Beanstalk on Google+ Beanstalk on Facebook Beanstalk on Twitter Beanstalk on LinkedIn Beanstalk on Pinterest
Published On:
SEO articles and blog published on ...
Hear Us On:
Webmaster Radio
Blog Partner Of:
WebProNews Blog Partner
Helping Out:
Carbon balanced.


Microsoft Scroogling Google

Microsoft scroogles Google.

I received an email notification from Microsoft this morning when I arrived at my office. The subject … “Our terms are changing”. Now, maybe I’m jaded but I immediately rolled my eyes and thought, “Great, what right have I lost now that I need to give up to keep either my OS or my office suite. Turns out they had their eye on Google, now me.

In what can only be viewed as a cheeky attack on Google their email discusses a few  changes but none as clear-in-target as their section on privacy which reads:

As part of our ongoing commitment to respecting your privacy, we won’t use your documents, photos or other personal files or what you say in email, chat, video calls or voice mail to target advertising to you.

This isn’t the first time Microsoft has attacked Google on privacy issues.  In November of 2013 they launched their Scroogled line of products (the shirt in the image above is one of them) in the Microsoft store.  That product launch got a lot of backlash but personally I found it entertaining.  They also launched the Scroogled site at basically slamming every product Google has and their privacy issues.

Let the games continue …

SEO news blog post by @ 8:11 am on June 12, 2014



New Microsoft CEO – Satya Nadella

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella
On February 4th Microsoft announced a new CEO. His name is Satya Nadella and he’s going to be a force to be reckoned with.

Nadella, 46, is the third CEO of the company and it’s his “youth” and background in both business AND engineering that make him an excellent choice.  What’s clear in this decision is that Microsoft is placing as much emphasis on business acumen as it is on technical knowledge and the ability to understand what it is they’re doing and how to work with those that do it.  The hope is (in my mind anyways) that this will help them  avoid some of the past major blunders of their past such as their inability to capitalize to their potential on the growth of mobile and let’s not forget the decision to not go into search earlier that lead to them to a hard uphill battle with Google.

To aid in this transition Bill Gates is stepping down as Chairman (at Nadella’s request) to take a more active role with the product groups.  You have to know that they have faith in his skills to have Bill spending more of his time working at the company.  Here’s the video Mr. Gates put out about the announcement:

At only 46 he has over 20 years with the company and there’s no doubt that he’s paid his dues and understands the culture and their strengths and weaknesses.

The Future

In the near future we can expect to see a reorganization as Nadella moves to (as he calls it) amplify their ability to adapt and move on new technologies.  The interesting part is that you probably won’t hear much of Nadella himself who’s tended to remain in the background, clearly quietly making a huge impact at one of the world’s largest and most respected companies.

I personally wish him luck and that he avoid some of the disasters I see on the horizon for Yahoo! and their CEO Marissa Mayer.  If rumors are right, Yahoo! is working on their own search engine.  Search didn’t work for them the first time Marissa, just because you came from Google doesn’t mean you can make it work now.

If You’re Interested …

There’s a good piece on the Satya Nadella (to get you started anyways) over at Wired.  You know … if you want to know more about the man who will be driving the future of your PC, gaming and mobile experience.  No biggie though. :)

SEO news blog post by @ 6:58 pm on February 6, 2014



The Bing Ring Bust Begins

Bing joins Google in switch to secure resulting in loss of keyword data for SEO's.SEOs everywhere took a hit when Google encrypted all searches last year, swiftly destroying access to one of our most vital pieces of information: which keywords resulted in traffic. For a while it seemed that we could access that data—albeit only partially—on Microsoft’s Bing search engine, but as of Monday those times are a’changing too.

Bing now appears to support secure https:// search, though it’s optional and Bing has not made any moves to promote this feature as of yet. According to Search Engine Watch, being logged into your Microsoft account does not automatically encrypt your search data—unlike Google—and there aren’t any options to only use secure search…so far. Microsoft spokespeople speaking to Search Engine Watch and Search Engine Land deferred the question, saying that the company is still evolving their HTTPS function and rolling out slowly.

But let’s face it: we know what’s coming. Right now, that (not provided) in Google Analytics is a continuous blow to the hard work of every SEO and webmaster out there; losing the keyword data from Google searches forced us to re-evaluate how we defined success and how we measured whether our efforts were working. While Bing’s market status in the US is tiny—barely over 18% of overall search traffic—it was one of the only ways to still grab keyword data. Bing hasn’t commented on whether they’ll yank keywords out of our hands completely, or whether they’ll be willing to include some enhanced keyword information in their Webmaster Tools. If they’re smart, they’ll throw a bone to advertisers, who may not be willing to place ads if they can’t get referral data. But I’m not holding my breath, and if Bing doesn’t take all searches to HTTPS within the year then I will eat a hat (as long as it’s made of cake or something).

