybody's sites on the web and creates links to their data.
MS Should fight for an OPEN & FREE internet.
The MS Client is actually nicer than Google's own client.
Yes indeed, I remember GoogleTV doing the same thing with broadcaster's open content.
Look at all the Twitter clients available... You don't see Twitter complaining.
right. no company, not even IBM, has done as much as Microsoft to cripple innovation and stifle interoperability. Why doesn't Microsoft open its IM protocol, directx, exchange protocols, office formats (the ISO xml nonsense they bribed their way through committee is not open in any way shape or form), etc... so Google and others can interop with them?
More like typical Google who claim they promote open standards.
what protocols has microsoft opened up? have they shared their IM protocol with everyone? have they shared exchange protocols with everyone? how about their proprietary patent crippled office file formats? Again, the ISO "standard" is worthless with its undocument tags like: "<doAsWord95>" why didnt Microsoft use the existing ODF formats which were already ISO standards? How about Microsoft open DirectX?
Looks like google leaned on the mctube developer. There is now an "update" to mctube that removes the cache feature. There is an "update" I'll never make.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkichline
They aren't stealing intellectual property. ...
Yes, they are.
"Inaddition to violating those provisions of the Terms of Service, your application also uses YouTube’s protected trademarks in ways that likely confuse consumers as to the source of the application and whether it is affiliated with or approved by YouTube. The YouTube API Branding Guidelines (https://developers.google.com/youtube/branding) state that you may never use the YouTube logo or theYouTube name in conjunction with the overall name or description of your application, product or service."
If you hate ads so much, do you use Adblock on AppleInsider?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
Microsoft is just saying, "F**k it, I don't care"
Just like Google said when they reverse engineered Java and created Dalvik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
If you hate ads so much, do you use Adblock on AppleInsider?
Does Google allow Adblock in the Chrome web store?
Google removed this (link now dead):-
Chrome Web Store - Downloadify
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/downloadify/...
Download every spotify song for free
If Google is prepared to dish it out they should also be prepared to take it.
Microsoft should rebadge and rename their application to "Bing TV" and be done with the copyright claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.
During the trial period some cases of serious injury or death have occurred. If you experience death, stop taking the medication immediately and consult a mortician.
Well, now the shoe's on the other foot. I seem to recall Google trying to build a TV platform by scraping "free" web feeds from the broadcast networks, only to cry foul when the networks began blocking those feeds from Google TV devices. Apparently, the networks didn't care to hand a valuable treasure trove of user data over to Google without getting something in return. Everybody just wants to get paid for their content, but Google's entire business model centers around devaluing everybody else's services by subsidizing their own offerings with ads and trying every angle to distribute content without paying for it.
I like the Microsoft's answer
Anyway, this Google's whining shows that they are really full of crap with their so-called innovations...They are vultures earning money from ineffective adverts and not from quality products or services. They are inflating price of products you pay for. Same as FB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
The only thing I think is fishy is the ability to download; otherwise, I'm guessing the app merely accesses the web, re-skins it, and blocks ads. Didn't think that's illegal.
Nothing really fishy about the downloading. You have to download the video to view it to begin with, this is simply saving the stream to to a file easily. People used to do the same thing by fishing through their browser cache years ago when video streaming was still a new thing. There are a dozen Firefox extensions that will allow you to save videos or audio streams from websites, including YouTube.
MS should not have to take down their YouTube Client.
Google scans everybody's sites on the web and creates links to their data.
MS Should fight for an OPEN & FREE internet.
The MS Client is actually nicer than Google's own client.
Yes indeed, I remember GoogleTV doing the same thing with broadcaster's open content.
Look at all the Twitter clients available... You don't see Twitter complaining.
They're open as long as they're being paid. I use a Flash blocker on Youtube to get MP4 video loading in Quicktime and I've noticed on a few occasions that the video won't load. If I right-click and restore Flash, it works fine but there's an advert in there that wouldn't show with the MP4 version. It's not a problem that they do that as that's how they monetize content but I don't think they are open enough with their fans about the fact that their number one priority is advertising and when an open standard like HTML 5 doesn't let them monetize content or protect it via DRM, they'll favour proprietary formats like Flash.
It's the fans who go on about Android and Larry Page comes out and says Android actually isn't critical to their success - what's important is that people use their services, whether that's via their own OS or someone else's. The reason Android exists most likely is that Google realised that without smartphones targeting low-end customers (which Apple won't do as they have a minimum quality bar), they'd lose out to someone like Microsoft who certainly wouldn't promote their services. Android fans dismiss the idea that Samsung will drop Android in favour of Tizen because customers won't buy the hardware. If Android was so important, how come Samsung is making 95% of all the profit?:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/16/samsung-estimated-to-make-95-percent-of-android-device-profits/
People are buying Samsung for the hardware not for Android and that's propping up the entire eco-system. If they drop Android, customers will still buy Samsung for the hardware. Tizen runs Android apps through a compatibility layer but gradually, Samsung will convince people to shop at the Samsung app store. That means Android profitability, especially for developers, plummets.
Coming here to read about news from Apple, I find Google, M$, and a lot of Samsung stuff instead.
Oh well! Still hoping for a change!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
MS should not have to take down their YouTube Client.
Google scans everybody's sites on the web and creates links to their data.
MS Should fight for an OPEN & FREE internet.
The MS Client is actually nicer than Google's own client.
Yes indeed, I remember GoogleTV doing the same thing with broadcaster's open content.
Look at all the Twitter clients available... You don't see Twitter complaining.
right. no company, not even IBM, has done as much as Microsoft to cripple innovation and stifle interoperability. Why doesn't Microsoft open its IM protocol, directx, exchange protocols, office formats (the ISO xml nonsense they bribed their way through committee is not open in any way shape or form), etc... so Google and others can interop with them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosslad
More like typical Google who claim they promote open standards.
what protocols has microsoft opened up? have they shared their IM protocol with everyone? have they shared exchange protocols with everyone? how about their proprietary patent crippled office file formats? Again, the ISO "standard" is worthless with its undocument tags like: "<doAsWord95>" why didnt Microsoft use the existing ODF formats which were already ISO standards? How about Microsoft open DirectX?
If google wants Microsoft to take down the youtube app then google should make their own wp8 app. It is that simple.