![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
| http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html
| So what? Did you know that nearly all the profits Mozilla makes come from $1/per download paid by Google to get default search installed on Firefox? Mozilla is supposedly a non-profit, yet I think their income is now up to something like $300 million/year. The money has corrupted them and now they're losing customers because they don't listen to what people actually want. (Notably, it started with the Mozilla people hiding the ability to block 3rd-party images -- ads.) Mozilla is now actually being paid off by Yahoo, but the deal is pretty much the same. Google is gigantic and they go to great lengths to stay that way. Apple is stunningly greedy and always happy to sell out their customers. It's a perfect match. The real question is.... do you just go along and accept the "assignment" of Google search? Do you just type into the address bar of your browser compliantly and let Google track you, thus making their payments worthwhile to them? It's up to you to stop the corruption. Their methods have made them unequivocably top dog. On my own website I get an average 60-100 top search engine visitors per day. My site is very much geared toward Windows users and Windows programmers or sys admins. Yet nearly all searchers arrive from Google. For each 100 Google searchers there are perhaps 1 each from Bing or Yahoo. An occasional DuckDuckGo or ISP search. But they're all a drop in the bucket compared to Google. Google also has a very skewed system of rating pages -- putting a high value on incoming links and frequent updates, in order to favor big, commercial pages. So Google's payouts are only a small part of the story. A bigger, though less obvious, part is how Google shapes the Internet itself. Many smaller, non-commercial websites have nearly disappeared. They might still be there, but they're invisible if Google doesn't list them. .... So if you're still using Google search then you're part of the problem that you're implying by advertising their Apple "bribe". |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() On 1/23/16 8:33 AM, in article , "Mayayana" wrote: | http://phys.org/news/2016-01-google-...n-iphones.html | So what? Did you know that nearly all the profits Mozilla makes come from $1/per download paid by Google to get default search installed on Firefox? Mozilla is supposedly a non-profit, yet I think their income is now up to something like $300 million/year. The money has corrupted them and now they're losing customers because they don't listen to what people actually want. (Notably, it started with the Mozilla people hiding the ability to block 3rd-party images -- ads.) Mozilla is now actually being paid off by Yahoo, but the deal is pretty much the same. Google is gigantic and they go to great lengths to stay that way. Apple is stunningly greedy and always happy to sell out their customers. It's a perfect match. The real question is.... do you just go along and accept the "assignment" of Google search? Do you just type into the address bar of your browser compliantly and let Google track you, thus making their payments worthwhile to them? It's up to you to stop the corruption. Their methods have made them unequivocably top dog. On my own website I get an average 60-100 top search engine visitors per day. My site is very much geared toward Windows users and Windows programmers or sys admins. Yet nearly all searchers arrive from Google. For each 100 Google searchers there are perhaps 1 each from Bing or Yahoo. An occasional DuckDuckGo or ISP search. But they're all a drop in the bucket compared to Google. Google also has a very skewed system of rating pages -- putting a high value on incoming links and frequent updates, in order to favor big, commercial pages. So Google's payouts are only a small part of the story. A bigger, though less obvious, part is how Google shapes the Internet itself. Many smaller, non-commercial websites have nearly disappeared. They might still be there, but they're invisible if Google doesn't list them. .... So if you're still using Google search then you're part of the problem that you're implying by advertising their Apple "bribe". RichA doesn't understand that, much like the Art mentioned in another post he initiated, that the amount paid is agreed between a willing buyer and seller. If both parties are satisfied, it is a fair deal. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Google paid Apple $1B bribe | PeterN[_6_] | Digital Photography | 6 | January 24th 16 09:20 PM |
Google paid Apple $1B bribe | Sandman | Digital Photography | 6 | January 24th 16 09:41 AM |
Who knows what they paid Apple to switch? | Mr. Strat | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | November 6th 09 04:26 AM |
Who knows what they paid Apple to switch? | David J Taylor[_12_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 2 | November 4th 09 10:38 PM |
Who knows what they paid Apple to switch? | Troy Piggins[_32_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | November 4th 09 07:02 PM |