Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Urging Safari Users To Use Bing

New submitter SquarePixel writes "Microsoft is urging Safari users to switch to Bing after Google was fined $22.5 million for violating Safari privacy settings. 'Microsoft is keen to make sure that no-one forgets this, let alone Safari users, and the page summarizes the events that took place.' It tells users how Google promised not to track Safari users, but tracked them without their permission and used this data to serve them advertisement. Lastly, it tells how Google was fined $22.5 million for this and suggests users to try the more privacy oriented Bing search engine."

42 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. more privacy oriented Bing search engine by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, they haven't gotten caught yet

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by Maho+Shoujo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps the same could be said of everyone.

    2. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by socceroos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It should be bleedingly obvious to all that noone other than yourself is going to protect your privacy.

    3. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by msauve · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're completely altruistic. Bing doesn't want more users because it results in more profit. What do you think Microsoft is, a for-profit corporation?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey! I know Noone! How is the old rascal doing??

      Tell him I said hi!

    5. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by symbolset · · Score: 4, Funny

      Still lurking. Maybe today he'll show up and post something.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    6. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by symbolset · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Profit? Bing doesn't know what profit is. They're like $16B in the red and have never ever seen what black ink looks like. You would have to explain black ink to them as if they were blind from birth.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    7. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, Microsoft doesn't start looking nice. There can be more than one bad company.

      Having said that, so far I'd rate Google as a way better company than Microsoft as far as business ethics go.

    8. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by rioki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The difference is that Google started with high ethics and suits are "letting is slip", Microsoft on the other hand started with the premises of making money, they view as ethics an asset that valued against each other. (If it makes them more money they are "ethical".)

    9. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by petman · · Score: 4, Funny

      fucking WANKERS

      I do believe that's an oxymoron.

    10. Re:more privacy oriented Bing search engine by bWareiWare.co.uk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The can also be good and bad at the same company. No company gets to the size of MS etc. without someone doing something evil. Hell even Linux has had at least one murderer work on it; statistically companies that size must have all sorts.

      With the possible exception of Oracle no tech. company sets out to be evil.

      Microsoft's bad name has mainly come from their cut-throat approach to competitors (of which OSS is one) and the even worse treatment of their supposed partners. However they have historically treated developers well, and respected privacy.

      Despite their motto and their many-many good deeds, this is far from the first time Google have deliberately violated people's privacy (Streetview springs to mind), and even when court have never given wholehearted apologies.

      As with all things you have to choose your poison, then take responsibility for limiting your own risks.

  2. DuckDuckGo by fredgiblet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    DuckDuckGo's entire advertising strategy is based off of privacy.

    1. Re:DuckDuckGo by Cinder6 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I started using DuckDuckGo exclusively just a couple days ago. So far I'm liking it a lot--search results seem just as good as Google's, if not better in some cases. With that said, I actually miss Google's Instant search in Chrome. On the other hand, the bang keywords are nice on those rare occasions I'm not using Chrome (for the uninitiated, adding "!amazon", for example, opens the Amazon.com search result page for your query).

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    2. Re:DuckDuckGo by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

      Thank you for the suggestion. Bing's app doesn't appear to work on Android tablets (which appears intentional), but DuckDuckGo's app works fine on my Nexus 7.

    3. Re:DuckDuckGo by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Interesting i would have thought that with the ! symbol meaning "NOT" the rest of th universe that it would display shopping results for every but amazon.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    4. Re:DuckDuckGo by SuperCharlie · · Score: 3, Informative

      I gave DDG a fair shake for a few months but ended up with a lot of spammy results a lot of times and didnt find what I wanted all the time. I do like their ! searches tho and I keep them in my browser search list specifically for !whois and a few other ! searches. I hate it as much as the next nerd, but google is king of search and gets me where I need to go. I do know and remember always that the almighty google is also all-tracking.

    5. Re:DuckDuckGo by symbolset · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yahoo!'s boss came from Google. She's not a Google tool, but she did used to date one: Larry Page. Depending on how that ended they may she may be more open to a mutually beneficial relationship than the old boss. Or she may want to kill Google. Or maybe both, depending on the lunar calendar. Who knows? She's knocked up right now and so not as susceptible to lunacy as young owners of her gender usually are.

