The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
“We”? You mean laissez-faire capitalism via abusive behavior of advertising/marketing entities. That’s not “we”; that’s most definitely a “they”.
Developers build the tools, marketers make the associations, and the tools do their bidding, mindlessly. Then the developers adjust the tools to widen the net for their true customers (the marketing and advertising people). Actual end-users of the bait “products” are treated like cattle and research fodder, all the while the tools they think they’re being given get worse because these users’ desired tasks have nothing to do with the real business model involved.
Marketing entities are entirely willing to use the tools to ruin the intent of the tools, and the provider of the tools do nothing to corral this behavior. They want as wide a net as possible for attaining and holding their real customers (marketing and advertising entities).
There are a lot of faceless companies involved causing the actual problem, but the lie of Google as a search engine (or mail service, or office suite, or...) puts a huge pile of blame squarely on Google, and rightfully so.
Search engine spam is a serious problem all of its own that the so-called brilliance of Google engineering hasn’t fixed.
“We” nothing. Average users just what the tools to do their jobs as presented to them, without trying to throw effing advertisements in their faces to distract or manipulate them 24/7. Google’s entire business model is advertising. They are culpable. Everything else they do serves that one single purpose, and it takes a lot of reading and savvy awareness for the average user to learn this fact.
”We”?? As if. Don’t blame all of humanity for the lousy behavior of unregulated (self or otherwise) capitalists (and their legal or illicit businesses).
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
Sounds like we need close government monitoring of our citizens then.
Nice tactic of trying to trigger libertarians promoting the myth that everyone else is to blame as a defense of utterly unregulated corporations...
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
um, don’t follow news much? haven’t paid attention to the adsense ads you have been served for the last 20yrs?
elsagate was the most recent, where google claimed they had no idea what the most popular videos were for children or that they were pornographic, violent and psychopathic posted by unknown people while they claimed massive ad revenue?
i agree it is the users, they laud google and watch all the shitty content that makes it top rating and get ads.
that said google did nothing for over a decade while raking in the cash from ads attached to bad keywords, foul content and accepted ads from scammers.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
“We”? You mean laissez-faire capitalism via abusive behavior of advertising/marketing entities. That’s not “we”; that’s most definitely a “they”.
Developers build the tools, marketers make the associations, and the tools do their bidding, mindlessly. Then the developers adjust the tools to widen the net for their true customers (the marketing and advertising people). Actual end-users of the bait “products” are treated like cattle and research fodder, all the while the tools they think they’re being given get worse because these users’ desired tasks have nothing to do with the real business model involved.
Marketing entities are entirely willing to use the tools to ruin the intent of the tools, and the provider of the tools do nothing to corral this behavior. They want as wide a net as possible for attaining and holding their real customers (marketing and advertising entities).
There are a lot of faceless companies involved causing the actual problem, but the lie of Google as a search engine (or mail service, or office suite, or...) puts a huge pile of blame squarely on Google, and rightfully so.
Search engine spam is a serious problem all of its own that the so-called brilliance of Google engineering hasn’t fixed.
“We” nothing. Average users just what the tools to do their jobs as presented to them, without trying to throw effing advertisements in their faces to distract or manipulate them 24/7. Google’s entire business model is advertising. They are culpable. Everything else they do serves that one single purpose, and it takes a lot of reading and savvy awareness for the average user to learn this fact.
”We”?? As if. Don’t blame all of humanity for the lousy behavior of unregulated (self or otherwise) capitalists (and their legal or illicit businesses).
We search out the porn. We display our anger at strangers on the internet. We demand free. We demand open. We demand immediate gratification. We have no qualms over stealing from creators: music, movies, images.... We are destroying the internet. We can't even be civil to each other on a fan blog for a couple of hours. That's the same environment we have become emboldened to create in our own hometowns now.
Malware and porn and disinformation and displays of death and destruction and bodily harm are not promoted by Google, or Apple, or Microsoft. WE are the ones searching it out, even willing to ignore their warnings and proceed anyway. Worse, when a gatekeeper like Google or Apple tries to do the right thing and remove easy access to content promoting war and suffering, harm to children, and extreme violence against fellow human beings they are vociferously criticized for unfairly restricting free flow of information. Censorship!!
Yes we are the ones destroying the internet. and that includes you, not some ads a website uses for support because we're too selfish to pay them for their work. On the contrary without ads you'd have no news at all. No newpapers, no TV, no magazines, and what you'd be left with is word of mouth and the encyclopedia. Information providers and content creator are not willing to work for free any more than you are, and individuals are largely unwilling to pay them for their time and effort. That's been true hundreds of years, even for Shakespeare and DaVinci. Stalemate. That's why sponsors are essential to information and creation distribution. Ads aren't the problem, they've been a large part of our ability to research and find and read and entertain. We are the problem because we give no option. Then worse we poison and attack those sources with our own insecurities and prejudices.