As SEO continues to evolve and grow, we face new challenges as search engines become increasingly about people and less about algorithms. In the end, these roadblocks make us better marketers; we have to work for our links, but they’re higher quality. So throw on some Dylan and gather round, children; it’s time to admit that the waters around us have grown. Time to accept that soon we’ll be drenched with (not provided)–and that’s okay.

SEO news blog post by @ 12:47 pm on January 15, 2014



Are you Modern? Take the test!

modern.IE Logo

Two pro-Microsoft posts in one week? I know, Right?!

Clearly we are not masters of fate or IT news, so today’s headline is covering the new modern:IE Test Site setup to assist web developers with creating IE compatible site content.

Wasn’t it like, two days ago that I just pointed out that the big flaw with IE is that the old versions create a web design nightmare? *tap tap* .. Apparently this thing is turned on?

What does it test?

Actually the tool is a suite of tests with some specific test cases for IE browser specific issues.

Here’s a list of categories it will test and report on without setting up a ‘Site Owner’ account:

  • Fix common problems from supporting old versions of IE:
  • Known compatibility issues
  • Compatibility Mode
  • Frameworks & libraries
  • Web standards docmode
  • Help this webpage work well across browsers, across devices:
  • CSS prefixes
  • Browser plug-ins
  • Responsive web design
  • Browser detection
  • Consider building with some new features in Windows 8:
  • Touch browsing default
  • Start screen site tile

If you plug your URL in the page will test all these areas and report back to you where improvements could be made.

Additionally there is a direct link to the ‘Pinned Site Tile’ testing/design tool.

This tool lets you select an image (144×144 pixel PNG) and text for your website when a Windows 8 user wants to ‘Pin’ the site to their start menu.

My experience with the tool wasn’t great, likely due to some caching, but if you test your code against sites that do work properly you can still sort out the needed meta tags quickly enough.

Other Goodies?

Included in the suite is a link to the Internet Explorer Test Drive site to compare HTML5 features and performance with other browsers..

Technically, I ended up short on time to cover more, so if you dive in and start to wonder why we didn’t point out something new/interesting, feel free to let us know, we’re always open to feedback. :)

SEO news blog post by @ 12:20 pm on January 31, 2013


Facebook Social Search: Grasping for that Third Pillar?

On January 15th 2013, Facebook planted it’s so called “third pillar” of it’s social network empire, “social search”.

If Facebook *is* all about social media, and they already had a search function, how is this a big change?

Stack of coins with a magnifying glass on the pennies.
Okay, well that *is* some small change..

From what I can tell of the new search feature, it’s an exclusive index of Facebook, powered by Bing. So you get better/different results from the previous search options because it’s been handled by Microsoft’s search methodology.
So, you may be wondering, “Why isn’t Bing offering an improved ‘Social Search’ now that they have access to all this Facebook data?”, and you will be amused to note that today Bing indeed announced an improved ‘Social Search’ to users of their services.

In fact, Bing’s social search results are appended to the Facebook search results, and all clicks stay inside Facebook.

Still, what’s really ‘new’ about this search behavior?

Allegedly if I tack on action words to a search like, “visited by friends” or “popular with friends”, it’s supposed to marry the search results with social data from my friends list.

I gave that a whirl, trying to find various searches that would result in ‘approvals’ or ‘likes’ from my friends and I got very poor results.

Could it be that my tech savvy friends have dialed in their Facebook privacy settings to the point where Bing’s assistance is negligible? Possibly. And I wouldn’t blame them for it.

Then I tried some of the same searches in Google, without engaging any ‘social’ tags or features, and viola, I can see restaurants, pubs, and even retail stores that people in my circles have rated. I also know now to never have lunch with Dave, since he loves all the types of restaurants I try to avoid. :)

Plus, thanks to Google’s purchase of Zagat, I have a fallback option for accurate/honest feedback if my friends aren’t reviewing restaurants or pubs that I want to try out or are simply closer to my location.

While I’m not seeing a real improvement, FB is seeing a nice reversal of their stock prices, which were on a steady downfall last year, as we mentioned in our May 22nd, 2012, blog post: FB stock drops as SpaceX soars to success!

