You don't get it at all. Only about 5% of the public have good taste. Apple has helped about another 5% to 15% develop some sense of appreciation for good design awareness. To those with no taste at all, it just looks like we hate anything non-Apple, while we see and appreciate good design. That's all. Don't take it personal that you have way too much Nethanderal DNA in your make up.
Doesn't the iPad have more than 5% of the market? I wonder what that implies.
Why the heck would you want to use a browser designed to suck as much data out of you as possible?
Don't be an idiot, quit using Google products. You're not a Google's customer, you're just the product they sell to their customers: advertisers.
Whatever. As long as they don't break the law, all they get from me is just another guy who likes baseball, beer, auto racing, and Apple. It is not like they took anything valuable from me. If they use the information to help me search faster or target ads that I might be interested in (unlikely...) but why is that such a bad thing? Is it because they are able to sell the the info and not give you any of the money? If someone walked up to you in the street and said I'll give you $10 if you tell me 10 websites you like, would you do it?
They said there is an incognito mode so if you are worried about it use that.
Safari has/had a private mode too, and Google ignored it. Found a way to circumvent that. Why should anyone trust incognito mode to actually work?
Exactly.
The only thing that incognito in Chrome does is prevent other people who have access to your terminal to see what you've been up to. All of the normal information harvesting that Google is famous for is still taking place.
Safari has/had a private mode too, and Google ignored it. Found a way to circumvent that. Why should anyone trust incognito mode to actually work?
No they did not. They violated the no third party cookie feature. If they had compromised the Private Browsing mode then that would have been a bug in Apple's code. That said, they were very close to breaking the law with their tactics on the cookie thing. I don't think Google can get away with anything since they are under a great deal of scrutiny now. That whole issue about collecting data over unsecured wifi was pretty shady and they are going to pay a fine for that to be sure, but really if you have no password on your wifi, what did you expect?
My favorite feature so far: "Request Desktop Site" for those sites that keep wanting to shove a mobile version down your throat even when you don't want it (**Cough** Appleinsider **Cough**)
No they did not. They violated the no third party cookie feature. If they had compromised the Private Browsing mode then that would have been a bug in Apple's code. That said, they were very close to breaking the law with their tactics on the cookie thing. I don't think Google can get away with anything since they are under a great deal of scrutiny now. That whole issue about collecting data over unsecured wifi was pretty shady and they are going to pay a fine for that to be sure, but really if you have no password on your wifi, what did you expect?
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here. See this:
What is so 'good' about those stats? Are you suggesting that 'good' stuff is popular stuff?
Windows != Good
Justin Bieber != Good
Symbian != Good
Religion != Good
Skoda sells more cars than Ferrari, does that make them better cars?
If Skoda and Ferrari were the same price, which would sell more? Safari and Chrome are both free. Dumb argument. (And I use Safari and prefer it over Chrome btw).
And to think religion isn't good just proves your intellect. Even if you don't believe in God, religion, or whatever- to say that religion, as a whole, is bad- is pretty asinine. Religion got society to where it is today. There are plenty of bad agendas spread by religion throughout history, but way way way more positive has come from it. Sorry for the Tangent- but sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade.
Edit:
I have another small question that I don't understand. How is having safari be the default browser- and not being able to change the default browser- legal? I don't want to change it from Safari, but just curious as to the legality.
You are right. My mistake. I assumed that you meant Private Browsing when you actually meant privacy settings. In either case I was aware of the issue. But again I personally don't care that much about Google because they are losing money on me. They send me a check every month for idiots who accidentally land on my 404 page and then click on one of the links. Plus I have ad blockers in my browser too so Google is in the minus column on my account.
And to think religion isn't good just proves your intellect. Even if you don't believe in God, religion, or whatever- to say that religion, as a whole, is bad- is pretty asinine. Religion got society to where it is today. There are plenty of bad agendas spread by religion throughout history, but way way way more positive has come from it. Sorry for the Tangent- but sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade.
Religion may be flawed but you don't see too many Hospitals or Universities founded by organized Atheism.
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
* Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
* Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
* Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
* Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
* Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
* Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
* According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
* "San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
* Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
* Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
* Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
* Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
* Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
* Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
* Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)
* Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
* Google collected emails, texts, photos and documents gathered from Wi-Fi networks using Google's StreetView cars to collect data. (8)
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom
Finally!
It puts Safari to shame. And Google Drive is easily the best cloud storage out there right now. (Dropbox is a close 2nd)
So nice being able to work on my computer in Chrome and having all of my tabs being right there on my phone.
But I've had this for a little while thanks to my Galaxy Nexus (that's now running Jelly Bean!)
Actually Cubby is also very good but I do use Drive daily.
to be honest, Safari sucks big time.
Doesn't the iPad have more than 5% of the market? I wonder what that implies.
Nothing wrong with some healthy competition.
