5 ms·

I am so saddened by how much we trust Google. I wish we regarded Google software with more suspicion. Would people have been nearly as upset if it had been Goog

I am so saddened by how much we trust Google. I wish we regarded Google software with more suspicion. Would people have been nearly as upset if it had been Google that acquired GitHub? I miss the days of being suspicious of Microsoft. But Microsoft isn't nearly as diabolical as Google, nor are they as competent.

blacksmith_tb 8y ago
I'd argue MS has become less diabolical as they've become more competent (VS Code, e.g.). Google is more complex, they are certainly looking more diabolical, not quite sure about the more competent - I suppose it only matters that they are competent enough to be dangerous.
- fartcannon 8y ago
  I'd argue that Microsoft is much worse, what with their utter ubiquity in corporate environments, linkedin, github and win home users. Google ruined cell phones and Microsoft ruined personal computing.
  - mcny 8y ago
    The problem is it is often difficult to decide where incompetence ends and where malicious begins. Microsoft Edge or at least EdgeHTML has a stated goal of being 100% compatible with Google Chrome. As you might guess, it isn't even close. Why? There are far too many competent people at Microsoft to say "never attribute to malice what can be described by incompetence". This isn't the kind of incompetence at Equifax.
    - kerng 8y ago
      Its sad that one has to be 100% compatible with Chrome. Is this something that someone at Microsoft really said? one should have to be compatible with the standards. If that statement is true, then it supports the claim of Google's dominance- which is unhealthy for the browser market, and users.
      - mcny 8y ago
        Maybe I didn't capture the wording perfectly. Maybe I reported what I heard and not what they said? > any Edge-WebKit differences are bugs that we’re interested in fixing context: > We recommend that web developers avoid UA sniffing as much as possible; modern web platform features are nearly all detectable in easy ways. Over the past year, we’ve seen some UA-sniffing sites that have been updated to detect Microsoft Edge… only to provide it with a legacy IE11 code path. This is not the best approach, as Microsoft Edge matches ‘WebKit’ behaviors, not IE11 behaviors (any Edge-WebKit differences are bugs that we’re interested in fixing). In our experience Microsoft Edge runs best on the ‘WebKit’ code paths in these sites. Also, with the internet becoming available on a wider variety of devices, please assume unknown browsers are good – please don’t limit your site to working only on a small set of current known browsers. If you do this, your site will almost certainly break in the future. Personally, I think operations infrastructure should take a a more hands-off approach and let people use whatever web browsers they want and focus on educating users on why and how rather than on what. However, it is not practical for a variety of reasons. I had a chance to chat with a Chrome team member. He assured me that if you are an IT department and want to deploy Chrome in your enterprise, the Chrome team is committed to stand behind you. You can start at https://enterprise.google.com/chrome/chrome-browser/ https://enterprise.google.com/chrome/chrome-browser/ If you have custom home-grown applications that require a legacy browser, you can centrally manage lists. In practice, this means that users will just need to open Google Chrome. If they go to some address that requires a legacy browser, Chrome will automatically kick you to the legacy browser. When someone continues on the legacy browser, you can kick them back to Google Chrome and have them continue there. I think this is the better path forward especially considering that Windows 7 will end of life in 2020. While I love Mozilla Firefox, I think Chrome is your only choice when it comes to Enterprise desktop. For web developers like me, Edge has such a small market share that it makes no sense to test for Edge. From what I understand above, I shouldn't have to test for Microsoft Edge. It shouldn't have any of the legacy stuff from MSIE. That being said, threats of mono culture aside, I think it is best for any corporation to move their web browser to Google Chrome. Your people will be more productive on Google Chrome because it is the browser they know and love. https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/06/17/building-a-more-interoperable-web-with-microsoft-edge/ https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/06/17/building-a-mo... If you're reading this, hello from Google Cloud Summit New York!
- deegles 8y ago
  That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better, more user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft usage/profits. Google, on the other hand, is fundamentally incentivized to sell ads, which requires collecting data. The more data they collect, the more money they make. As the saying goes, we are the product. No amount of hand-wringing or shaming is going to change that fundamental fact. I think that in 100 years we're going to look back on how personal data is used the way we look at barbaric medical practices of the Dark Ages. People in general just didn't know or expect better.
  - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
    > That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better, more user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft usage/profits. Microsoft is in the same business as Google. Search, Bing. Gmail, Outlook.com. GCP, Azure. They even operate an ad network. Google has some bad incentives but Microsoft has all the same ones. If not, why isn't there a single button for "never send any of my personal information to Microsoft" anywhere in Windows 10?
    - Alterlife 8y ago
      In the meantime, Apple builds walled-garden devices with limited functionality so that users are forced to buy several devices. It's unfortunate that every large vendor today has short-term incentives to screw users.
    - krn 8y ago
      > Microsoft is in the same business as Google. Microsoft and Google may have competing products, but they are in completely different businesses. Microsoft is in the business of software, Google is in the business of data. That's why there's a public Bing Search API[1], but there's no public Google Search API. [1] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-services/bing-web-search-api/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-service...
      - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
- bitmapbrother 8y ago
  I would argue otherwise. I mean look at all of the ways Microsoft spies on its users: 1) Uploads data from their user's computer to their servers. 2) Operates a search engine and Ad business with user tracking and data mining 3) Owns linked In and actively mines their user's data and shares it with advertisers 4) An investor and partner with Facebook. 5) Operates data centers in China that are run by state run companies that funnel user data back to the government.