How long this will bolster their faltering stock value?

Will ‘Social Search’ mature into a feature that entices disinterested users to revisit Facebook?

Clearly that’s anyone’s guess, but at least they are trying to keep the ship afloat, and search traffic could help bolster ad revenue, as it did for Google.

Time will tell. ;)

SEO news blog post by @ 11:56 am on January 17, 2013


Search Engines: How Did We Get Here?

search engines

It seems strange to say but, for those old enough to remember, there was a time when internet searches were not dominated by Google. Prior to its arrival, the one time alpha and omega of search engines was Alta Vista (founded in 1995). One can still find Alta Vista (resurrected by Yahoo) bravely hanging on in a very lonely and unvisited corner of the internet, quietly giving competent search results via a rather bland and unappealing interface (it has a baby blue background that reminds one of the color of an unwanted sweater at Christmas). Perhaps if one has the time, go and enter a query for old times sake; it is akin to visiting a long forgotten relative in an old age home. The gesture is bound be appreciated and Alta Vista still has the power to tell a good story or two (although, you may feel like you are listening to Yahoo – which now receives primary and paid search results via Bing, which is in turn in owned by Microsoft).

Reading over the names of the now non-existent search engines that began life in the mid 1990s does illicit a certain sense of nostalgia, though without the passage of time usually required to stir these feelings. We are of course talking about “internet” years, which in a way mirror dog years (though dog years have remained fairly static and predictable). Does anyone still remember these one time players from the seminal days of the internet (some of the names could easily be mistaken for hair metal bands): Excite, Magellan, Snap, Direct Hit, Hot Bot. Some have soldiered on, others have been absorbed or have faded away into well deserved obscurity.

Today, as we all know, the dictatorial and tyrannical ruler of the internet, when it comes to searches, is none other than Google. Google started life as a research project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1996. By 1998, Google had been incorporated as a privately held company. Today, Google has an Explicit Core Search share of 66.4% (more than four times that of its nearest competitor – Bing/Microsoft). Google is now a part of the scenery, like wood paneling in the basement. You don’t really like it, its kind of bland and dated, but you are too lazy to take it down and re-decorate as it serves its purpose so you tolerated it.

The other distant, but managing to get by, search engine that is nipping at Google’s heels is Bing. This Microsoft owned search engine is slowly gaining in stature, but still has a long way to go before it is truly relevant. Many prefer it to Google (perhaps more so out of spite), as it gives a wider range of results and is not as inclined to burden the user with advertisements or cookies. That said, Bing has failed to catch on. All one needs to do is look at their own analytics to see which search engine is driving traffic to their site. Bing is responsible, across the board, for a very small percentage of that traffic. Why? Google, for all its problems, still gives users the results they want and provides a feeling of familiarity (see wood paneling). It begs the question then, “what does Bing offer that Google doesn’t?” The answer, unfortunately for Bing, is not enough to cause one to switch. Google has a form of brand loyalty that cannot be trumped at the moment.

Bing, or better yet, Microsoft, in a desperate attempt at relevancy, tried a side-by-side comparison (Coke-Pepsi taste test, anyone?) and for all intents and purposes it failed. It wasn’t that Google provided by far the better results, it is just that Bing didn’t bring anything else to the table other than a vague sense of, occasional, equality. Even though Coke changed its recipe, but then wisely reverted back to what made it great, it still won the Pepsi challenge – hands down (such was its hold on public consciousness; and the fact that it was simply a better product). It is probably safe to say that Bing and Google will have Coke-Pepsi relationship for the foreseeable future, despite Google’s best attempts to annoy those most reliant on its search results by changing its “secret” recipe via the never-ending Panda and Penguin updates.

So what of Yahoo? Yes, it is still around and has refused to leave like the ubiquitous reveler who doesn’t know the party has ended. Oddly, we still begrudgingly acknowledge its existence as is evidenced by its Explicit Core Search share of 12.8%. Honestly, though, most Yahoo searches are probably done by accident. Yahoo’s behavior is even more bizarre in that they have kept the aforementioned Alta Vista afloat. Perhaps it is a write off for tax purposes or the beginning of a retirement home for irrelevant search engines.

So who are the other players left in the North American search engine wars? There has to be some RC Colas out there, right? In third place, with an Explicit Core Search share of only 3.2% is the Ask Network (originally know as Ask Jeeves – founded in 1996). Ask Jeeves, for the multitudes who will not recall, was the first search engine to employ what is known as “natural language” queries as opposed to the more terse syntax required by other search engines. still uses this method and has also expanded it to include conversion, math and dictionary questions, which are really its forte. With the Ask Network’s recent purchase of, it may see an increase in its search volume, but nothing to bother Google and Microsoft. It should also be noted that receives paid results from Google.