And since you invited me to your soapbox here's what I think is currently the biggest threat to our culture and community: Smartphones. We;re now connected to the internet 24/7, non-stop entertainment and distraction. We can't have families together at the table, enjoy an evening with friends, pay close attention to our work or studies, without a smartphone by our side begging not to be ignored. Pay attention at a restaurant next time you're out, look around at a few tables at your library, see what kids are doing under the radar in the classroom, watch people walking on the street, sports fans at an arena...
There's good reasons Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would not allow their children to have one. We all think we're smarter than they were. When people create something for profit they would not use in their own homes we should ask why rather than ignore it.
If YouTube is profitable it’s for the same reason search is — ads. Still a one-trick pony when it comes to revenue. Funny people whine about Apple being overly dependent on iPhone revenue, but don’t sweat it with Google and ad revenue.
Completely different ponies.
'ads' are actually different products. If you want to go down that route, Apple is a one trick pony for dealing with CE.
Even in the old days, every single time you did a Google search, Google was raking in money from someone. You didn't have to click on anything. It didn't cost you anything. It was 'invisible'. Since then, cloud services have developed beyond most people's imaginations. YouTube has been monetised more than it was in the past and is more visible to the end user. It currently brings in over a billion dollars in revenue each month. Search is still the cash cow (98 billion last year).
Taken as a whole, ads (in whatever shape or form) are Google's lifeblood but consumers often aren't very aware of how important they are in the big scheme of things. Just going about our daily lives generates revenues for the company. iOS users included. It is doubtful that Google is paying billions to Apple at loss to have access to them).
Apple was absolutely reliant on iPhone for nearly a decade and still is (in numerical terms). Any large drop in iPhone revenue automatically has people hitting the panic stations button. That's logical from from some perspectives if such a visible product represents more than 50% of your revenue. It doesn't matter that other divisions within the company could be successful businesses in their own right.
Google search is shielded from some factors by its 'invisibility'. Most people don't associate a Google search query with monetisation. That isn't the case for Apple. The iPhone is very visible and susceptible as. result.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
Heh. Seems I’m eating humble pie again.
Neil Cybart:
Intriguing.
Cybart also pointed out (can’t find the link unfortunately, but a Bing search will flag up a few articles) that Google’s per click revenue has been slowing down since early last year, which is why they have been trying to draw Wall Street’s attention to hardware revenues.
I think, in part, it’s because advertisers are starting to realise that their customers are turned off by wrecked page performance and general unreadability caused by Google ads.
I also wonder if Apple's campaign for privacy (which, by definition, is an attack in Google) is having some effect.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
Wow.
Talk about victim-blaming.
I guess this attitude ties in with Google’s culture of sexual harassment.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
Wow.
Talk about victim-blaming.
I guess this attitude ties in with Google’s culture of sexual harassment.
Are you bored and need someone to talk to? You've made a valiant effort by tying two unrelated things together in order to get a conversation going, so kudos to you for that.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
Wow.
Talk about victim-blaming.
I guess this attitude ties in with Google’s culture of sexual harassment.
Are you bored and need someone to talk to? You've made a valiant effort by tying two unrelated things together in order to get a conversation going, so kudos to you for that.
IMHO you made a rare (for you) blunder on that post as I mentioned earlier but you didn't reply to my post.
The Google Boys had one profitable idea: search. All of their other ideas generated $172 million in quarterly revenue at a cost of $2+ billion. If Google were unable to track the online activity of ordinary citizens and sell ads using their personal data, that one idea may not be profitable, either.
Which is why Apple should have killed them with iAd.
that was never possible. Apple would never have approved all the spam, malware, scams, hate, violence, child grooming, porn and use of morally questionable keyword linking required to have taken Google’s biggest customers from them.
LOL.... Hate much? Such weird claims.
Welcome to the internet. Google didn't design it, Apple can't control it, and Microsoft cannot hold the door key. We are the problem not some faceless company. Look in the mirror instead. Dealing with hate and morally questionable practices begins with you and yours.
Wow.
Talk about victim-blaming.
I guess this attitude ties in with Google’s culture of sexual harassment.
Are you bored and need someone to talk to? You've made a valiant effort by tying two unrelated things together in order to get a conversation going, so kudos to you for that.
IMHO you made a rare (for you) blunder on that post as I mentioned earlier but you didn't reply to my post.
I guess I didn't see it. Which post and what was it?
Comments
Developers build the tools, marketers make the associations, and the tools do their bidding, mindlessly. Then the developers adjust the tools to widen the net for their true customers (the marketing and advertising people). Actual end-users of the bait “products” are treated like cattle and research fodder, all the while the tools they think they’re being given get worse because these users’ desired tasks have nothing to do with the real business model involved.
