Google’s Net Neutrality Blunder
Since its inception, Google has enjoyed the "good guys" reputation in the computing community and beyond. Google has been the inspirational force behind dozens of "good" movements online and off. Products like Gmail, Google Apps, and more have not only pushed the boundaries of free software, they have forced other players, namely Microsoft to step up their game. Microsoft’s new Office web apps might still be years away (if ever) without the push provided by Google’s offerings.
Google has been a helpful force in other areas as well. It’s Chrome browser started a JavaScript speed war within the browser community without which advanced cloud based computing offerings (like web apps) would not be possible. The Android operating system has provided a much needed boost to the mobile phone community, allowing users to get advanced, forward thinking features, without having to sell out all control to whatever Apple decides is "right" for your phone.
In the non-computing world, Google has put its weight and money behind "good" causes and projects like wind energy and more.
Unfortunately, it is beginning to seem like the company does not have the vision to see beyond the latest "fun" technology cooked up by its programmers in their vaunted 20 percent time. The latest debacle comes courtesy of its so-called net neutrality proposal that it cooked up with Verizon. Google finds itself in the unfamiliar position of having to defend not only one of its offerings, but its motivation as well. Whenever a company, any company, must expend as much energy as Google has on defending a non-product idea, it’s a safe bet that it is backing the wrong horse.
In this case, Google is increasingly parsing out the language in its net neutrality proposal. It claims that detractors are getting it all wrong and what it really means is good for everyone, if only you read it their way. Unfortunately, it is just this ambiguity that is the problem. Assuming that one counts on Google being completely benevolent now and in the future (a big assumption), there is nothing to stop others from taking the company’s proposal and reading it exactly as the naysayers say it will be read. What is to stop AT&T, Comcast, or some new telecom company from using "good guy Google’s" words against them, and us?
In a misguided effort to make themselves a key player in the net neutrality debate, Google has put its name on something that has shaken lose some of the hard earned goodwill the company has built up over the years. In the future, this net neutrality proposal will be regarded as a mistake in business strategy by company management. Just how big of a mistake, will depend upon how quickly (if ever) Google realizes it and changes course. If that happens quickly, then this chapter will be regarded as a rare stumble by the Internet giant. If, however, Google insists on pushing a bad position for too long, this moment could very well become known as the beginning of the end.
Will Google recognize the overwhelming, and near universal, backlash against its net neutrality proposal in time, ala Facebook? Or, will Google be unable to see past its own vision of greatness in time to salvage its reputation?
Good Software Development Ideas Google Chrome
Sometimes a good idea is so obvious you can’t help but wonder why no one had bothered doing it before.
Webmonkey reports that Google Chrome has released a new beta version of the Chrome browser that runs ALONGSIDE of the regular full-release version of the Google Chrome browser. The idea is that instead of having to commit to either the beta channel or the dev channel of Chrome as your one and only Chrome browser installed on your system, you could choose to have both a bleeding edge installation of Chrome with all of the latest features and functionality, while at the same time having a completely stable version of the browser installed as well.
This is such a great idea, it is a wonder that all beta software is not offered in this manner.
It wasn’t that long ago that beta software was something that was carefully controlled and offered only to specific partners who installed it in a testing environment. In this case, the only one model of software installation made perfect sense. Ever since Microsoft used mass beta and pre-release distribution and testing to go from releasing the embarrassing and widely hated Windows Vista to the almost complaint free Windows 7, software developers have been increasingly realizing the power of wide beta testing to virtually eliminate bugs and other issues before release. In this model the side-by-side beta version of software makes much more sense.
The developers of the Chrome Browser will no doubt see much wider adoption of its developer-level browser with the new Canary version that allows users to run both the "real" version of the browser and the new leading edge developer beta version at the same time. That broader usage will in turn allow bugs to be discovered and fixed more quickly and that will in turn allow Google to release updates to its Chrome browser faster than its rivals.
Like I said, some business strategy ideas are just so good, you wonder why they haven’t been used before.
Support for NoScript JavaScript Disabled Browsers
I can’t help but wonder, considering the number of websites and web developers who insist on ensuring that their websites are still fully compliant with Internet Explorer 6, which was rendered obsolete long ago, should other non-standard browser configurations be considered as well?
Has anyone ever tried to count how many users run Firefox with the NoScript add-on?
How many users have JavaScript disabled in Google Chrome?
Do a lot of IE users have JavaScript turned off or restricted somehow?