Languishing in fourth, and talk about staying in the fridge past your best before date, is AOL, inc. Surely this can only be due to all those computers that came preloaded with it being turned on from time to time to see if they still work and if there are any harvest-able parts in them. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. The real problem with AOL was how restrictive it was. They were intent on keeping its users within its sphere of influence by directing them to approved sites and services. It was an early attempt at a “dumbing down” of the web for the masses, which thankfully failed. PCWorld magazine even awarded AOL the number one position in its top ten list of most annoying tech products on April 16th, 2007, for its practice of direct marketing. PCWorld claims that between 1993 to 2006 that AOL sent out over 1 billion AOL discs (most of which, according to PCWorld, ended up at their office).

Around the world, the search engine equation really isn’t much different. Google still holds the top spot by about a 7:1 ratio over its nearest competitor, For those unfamiliar with Baidu, it is a search engine designed for websites, images and audio files that contain Chinese language content. Baidu has also created a Japanese language search engine, which only makes programmatic sense considering the written languages of China and Japan are ideographic and have a shared history. Out of all the other search engines mentioned, Baidu, based on the pervasiveness of Chinese languages (Mandarin and Cantonese) and culture, is the most likely to enjoy the biggest gains against Google globally.

Yahoo comes in at about an 11:1 ratio when compared to Google internationally; Microsoft sites come in at a 25:1 ratio. Rounding out the top five is the little known search engine known as Yandex. Yandex is a Russian owned internet company, which also owns the largest search engine in Russia. In addition, the Yandex site was voted the most popular website in Russia, too (which may or may not mean anything considering all the controversy around election fraud there and the fact that Yandex’s 40% market share in Russia is still second to Google). Yandex does have a presence in the USA as Yandex Labs, which is located in the San Francisco Bay Area. Before Yandex can really make a global impact it is going to have to become the dominant search engine choice in Russian speaking countries first; if not, expect continued marginality.

So, what does the future of the internet searches hold, well, for many it will be one lidless eye watching over all one does. But, If history has shown us anything, it is that no company, institution or government has been able to maintain a monopoly, and one day, without warning, the next young upstart(s) will come along and displace the wise old man of the web (currently Google). Hopefully Google will depart with more grace than some of its predecessors. Case in point, as of the writing of this article, US regulators are about to sue Google for using its search prowess to stifle competition and push up online advertising costs. Is this the first chink in Google’s armor that will open the door to the competition?

Credit: a big thanks to comScore for their invaluable help and information.

SEO news blog post by @ 11:47 am on November 28, 2012


Microsoft Data Center Wasting Energy to Avoid Fines

As a follow up to my previous post on Internet pollution which discussed the amount of electrical consumption and wasteful energy practices by data centers; a post from the NY Times today really summed up the national mentality towards the consumption of energy and the wastefulness of the industry.

Microsoft Data Center

The Microsoft Redmond Quincy data center, which is the home of Bing and Hotmail and other cloud based servers, had a contract with a Washington state utility which contained clauses that imposed severe penalties for the under-consumption of electricity.

Microsoft was fined $210 000 for not meeting its “power-use target”. In an effort to avoid such a sizable penalty this year, Microsoft deliberately consumed millions of watts of power within three days in a “commercially unproductive manner” to avoid the fine being levied against them. The Washington utility board capitulated and reduced the amount to $60k. While the Redmond center claims that it is moving to a carbon neutral footprint, this squandering of energy shows that both groups care little for the environment and are more concerned with the almighty dollar.

With industry becoming ever increasingly more environmentally conscious, such blatant wastefulness cannot go unchecked. It seems that both the power company and the consumer are at fault in this situation. You cannot blame Microsoft for trying to save money; yet why is the power company charging such outrageous amounts for “under-consumption” in the first place? This model forces unneeded energy consumption for the sole purpose of avoiding a fine. This entire model is flawed as it has no regard for the environmental impact for this amount of wastefulness.

With alternate energy technologies becoming commonplace and affordable, we can only guess as to why data centers continue to waste such copious amounts of energy with such blatant disregard to the environment. Certainly the same laws that apply to more traditional dirty industries needs to be applied here as well.

