> They're "When UserAgent is detected send shitty version". If you must pick an example of them breaking stuff, please pick one that they didn't already apolog

> They're "When UserAgent is detected send shitty version". If you must pick an example of them breaking stuff, please pick one that they didn't already apologize and fix. > http://i.imgur.com/FDM5DQ9.png http://i.imgur.com/FDM5DQ9.png My mistake on confusing google earth with google maps, that is an important point that issue. It does suck that doesn't work on firefox, but no one is forcing any one to do anything. Its not like you paid for any of this, or there is some law that says companies have to give stuff away for free. > You're doing 180s with such grace, it it impressive. On one hand, Google isn't forced to release their software for firefox. On the other hand, they're paragons of the open web and are all about standards I am not reversing my stance or saying anything self contradictory. I am attempting to define nuanced boundaries around some who would rather bludgeon things into a simple categories whether or not it fits. So far all I hear are complaints about company giving away huge amounts of value for free, but isn't doing it the way you (or I) want. I never said Google was paragon of anything and I admitted they could do better (I really do wish they would do better), the only line I am taking is that their behavior is not "anti-competitive", which is not a high bar. Which has not been disproved or this case even rationally approached. I am open to having my mind changed, but I would need well thought out discourse and evidence to change it. If you respond again so thoughtlessly or with such poor grammar I will not be responding again.