5 ms·

Microsoft web browser that covers its tracks could hit Google’s advertising

9 points by hhm 18y ago

ojbyrne 18y ago
"Although casual users cannot see the previous user’s search history, authorities such as the police will be able to access it if necessary." So everything is actually still there, just not present in the UI? Seems pretty silly if so.
- breck 18y ago
  I think the article is simplified a bit for the masses who don't understand how the internet operates. Cookies and browser history aren't saved locally(is my guess of IE8, I haven't used it), but the ISP and/or Website could still have a record of your visit which could be obtained by the police.
- gasull 18y ago
  I think it means that the ISP will still spy on your movements. Recent laws passed in the UK make ISPs eavesdrop on their users. It's a very confusing article, probably plain wrong.
shadytrees 18y ago
> Microsoft and Google failed to return calls last night. They're just, you know, shy and unsure of what to say. Should they commit to this relationship? They've been burned before.
KirinDave 18y ago
People have had access to this feature for years now from Safari and Firefox, and things haven't exploded. Why is it suddenly a concern with a beta of IE8? People are really eager to find MS conspiracies to write about. I guess if you're a tech journalist, it's kind of like the white whale of your industry.
- breck 18y ago
  My guess is that IE8 finally makes the feature prominent, like the Back button. But haven't seen it yet, so maybe someone who has can comment?
- greyman 18y ago
  How it can be done it Firefox, is there some plugin to do it? I am just curious...I am aware that I can switch on erasing my private data when I close Firefox, but that isn't the same thing.
greyman 18y ago
>> "In allowing surfers to access websites but conceal their browsing behaviour, Microsoft prevents internet sites from collecting information about their users" << How exactly? I don't get it. I supposed they just turn off local cache and local browsing history...
- ii 18y ago
  InPrivate Blocking feature won't allow the site you're visiting to send information to third-party sites, various ad sites, google-analitics.com and friends included.
axod 18y ago
This is so wrong it belongs on theonion. This will have absolutely no impact on google, or any other advertising. Contextual advertising just does not work the way the article supposes it does.
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  I think you missed the point. Google (like most large ad networks) does a lot more than just contextual advertising, especially now that they own DoubleClick. There are a lot of sites like MySpace with little or no context that make up a huge % of Google's non-search page views. Google serves ads there largely based on context from previous pages you visited. For instance, if you searched on Google for "digital camera" and then later went to YouTube, they might show you ads for digital cameras. Many big ad networks do this. Browsers blocking that would greatly lower CPMs.
  - axod 18y ago
    So the browser stops supporting cookies does it? Even if the browser does stop sending cookies to google, they could do pretty good tracking based on useragent/ip. However, a browser that doesn't support cookies correctly, isn't very useful. The browsers history is completely irrelevant. From the article: "others using the same computer will not be able to see which sites have been accessed." That is not the same as "Cookies sent from google will no longer work"
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
    - mattmaroon 18y ago
      It supports cookies just fine. It just doesn't send your info to every third party site that has a pixel on the page. Now for Google to track you as you move around the web, they'll have to do a lot more than simply give people a JS snippet to slap in their pages. That's the point. It won't make it impossible for them, but it could make it impractical. The article probably didn't explain it so well because it was aimed at a non-technical audience.

9 points by hhm 18y ago

"Although casual users cannot see the previous user’s search history, authorities such as the police will be able to access it if necessary." So everything is actually still there, just not present in the UI? Seems pretty silly if so.

breck 18y ago
I think the article is simplified a bit for the masses who don't understand how the internet operates. Cookies and browser history aren't saved locally(is my guess of IE8, I haven't used it), but the ISP and/or Website could still have a record of your visit which could be obtained by the police.
gasull 18y ago
I think it means that the ISP will still spy on your movements. Recent laws passed in the UK make ISPs eavesdrop on their users. It's a very confusing article, probably plain wrong.

shadytrees 18y ago

> Microsoft and Google failed to return calls last night. They're just, you know, shy and unsure of what to say. Should they commit to this relationship? They've been burned before.

KirinDave 18y ago

People have had access to this feature for years now from Safari and Firefox, and things haven't exploded. Why is it suddenly a concern with a beta of IE8? People are really eager to find MS conspiracies to write about. I guess if you're a tech journalist, it's kind of like the white whale of your industry.

breck 18y ago
My guess is that IE8 finally makes the feature prominent, like the Back button. But haven't seen it yet, so maybe someone who has can comment?
greyman 18y ago
How it can be done it Firefox, is there some plugin to do it? I am just curious...I am aware that I can switch on erasing my private data when I close Firefox, but that isn't the same thing.

greyman 18y ago

>> "In allowing surfers to access websites but conceal their browsing behaviour, Microsoft prevents internet sites from collecting information about their users" << How exactly? I don't get it. I supposed they just turn off local cache and local browsing history...

ii 18y ago
InPrivate Blocking feature won't allow the site you're visiting to send information to third-party sites, various ad sites, google-analitics.com and friends included.

axod 18y ago

This is so wrong it belongs on theonion. This will have absolutely no impact on google, or any other advertising. Contextual advertising just does not work the way the article supposes it does.

mattmaroon 18y ago
I think you missed the point. Google (like most large ad networks) does a lot more than just contextual advertising, especially now that they own DoubleClick. There are a lot of sites like MySpace with little or no context that make up a huge % of Google's non-search page views. Google serves ads there largely based on context from previous pages you visited. For instance, if you searched on Google for "digital camera" and then later went to YouTube, they might show you ads for digital cameras. Many big ad networks do this. Browsers blocking that would greatly lower CPMs.
- axod 18y ago
  So the browser stops supporting cookies does it? Even if the browser does stop sending cookies to google, they could do pretty good tracking based on useragent/ip. However, a browser that doesn't support cookies correctly, isn't very useful. The browsers history is completely irrelevant. From the article: "others using the same computer will not be able to see which sites have been accessed." That is not the same as "Cookies sent from google will no longer work"
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    It supports cookies just fine. It just doesn't send your info to every third party site that has a pixel on the page. Now for Google to track you as you move around the web, they'll have to do a lot more than simply give people a JS snippet to slap in their pages. That's the point. It won't make it impossible for them, but it could make it impractical. The article probably didn't explain it so well because it was aimed at a non-technical audience.