After the Safari privacy boo boo, which Google claims was just another innocent mistake, Google, like Brittney Spears, has gone and did it again ..... done the same thing to Microsoft's IE! Did Google really make another mistake, or is Google guilty of deliberately being 'evil'? http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...cepting-tracking-cookies-microsoft-claims.ars
I am lost with this story. In one camp, people say Google should be hung at the stake, but in the other, Google states that Microsoft is adhering to archaic standards (this wouldn't surprise me... we're talking about IE here). If Google did in fact do things that override user cookies however, they deserve to be held responsible.
I'm waiting to see if Firefox also has similar problems with Google code; after all I don't think the code wrote itself, and if Google is guilty than I'm also sure that they must have violated Firefox as well, and maybe Opera as well? Then again, Safari and webkit are the biggest browsing platform on the mobile scene and Safari itself generates 2/3 of all search inquiries according to Google:
Considering the 2 major phone platforms on the market right now have webkit browsers stock. No one even had to survey that, it could have been guessed by anyone and been guaranteed correct. It just goes without saying.
Well, my issue with that statement is different. None is a browsing platform. One is a browser, the other an engine. And the browser uses that engine anyways. What he probably wanted to say was that Safari was the biggest browser on mobile devices. Which probably is true. And that WebKit was the largest browser engine on mobile devices, which is definitely true. A browsing platform is a PC, or a Macintosh, or iPad or a Android device, etc.
*snicker* Ah marfig, there you go inserting facts into conversations again. Do definitions really matter? On topic, I, too, am curious to see whether or not Firefox was also subjected to this. For Google to say that it's an archaic standard is one thing - and the company actually points to where MS itself breaks the standard - but it IS still currently a standard and therefore a company that holds the motto "don't be evil" should look at that as still needing to be respected even if others aren't. After all, when you're the good guy, you simply don't have the same options as the bad guy.
Corporations are set up to reward evil for good. "Don't be evil" sounds like they're setting the bar pretty low, but really it's impossible not to be evil and still make a buck.
There so many things that went wrong with that Google motto that it isn't surprising they don't explore it anymore.
Wah wah wah, if it was such a problem why is it the RECOMMENDED work-around? All I hear is cring because Google supposedly screwed up with Safari and now they wanna try and say oh they did it with IE too guys!!! How do we know that by default it isn't set up like that due to a lazy coder and IE? Since it is the recommended work around whats to say the guy who did it didn't just say "well it wont mess with any other browser, why do extra work?' Also, if it was the massive problem it has been made out to be then why would so many other sites INCLUDING Microsoft do the SAME thing? Oh and BTW, some idiots were asking "I wonder how Chrome handles those P3P Policies" (over on the original site that is) Answer THEY DONT! Nor does Opera Safari OR Firefox only IE has them because only IE is compliant with backwards a** 2002 standards that are not really a standard. Also found a possible reason for all this bad publicity lately for Google, it actually makes sense since they were one of the largest Anti-SOPA supporters:
You know, I'm tempted to side with Microsoft. Wait, better, I say Go Microsoft! Signed, Marfig. Pro anything that messes with +1.