blacksmith_tb 8y ago

I'd argue MS has become less diabolical as they've become more competent (VS Code, e.g.). Google is more complex, they are certainly looking more diabolical, not quite sure about the more competent - I suppose it only matters that they are competent enough to be dangerous.

fartcannon 8y ago
I'd argue that Microsoft is much worse, what with their utter ubiquity in corporate environments, linkedin, github and win home users. Google ruined cell phones and Microsoft ruined personal computing.
- mcny 8y ago
  The problem is it is often difficult to decide where incompetence ends and where malicious begins. Microsoft Edge or at least EdgeHTML has a stated goal of being 100% compatible with Google Chrome. As you might guess, it isn't even close. Why? There are far too many competent people at Microsoft to say "never attribute to malice what can be described by incompetence". This isn't the kind of incompetence at Equifax.
  - kerng 8y ago
    Its sad that one has to be 100% compatible with Chrome. Is this something that someone at Microsoft really said? one should have to be compatible with the standards. If that statement is true, then it supports the claim of Google's dominance- which is unhealthy for the browser market, and users.
    - mcny 8y ago
      Maybe I didn't capture the wording perfectly. Maybe I reported what I heard and not what they said? > any Edge-WebKit differences are bugs that we’re interested in fixing context: > We recommend that web developers avoid UA sniffing as much as possible; modern web platform features are nearly all detectable in easy ways. Over the past year, we’ve seen some UA-sniffing sites that have been updated to detect Microsoft Edge… only to provide it with a legacy IE11 code path. This is not the best approach, as Microsoft Edge matches ‘WebKit’ behaviors, not IE11 behaviors (any Edge-WebKit differences are bugs that we’re interested in fixing). In our experience Microsoft Edge runs best on the ‘WebKit’ code paths in these sites. Also, with the internet becoming available on a wider variety of devices, please assume unknown browsers are good – please don’t limit your site to working only on a small set of current known browsers. If you do this, your site will almost certainly break in the future. Personally, I think operations infrastructure should take a a more hands-off approach and let people use whatever web browsers they want and focus on educating users on why and how rather than on what. However, it is not practical for a variety of reasons. I had a chance to chat with a Chrome team member. He assured me that if you are an IT department and want to deploy Chrome in your enterprise, the Chrome team is committed to stand behind you. You can start at https://enterprise.google.com/chrome/chrome-browser/ https://enterprise.google.com/chrome/chrome-browser/ If you have custom home-grown applications that require a legacy browser, you can centrally manage lists. In practice, this means that users will just need to open Google Chrome. If they go to some address that requires a legacy browser, Chrome will automatically kick you to the legacy browser. When someone continues on the legacy browser, you can kick them back to Google Chrome and have them continue there. I think this is the better path forward especially considering that Windows 7 will end of life in 2020. While I love Mozilla Firefox, I think Chrome is your only choice when it comes to Enterprise desktop. For web developers like me, Edge has such a small market share that it makes no sense to test for Edge. From what I understand above, I shouldn't have to test for Microsoft Edge. It shouldn't have any of the legacy stuff from MSIE. That being said, threats of mono culture aside, I think it is best for any corporation to move their web browser to Google Chrome. Your people will be more productive on Google Chrome because it is the browser they know and love. https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/06/17/building-a-more-interoperable-web-with-microsoft-edge/ https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/06/17/building-a-mo... If you're reading this, hello from Google Cloud Summit New York!
deegles 8y ago
That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better, more user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft usage/profits. Google, on the other hand, is fundamentally incentivized to sell ads, which requires collecting data. The more data they collect, the more money they make. As the saying goes, we are the product. No amount of hand-wringing or shaming is going to change that fundamental fact. I think that in 100 years we're going to look back on how personal data is used the way we look at barbaric medical practices of the Dark Ages. People in general just didn't know or expect better.
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago
  > That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better, more user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft usage/profits. Microsoft is in the same business as Google. Search, Bing. Gmail, Outlook.com. GCP, Azure. They even operate an ad network. Google has some bad incentives but Microsoft has all the same ones. If not, why isn't there a single button for "never send any of my personal information to Microsoft" anywhere in Windows 10?
  - Alterlife 8y ago
    In the meantime, Apple builds walled-garden devices with limited functionality so that users are forced to buy several devices. It's unfortunate that every large vendor today has short-term incentives to screw users.
  - krn 8y ago
    > Microsoft is in the same business as Google. Microsoft and Google may have competing products, but they are in completely different businesses. Microsoft is in the business of software, Google is in the business of data. That's why there's a public Bing Search API[1], but there's no public Google Search API. [1] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-services/bing-web-search-api/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-service...
    - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
bitmapbrother 8y ago
I would argue otherwise. I mean look at all of the ways Microsoft spies on its users: 1) Uploads data from their user's computer to their servers. 2) Operates a search engine and Ad business with user tracking and data mining 3) Owns linked In and actively mines their user's data and shares it with advertisers 4) An investor and partner with Facebook. 5) Operates data centers in China that are run by state run companies that funnel user data back to the government.