      Oh, God am I going to get hate for this post. It's humor folks. Laugh a little. If we can't enjoy the human condition and find it funny, what have we got?

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    6. Re:DuckDuckGo by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would you need an app to use a web search engine?

      (I mean, I know they exist and people use them... but why??)

  3. god I've grown old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Google breaching user privacy and Microsoft advocating privacy

    1. Re:god I've grown old by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Google breaching user privacy and Microsoft advocating privacy

      I have to keep a cheat-sheet to remind me who's the good guys and who's the bad guys these days.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:god I've grown old by green1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      simple... bad guys: everyone else
      good guys: me ;)

  4. Privacy? Bing? by lokedhs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bing, that integrates with Facebook, who are the champions of privacy, of course.

    1. Re:Privacy? Bing? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google's motto is only 3 words long. Is it really that hard to get right?

      Apparently so.

      Google seems to be having trouble with it, anyway.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  5. 6 and 1, half a dozen of the other by Revotron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So either way, you're still getting your results from Google.

  6. Trust Microsoft. No, really. by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Informative

    After all, Microsoft is the one technology company that has demonstrated a consistently superior level of trustworthiness and sound ethics. Right?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  7. Microsoft competing with someone?! by rgbrenner · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow.. this is definitely news. A competitor of MS made a mistake, and they're attempting to gain an advantage from it.

    It's like... they're competing or something.

    More stories like this /.

    This is groundbreaking stuff

  8. Say what? by UnifiedTechs · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't this like Ford telling Toyota owners to buy a new Ford because a Chevron tanker ran aground?

  9. Things can be relative by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just because Google does stupid shit does not mean Microsoft does not also deserve to be called out for doing stupid shit.

    But we can note when Google is worse.

    Google's G+ integration includes G+ results being promoted in the search stream.

    Microsoft's Facebook integration does not alter your search results.

    And G+ is sucking a lot more of your personal information (including search habits) into Google. At least with Microsoft there remains some division between what Facebook gets and what Microsoft gets.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Things can be relative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who gives a shit if that content is in your search results if it's relevant? I don't care where their data comes from, as long as it's related to what I'm looking for.

      If I search for "taco recipe" and one of my friends has recently posted one to G+, shouldn't I want to see that?

  10. Re:Clunk! by bsercombe72 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For this reason I avoid Bing like the plague and use IE for what it was meant for: a download tool for a real browser.

  11. This could be huge. by tpstigers · · Score: 4, Funny

    Safari Users. We could be talking as many as 2 dozen people here.

    1. Re:This could be huge. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Converting those users would increase Bings userbase by a significant percent

  12. PRC: Censor or go away by symbolset · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When China told Google to censor or get out, they got out - evacuating to Taiwan.

    Eric Schmidt, the Chairman and CEO at the time was for pursuing the business opportunity through minimizing the damage. Larry Page was ambivalent. That day Sergey Brin became Google's moral compass and said something like: "Not just no, but Fuck no. My dad was a Russian dissident and came to America to avoid being sent to a Gulag for speaking his mind. If you do this not only will I take my share and leave, but I'll use it to do my best to defeat the monster you've become."

    There was a big fight and Eric Schmidt gave up the CEO spot and his role as the world's best-paid babysitter. Larry Page took it (Sergey didn't want it). And Google moved out of China, abandoning the world's biggest growth market until it's ready to accept at least the human right of free speech. But the question about where Google stood on free speech was forever closed. That issue at least is resolved.

    Bing and Yahoo crowed their triumph that day, that they had bested their adversary on at least one field - and an important one. For all of me this was one battle they needed to lose.

    Recently there was press about some unnamed person from the White House asking YouTube to check a controversial video to see if it violated their terms of service. The reply: "No, it doesn't - thanks for asking." The implied unofficial implication was that it would be convenient if the video violated the terms. Certainly this didn't come from the President directly as he taught Constitutional Law, so it was a minor official inquiry that by some other company would have been taken as an opportunity to seek some advantage. But Google would have none of that. They don't do that. If pressed (they weren't pressed) the answer would certainly have been "not just no, but Fuck No! We don't do that." America doesn't have anything like the ability to enforce cooperation that China does, and if it happened to gain that power Google would just leave the US too now because organizationally the "free speech" question is completely and forever settled.