SEO news blog post by @ 11:48 am on September 26, 2012


Bing Maps : 500 Terabytes Better

Donald Sutherland from the 1978 version of the Invasion of the Body Snatchers

There’s fat ladies crooning in the shower, swine are airborne, and I found something in Bing that’s better than the same option in Google!?

Don’t send NASA to check for alien life/body-snatchers, it’s just a few really small perks that I’ve come across and they are pretty darn specific.

500 Terabytes of new image data

Microsoft started it’s ‘Global Ortho Project‘ in early 2010 with the very ambitious goal of mapping the Continental United States and Western Europe at a resolution of 30cm.

The concept is simple, just fly around with high resolution imaging devices, in this case the ‘UltraCamG‘ which Microsoft acquired in 2006 after purchasing Vexcel Imaging, GmbH in Austria.

The data is thus detailed, and current, a great thing when you are competing with Google’s constantly updated (~2 weeks) satellite images.

With a deadline of June 2012 the project is wrapping up almost on time and today the news sites are abuzz with the headlines that the project is completed and available to Bing Maps users.

For a comparison of the results here’s a look at the Beanstalk Office in Google Maps and then in Bing Maps:

Beanstalk's Office in Google MapsBeanstalk’s Office in Google Maps


Beanstalk's Office in Bing MapsBeanstalk’s Office in Bing Maps

Can you see the difference? Even if Bing didn’t have the resolution bonus, they own their image data so they aren’t required to spam their name all over the map like Google has to with the Landsat image data.

I’d love to show off the difference between Google’s Streetview and Bing’s Streetside view, but Microsoft apparently couldn’t afford to send someone by to take some images of our office <rasberry>so I’m not going to be bothered to show that off</rasberry>.

Traffic Data?

While writing this article I stumbled upon another difference between Bing and Google, there’s traffic data for the highways in my city on Bing, but Google has no data for my city (the capital city of this entire province), instead they spent the time to build traffic data for our sister city, Vancouver.
Google Traffic view of Vancouver
Talk about a let-down from Google, and a surprising plus from Bing. Tsk tsk..

On that side of things though, Google’s traffic info is much better than Bing’s. Google Maps even lets you pick a day of the week and hour of the day for planning ahead vs. making the assumption that you’ll only looking moments before you travel, or as you travel.

Overall the user experience with Bing Maps still lags behind Google Maps, with each attempt to zoom/pan/adjust on Bing Maps feeling like a blurry and slow mess due to the bitmap labels that stretch vs. re-size.

I even loaded Bing Maps in Internet Explorer (64 bit version) and Google Chrome to make sure I gave them the best chance to compare to the very peppy results with Google Maps.

Building Maps

As I was wrapping up this piece I noticed that there was a funny ‘block’ covering one of the malls in town when using Bing Maps.

Being a curious fellow I clicked it and found that they have mapped out the mall’s floor plan and allow you to see where each store is located, floor by floor!

The Bay Center Mall in Bing Maps Building ViewOooh! A 4hr 40% off Sale!? I could get some cheap studded ballerina shoes!

To be really honest, both Bing and Google are developing some unique features that helps maintain the competition between them which is excellent for the consumers who can use either service or both.

Now if only I could get a service to tell me where my pens have gone..

SEO news blog post by @ 12:29 pm on August 30, 2012


The most valuable company ever? It’s Microsoft, not Apple.

Bill Gates holding an Apple Logo
Crushing your head..

The slew of now redacted articles claiming that Apple managed to take the title of ‘most valuable company in history’ is further proof that the internet is packed with people who will post anything without considering the facts.

Sure if you compare 1999 dollars to 2012 dollars with no adjustment in value for inflation (?!) Apple looks pretty impressive today, but if you want to say ‘Most valuable company of all time’, you have to factor ‘time’ into the equation.

After accounting for inflation the race between Apple and Microsoft isn’t even close, with Microsoft in the lead by over $230 billion even by conservative estimates.

At one point this morning I saw an article offering the corrected values and stating that, ‘Bill Gates would be upset that IBM was handicapped by inflation‘! This was quickly corrected after comments pointed out a few errors, ‘Bill Gates ran Microsoft, not IBM, and Bill Gates is still alive, stop talking about him like he’s Steve Jobs.‘.

I wanted to pounce on the author, calling them out for reporting on tech history they clearly never paid any attention to, but the sad truth is that it was a senior author who probably wrote the post before getting his morning coffee.

Most Valuable How?

“Money aside, what tech company is the most valuable?”