Most importantly, if you added up all of the users with JavaScript unsupported or JavaScript disabled in their web browser, how big of a user group would they be as a percentage of all web users? Would that number be larger than the number of people still using IE 6? If so, wouldn’t it be prudent for website owners and webmasters to ensure that their websites function correctly without JavaScript, especially when so many of the elements using JavaScript are superficial like animated menus?
I for one test every WordPress theme or website template in Firefox with NoScript running to see what it looks like when it “breaks” because JavaScript is not enabled in a browser. If it still doesn’t render and function at a basic level, then I won’t use it.
Does anyone else do something similar?
Can the noscript tag be used effectively enough to compensate for non-JavaScript enabled browsers?
Google Experts WordPress Gurus SEO Professionals
Lately, I’ve noticed that there are actually far fewer experts out there than we are led to believe.
There are numerous blogs, websites, and people who hold themselves out as experts on WordPress, or SEO gurus, or professional online designers, and so on. However, a collection of recent updates to the core platforms that these experts give advice about has exposed an unpleasant truth. Most of those SEO experts, WordPress gurus, and online traffic masters out there are really nothing more than parrots rewriting what they have read elsewhere.
Google MayDay Update Exposes Fakes
Google updated it search ranking algorithm recently, much to the dismay of several SEO experts and legions of qualified SEO consultants. It seems that Google’s rankings had been lacking in the area of search known as long-tail keywords.
The definition of long-tail keywords is keywords that are searched for less frequently than typical short-tail or main keywords, but that still provide a lot of traffic to websites savvy enough to use them. For example, something like best Denver hotels, might be a short-tail keyword (or key phrase), while something like nice denver motel or best downtown denver luxury hotels would be a long-tail keyword. The idea is that if you can optimize a webpage to target the long-tail keyword, there will be much less competition, and therefore ranking highly for that phrase will be easier. Doing this just once is not very profitable, however, dedicated website publishers can earn lots of money by creating and optimizing numerous webpages or websites for multiple long-tail keywords.
To take the example further, the owner of a Denver hotels website might create an SEO optimized page for numerous long-tail phrases like, best family friendly denver hotels, or best denver hotels downtown with mountain views, or even best value hotels for business travelers in denver, and so on. Because, each individual page is optimized around that long-tail key-phrase, they can all rank high in Google search results for their own searches. Meanwhile, a website for a major chain of hotels, like Hilton or Marriott, might not rank well for any of those specific searches because they have neither the time nor inclination to try and rank for every search phrase someone might use to find a hotel in Denver.
Instead, these websites rely upon the carefully crafted public image Google has created whereby the best content always rises to the top of search rankings. Before Google updated its searches with the so-called May Day update, this was largely untrue. The only way a webpage would rank highly for a long-tail keyword search was if no one else had actually targeted it yet.
Unofficial Google spokesman Matt Cutts emphasized that the MayDay update to Google searches was targeted primarily at these long-tail searches and the websites that profit from undeserved high rankings in search results by focusing big SEO efforts on underused key phrases.
There has been much speculation about what exactly was changed by Google. What is interesting is where this speculation is coming from. Legitimate Google watchers have been postulating theories and ideas since day one. Furthermore, they are reporting what they hear from other webmasters, Google insiders, and official Google announcements and forum postings. Meanwhile, the fake Google experts have gone quiet about the whole matter, resorting to rewriting about the same old things that they have written about in the past, and waiting for someone else to discover what is going on and what to do about it so that they can finally find out themselves. Of course, then, they’ll be pontificating as though they have worked it all out themselves as soon as they have read enough material from others to use as a crutch springboard.
WordPress 3.0 Reveals Experts Are Not
A similar update to the WordPress blogging platform has left numerous WordPress websites stalled out writing and rewriting about the same eight or ten new features updated in WordPress 3.0 and explained completely on wordpress.org. What is missing is all of that advice about the intricacies of WordPress 3.0. Of course, it should take a little bit of time. WordPress is big and advanced, so digging through everything new in WordPress 3 takes a while, but there are insights along the way.
Most telling is the dearth of WordPress 3.0 themes. Most pre-WordPress 3 themes have been updated, and their creators are quick to point out that their premium WordPress themes are fully compatible with WordPress 3.0. Unfortunately, compatible, and designed for WordPress 3.0 are two very different things.
We’ll keep an eye out for good new WordPress 3.0 themes which should be arriving from the top WordPress developers shortly. In the meantime, if you are a professional writer, you can read the continuing series about the best WordPress themes for writers and the upcoming reviews of writer WordPress themes.