Marketing entities are entirely willing to use the tools to ruin the intent of the tools, and the provider of the tools do nothing to corral this behavior. They want as wide a net as possible for attaining and holding their real customers (marketing and advertising entities).
There are a lot of faceless companies involved causing the actual problem, but the lie of Google as a search engine (or mail service, or office suite, or...) puts a huge pile of blame squarely on Google, and rightfully so.
Search engine spam is a serious problem all of its own that the so-called brilliance of Google engineering hasn’t fixed.
“We” nothing. Average users just what the tools to do their jobs as presented to them, without trying to throw effing advertisements in their faces to distract or manipulate them 24/7. Google’s entire business model is advertising. They are culpable. Everything else they do serves that one single purpose, and it takes a lot of reading and savvy awareness for the average user to learn this fact.
”We”?? As if. Don’t blame all of humanity for the lousy behavior of unregulated (self or otherwise) capitalists (and their legal or illicit businesses).
Nice tactic of trying to trigger libertarians promoting the myth that everyone else is to blame as a defense of utterly unregulated corporations...
elsagate was the most recent, where google claimed they had no idea what the most popular videos were for children or that they were pornographic, violent and psychopathic posted by unknown people while they claimed massive ad revenue?
i agree it is the users, they laud google and watch all the shitty content that makes it top rating and get ads.
that said google did nothing for over a decade while raking in the cash from ads attached to bad keywords, foul content and accepted ads from scammers.
just stating facts man.
Malware and porn and disinformation and displays of death and destruction and bodily harm are not promoted by Google, or Apple, or Microsoft. WE are the ones searching it out, even willing to ignore their warnings and proceed anyway. Worse, when a gatekeeper like Google or Apple tries to do the right thing and remove easy access to content promoting war and suffering, harm to children, and extreme violence against fellow human beings they are vociferously criticized for unfairly restricting free flow of information. Censorship!!
Yes we are the ones destroying the internet. and that includes you, not some ads a website uses for support because we're too selfish to pay them for their work. On the contrary without ads you'd have no news at all. No newpapers, no TV, no magazines, and what you'd be left with is word of mouth and the encyclopedia. Information providers and content creator are not willing to work for free any more than you are, and individuals are largely unwilling to pay them for their time and effort. That's been true hundreds of years, even for Shakespeare and DaVinci. Stalemate. That's why sponsors are essential to information and creation distribution. Ads aren't the problem, they've been a large part of our ability to research and find and read and entertain. We are the problem because we give no option. Then worse we poison and attack those sources with our own insecurities and prejudices.
And since you invited me to your soapbox here's what I think is currently the biggest threat to our culture and community: Smartphones. We;re now connected to the internet 24/7, non-stop entertainment and distraction. We can't have families together at the table, enjoy an evening with friends, pay close attention to our work or studies, without a smartphone by our side begging not to be ignored. Pay attention at a restaurant next time you're out, look around at a few tables at your library, see what kids are doing under the radar in the classroom, watch people walking on the street, sports fans at an arena...
There's good reasons Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would not allow their children to have one. We all think we're smarter than they were. When people create something for profit they would not use in their own homes we should ask why rather than ignore it.
'ads' are actually different products. If you want to go down that route, Apple is a one trick pony for dealing with CE.
Even in the old days, every single time you did a Google search, Google was raking in money from someone. You didn't have to click on anything. It didn't cost you anything. It was 'invisible'. Since then, cloud services have developed beyond most people's imaginations. YouTube has been monetised more than it was in the past and is more visible to the end user. It currently brings in over a billion dollars in revenue each month. Search is still the cash cow (98 billion last year).
Taken as a whole, ads (in whatever shape or form) are Google's lifeblood but consumers often aren't very aware of how important they are in the big scheme of things. Just going about our daily lives generates revenues for the company. iOS users included. It is doubtful that Google is paying billions to Apple at loss to have access to them).
Apple was absolutely reliant on iPhone for nearly a decade and still is (in numerical terms). Any large drop in iPhone revenue automatically has people hitting the panic stations button. That's logical from from some perspectives if such a visible product represents more than 50% of your revenue. It doesn't matter that other divisions within the company could be successful businesses in their own right.
Google search is shielded from some factors by its 'invisibility'. Most people don't associate a Google search query with monetisation. That isn't the case for Apple. The iPhone is very visible and susceptible as. result.
Intriguing. Cybart also pointed out (can’t find the link unfortunately, but a Bing search will flag up a few articles) that Google’s per click revenue has been slowing down since early last year, which is why they have been trying to draw Wall Street’s attention to hardware revenues.
Wow.