This was a good question that came up in the reaction threads to the news that Apple is doing so well financially.

If Apple went bankrupt the entire user base would have tons of options for Android tablets/phones/MP3 players/personal PCs. Linux would flourish a bit, and China would have a lot of people looking for employment. Not really a big deal.

If Microsoft went bankrupt there would be over a billion desktop PCs needing new OSes, millions of email/web servers that would need to be migrated to Linux, Hotmail/Bing/MSN/Maps users would have to upgrade to GMail/Google search/GTalk/Maps, and millions of cell phone users would either need to buy new phones or at the very least switch off Microsoft Exchange services and move over to GMail.

Sure as a web developer, we’d produce a lot more web-content without IE compatibility issues, and that’s just a quick ‘glance’ at the issue, so I could be overlooking massive problems on either side, but from a glance, the ‘value’ is clearly not in Apple’s favor, in both money and services.

Speaking of big money tech business..

Facebook is still making headlines for losses, this time one of the earliest investors, ex-PayPal billionaire Peter Thiel, has jumped ship selling over 20 million shares.

Slipery Slope Sign

When one of your primary investors pulls out and cashes in, it’s a pretty clear signal that you’ve peaked and the road ahead is looking very questionable.

Peter Thiel’s projected total for this cash out comes close to $400 million, which is a bit less than the stock options he sold when the company went public in May.

At this point investors are speculating that Peter has sold nearly all his Facebook stock, and he is apparently investing heavily in 3d Meat Printers.

Actually printing a full ‘steak’ is years away, but when they get there I want a steak where the fat is perfectly balanced with the meat ‘Kobe style’, and each little fat cluster is the shape of a tiny unicorn.

Nom nom..

SEO news blog post by @ 11:30 am on August 21, 2012


Microsoft sues Google: Rankings on Google are too crucial!

Microsoft knows the pains of anti-trust lawsuits, million dollar fines, and the expensive nature of dividing up a business so it doesn’t look like a monopoly.
Breaking up the monopoly
So it’s no shock that one of the biggest weapons in Microsoft’s war chest is a handful of small companies that can claim Google services have stymied their opportunities to succeed.

According to this “Google treads carefully in European antitrust case” article posted yesterday in, companies with direct links to Microsoft are suing because they cannot compete in EU markets without ranking well on Google:

Google’s competition includes Microsoft but is mostly small, specialist Internet services which argue the Silicon Valley giant is ensuring their names come low or don’t even figure in searches. In Europe, 80 per cent of Web searches are run on Google, according to the most recent figures by comScore, compared with 67 per cent in the United States. Its opponents say that means Google, which makes its money by advertising sales, can make or break a business by its ranking.

… followed by:

Moreover, Google says the small companies claiming to be its victims are linked to Microsoft. The third original complainant,, is a German travel search site owned by Microsoft. Several are also members of I-comp, whose most prominent member is Microsoft, and which produces position papers on subjects such as web market concentration. I-comp lawyer Wood acknowledges the organization is not independent, but says “our palette is much broader than Microsoft’s.”
The scary truth is that if actions like this are successful we would have to reorganize or dismantle all companies like Google that offer free services which prevent smaller companies from selling the same services.

Typically such a thing would never happen here in North America, since due diligence requires proof of consumer harm, not just harm to the competition.

No matter how you look at it, Google is the opposite of consumer harm, but in the EU courts this may not matter.

Once Google loses in EU courts it will be ‘game-on’ for all other countries to dog-pile on the remains of Google, allowing greed to kill off one of the best things that’s ever happened to us.

Looking at history of humanity and greed vs. virtue, we should have seen this coming?

In my opinion it is as if Microsoft woke up one morning, looked into their magical mirror to reflect on how beautiful they are, and came to realize that some poison apples need to be handed out post-haste.

Speaking of humanity vs. greed, I MUST comment on this whole FunnyJunk vs. Oatmeal ‘fiasco’.

Either this is some brilliant promotional scheme or the owners of FunnyJunk painted a bullseye on their own foot. I am really not sure which one, but man is it sad.

Give it a read if you really want to be shocked at how low a business can stoop to make a profit from artists and the community.

It’s also refreshing to see the Oatmeal prove they could shut down TFJ, but instead they used the $20,000 they raised in 64 minutes to fund cancer research and support the World Wildlife Federation.

SEO news blog post by @ 11:08 am on June 12, 2012


Older Posts »
Level Triple-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Copyright© 2004-2014
Beanstalk Search Engine Optimization, Inc.
All rights reserved.