|
 |
Monday, February 21, 2005 |
 I don't think that Google clearly thought through its decision to move to Web page modification. If they succeed in nullifying the opposition to this, they will open the floodgates to Microsoft to rerelease its version of the concept.
Through modification of the browser, Microsoft could put this on 1,000 times the desktops Google could with its toolbar. Opposition to the concept is the only thing that is stopping Microsoft from doing it today.
It gets worse. The basis of this modification is search-based services. If Microsoft is able to put a basket of search-based services into every Web page most people view with a browser ("search in situ" vs. the site based model), Google could be in real trouble. It could quickly turn Google into Netscape, and I am sure Bill Gates knows this.
This is a bet the company decision.
9:35:58 PM 
|
|
Here's a question. Do you get paid for the Google ads for the content stored in the Microsoft's, Google's, or Yahoo's caches? Can anyone parse the affiliate code on these examples? It's clear that the ads have changed. They don't reflect the content of the site anymore and do reflect the URL of the storage location (the cache). It's not a snapshot. The question is does the site owner or the content owner get paid for those advertisements? Or does Google keep the revenue?
Sample site. Direct link. Look at the Google ads to the right.
Google's Cache.
Microsoft's Cache.
Yahoo's Cache.
UPDATE: It does appear that the ads support the content owner although that hasn't been proven conclusively.
3:42:53 PM
|
|
Anil cozies up to Google: "I thought then, and still think now, that Smart Tags were a great idea, especially if they were implemented as an option," wrote Anil Dash, an executive at Six Apart, on his blog. If this was an open tool, where the data sets I was using to tag the content were advertising free and not tied to the tool vendor, it probably wouldn't be a problem. This isn't what is going on here. This is adware. Google is pushing its advertising into content it does not own. Why not just parse the page and replace the banner ads the content provider is running with Google banners? This boils down to invasive marketing by an increasingly unscrupulous company. The pressures of justifying a $50 billion valuation are showing...
11:31:56 AM
|
|
Baghdad under siege. Urban takedowns, infrastructure disruption, and chaos; oh my!
Valdis Krebs makes a very good point:
The NYT article supports and confirms what John has been blogging for the last 12 months. But why no mention of John or the GG blog? Is that journalist aware of this blog? It basically writes the story for him...
6:50:43 AM
|
|
Bush begins is trip in Europe to push for transatlantic unity. Unfortunately, most in Europe will see it for what it really is: a mission to beg for financial assistance to support our mission in Iraq. This is too transparent to work. The underlying premise of muscular unilateralism is that we are financially able (and as importantly morally able) to change the world on our own. That assumption is being shown to be patently false.
6:07:23 AM
|
|
My close friend Dann Sheridan has some difficult news to report. His wonderful wife is in a fight with cancer. My family's hearts, minds, and prayers are with them right now.
5:44:32 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2005 John Robb.
|
|
|