It's available NOW!
http://itunes.apple.com/app/chrome/id535886823?mt=8
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighype
Why the heck would you want to use a browser designed to suck as much data out of you as possible?
Don't be an idiot, quit using Google products. You're not a Google's customer, you're just the product they sell to their customers: advertisers.
Whatever. As long as they don't break the law, all they get from me is just another guy who likes baseball, beer, auto racing, and Apple. It is not like they took anything valuable from me. If they use the information to help me search faster or target ads that I might be interested in (unlikely...) but why is that such a bad thing? Is it because they are able to sell the the info and not give you any of the money? If someone walked up to you in the street and said I'll give you $10 if you tell me 10 websites you like, would you do it?
They said there is an incognito mode so if you are worried about it use that.
Safari has/had a private mode too, and Google ignored it. Found a way to circumvent that. Why should anyone trust incognito mode to actually work?
Not in the way that you would have us believe, no.
The only thing that incognito in Chrome does is prevent other people who have access to your terminal to see what you've been up to. All of the normal information harvesting that Google is famous for is still taking place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpnorton82
You've made a leap in logic; that's not what I said.
Not in the way that you would have us believe, no.
So what does "mobs of idiots" mean then?
Ahh so explain what these stats mean then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
Safari has/had a private mode too, and Google ignored it. Found a way to circumvent that. Why should anyone trust incognito mode to actually work?
No they did not. They violated the no third party cookie feature. If they had compromised the Private Browsing mode then that would have been a bug in Apple's code. That said, they were very close to breaking the law with their tactics on the cookie thing. I don't think Google can get away with anything since they are under a great deal of scrutiny now. That whole issue about collecting data over unsecured wifi was pretty shady and they are going to pay a fine for that to be sure, but really if you have no password on your wifi, what did you expect?
My favorite feature so far: "Request Desktop Site" for those sites that keep wanting to shove a mobile version down your throat even when you don't want it (**Cough** Appleinsider **Cough**)
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here. See this:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/google-negotiating-ftc-fine-after-bypassing-safari-privacy-settings/76318
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity
What is so 'good' about those stats? Are you suggesting that 'good' stuff is popular stuff?
Windows != Good
Justin Bieber != Good
Symbian != Good
Religion != Good
Skoda sells more cars than Ferrari, does that make them better cars?
If Skoda and Ferrari were the same price, which would sell more? Safari and Chrome are both free. Dumb argument. (And I use Safari and prefer it over Chrome btw).
And to think religion isn't good just proves your intellect. Even if you don't believe in God, religion, or whatever- to say that religion, as a whole, is bad- is pretty asinine. Religion got society to where it is today. There are plenty of bad agendas spread by religion throughout history, but way way way more positive has come from it. Sorry for the Tangent- but sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade.
Edit:
I have another small question that I don't understand. How is having safari be the default browser- and not being able to change the default browser- legal? I don't want to change it from Safari, but just curious as to the legality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here. See this:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/google-negotiating-ftc-fine-after-bypassing-safari-privacy-settings/76318
You are right. My mistake. I assumed that you meant Private Browsing when you actually meant privacy settings. In either case I was aware of the issue. But again I personally don't care that much about Google because they are losing money on me. They send me a check every month for idiots who accidentally land on my 404 page and then click on one of the links. Plus I have ad blockers in my browser too so Google is in the minus column on my account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpnorton82
To paraphrase a member of said mob: I'll let you figure it out all by yourself.
Just as I thought, you have zero argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
And to think religion isn't good just proves your intellect. Even if you don't believe in God, religion, or whatever- to say that religion, as a whole, is bad- is pretty asinine. Religion got society to where it is today. There are plenty of bad agendas spread by religion throughout history, but way way way more positive has come from it. Sorry for the Tangent- but sometimes you gotta call a spade a spade.
Religion may be flawed but you don't see too many Hospitals or Universities founded by organized Atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toysandme
Actually, only half as bad as Facebook.
and since Mountain Lion will have "deep facebook integration" Chrome shouldn't worry you at all!
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
* Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
* Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
* Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
* Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
* Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
* Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
* According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
* "San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
* Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
* Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
* Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
* Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
* Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
* Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
* Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)
* Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
* Google collected emails, texts, photos and documents gathered from Wi-Fi networks using Google's StreetView cars to collect data. (8)
1. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
3. http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/10/google-evil. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
6. John Fontana. January 12, 2012 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/identity/ftc-asked-to-probe-google-search-integration/143 ZDNet. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
7. Lucian Parfeni. January 17, 2012. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Accused-of-Vandalizing-OpenStreetMap-Data-246965.shtml Softpedia. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
8. Hack Doyle and Daniel Bates. Posted May 27, 2012. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150606/Google-deliberately-stole-information-executives-covered-years.html. Daily Mail. Retrieved May 28, 2012.