3 ms·

Or, and hear me out here, they’re saying this wasn’t just a random overnight change but one that’s been tested and has shown positive feedback on mobile over a

• xp84 7y ago
  > "that’s been tested and has shown positive feedback on mobile over a long stretch of time." This is a very smart argument for Google to have shifted to. The thing is, this UI change is quite attractive. I 100% believe that they focus-grouped this, and that a vast majority of users agree that this looks nicer. The "problem" with it, as you probably know, is that the redesign was done to make ads blend in with real results more effectively to further increase the no doubt already impressive share of searches that end in a user clicking an ad. Users pretty much don't care about this. They generally click whatever's first and don't care that some retailer or whoever paid Google $1 for the privilege of appending ".com" to what the user typed and providing a link to be clicked. The people speaking up are primarily: * Geeks, who in general avoid ads because they know that they add no value and instead just get in the way of the actual results. * People who have to pay Google due to this racket, who will have to pay slightly more now that even more users will conflate paid ads with results, meaning that having the best and most relevant website matters less and paying Google the most money and having a higher-clickthrough paid Google ad matters more. It's simultaneously true that Google tested this and picked a design that nearly all of its users prefer, and that they're acting like greedy, craven racketeers here.
• danShumway 7y ago
  Well yeah, I'm pretty open about the fact that I trend towards an anti-Google bias. At the same time, I regularly defend Google when they do good things or get unfairly maligned -- especially recently with their proposals around the privacy budget, deprecating agent strings, 3rd-party cookie changes, better CORS defaults, and so on. Very few companies fall into a binary good or bad category, and like most companies, Google makes a mixture of both good and bad decisions. One of my primary problems with Google today is that it's just frustrating to interact with them. It feels like pulling teeth to engage with the engineers or support on issue trackers/twitter/press releases, in a way that very much isn't the case for other companies. Generally, when I look at issues or feedback threads, I'm not thinking of them as a personal failing for the engineers at Google. I'm not trying to assign blame or start a debate. There is a very weird combative element to Google feedback threads and official statements that isn't present in press releases and issue trackers for other companies. You can see the same kinds of asides in Google's previous statements about Manifest V3 changes, about the Web Audio fiasco, about URL changes, about merging the Chrome/Google sign-in. There's a pattern of immediately taking what should be very brief, neutral statements about rollbacks or changes, and then quickly transitioning them to, "we need you to understand that this wasn't our fault, it was yours." I don't understand that attitude, it takes the conversation to an emotional place that isn't worth going to. It doesn't need to be anyone's fault. Just say you're rolling back the changes and then publicly pat yourself on the back for listening to feedback. The frustration you're seeing here isn't just an anti-Google bias, it's the result of years[0] of watching Google regularly respond poorly to feedback from people who just want to work together with companies in good faith to make the web better. > to step away and explore other options This isn't really an option to for people who care about the web as a platform, because open feedback and (occasionally) criticism is the only way to make your voice heard about the direction that the Internet should go. In some cases we can just say, "Google will be Google" and advise people to use DuckDuckGo or Firefox instead. In many other cases, where Google is proposing new web standards, or changes that will significantly alter how ordinary people interact with browsers and websites, paying attention and offering feedback is just really important -- because Google's response to all of this criticism very often boils down to, "you should have complained sooner, it's too late to change now." [0]: https://danshumway.com/blog/chrome-autoplay https://danshumway.com/blog/chrome-autoplay