    For all that some would paint Google as evil, maybe Google is in some aspect preserving our moral compass for when we regain our sanity and come to understand again what's really important. Until then I admire their determination to retain their moral compass and do the right thing.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  13. Re:No ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    startpage is way better for privacy and much better results since it uses google. why the hell do people keep using DuckDuckGo?

  14. MS DID get caught, sniffing peoples google search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    But MS *DID* get caught. Remember the IE Toolbar, it watched users Google searches, and sent the results and the queries back to Microsoft, where Microsoft use it to improve (i.e. copy) for their own search results?

    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/google-to-microsoft-search-gotcha/

    Google added some fake searches, entered those into IE and it promptly sent that data back to Microsoft HQ where they put it in the Bing results.

    Not only that, they denied it, then it turned out they'd denied only the 'copying part', then they claimed it was anonymous data and thus not snooping (it isn't they get the toolbar id, and search data often has addresses, medical conditions and names in it).

    So yeh, they got caught. The only bizarre thing is why they weren't prosecuted. I think we're all kind of wary of Microsoft now, if you're using Microsoft products, more fool you.

    DuckDuckGo is what I use now.

  15. Google vs Microsoft. by Kaenneth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft sells Software, Google sells You.

  16. Bing Challenge by Anubis+IV · · Score: 3, Informative

    I tried that blind comparison test that Microsoft set up between Google and Bing, just because I am a nerd who can appreciate that he may be prejudiced and wanted to actually do a test for himself. I still ended up choosing what I later discovered were Google's results as my preferred ones for 3 out of the 5 test searches. Scoring 2-for-5 was not enough to get me to switch to Bing, of course, but it was enough to get me to appreciate the service more.

    The Safari issue sucks, of course, and I am a Safari user on my Mac at home (though I hate it on Windows), but it won't be a deciding factor for me.

  17. Re:Google is more evil than Microsoft ever was by Maow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That linked-to blog is rather full of shit.

    I avoid using Google for searching 99% of the time, block AdSense, Google Analytics, and usually Google APIs, but this is over the top:

    YouTube is just one Google site based entirely on hosting and serving copyrighted material. Virtually nobody comes to YouTube for the original content.

    Just bullshit. They are, if anything overly eager to have content pulled based upon loose matches by copyright bots.

    Some of that copyrighted content is posted by the rights holders as advertising too.

    Then there's this steaming turd:

    The criminally insane Eric Smith, former CEO of Google

    Criminally insane? Greedy maybe, but the only one criminally insane is the anonymous blogger that posted this crap.

    Google is definitely not your friend.

    Of course it isn't.

    Google does evil, all the time.

    Oh really? I don't trust them, but they've been remarkably non-evil considering the amount of power they wield.

    Google does not give a shit about your privacy.

    Agreed.

    Google has no "noble" interests; everything they do is purely intended to help them rape your privacy.

    They push for an open internet with open standards where ever they can; they could push closed standards but don't -- that's relatively noble, for a corporate entity.

    Google doesn't give you anything "for free". You are the product and Google laughs the whole way to the bank.

    Same with all ad-based content.

    Please do not promote Google anymore.
    [...]
    If possible, circumvent as many Google services and downloads that you can, and help others remove their Google tentacles.

    I don't and help others block their trackers and use other search engines.

    They are not "the lesser of two evils".

    They are the lesser of 5 evils (Apple, MS, Oracle, FaceBook, Google). I fear that someday they could become enormously evil, but for now the blogger is a hyperventilating, hyperbolic douche.

  18. Re:MS DID get caught, sniffing peoples google sear by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wow, you really are an idiot. The toolbar installer explained that it could send your searches to Microsoft in order to improve results. It was obviously (except, oddly, to Google's completely brilliant and utterly unbiased engineers) a feature you enabled if you wanted to guide Bing towards better (from your perspective) search results. Google engineers deliberately enabled this behavior, then poisoned the results with nonsense searches that *had* no legit results, so the only info Bing had on those queries were the poisoned values. They then claimed that the fact that Microsoft was using the poisoned values that Google had deliberatesly sent them meant that Microsoft was "copying" Google.

    A number of... individuals... such as yourself not only believed Google's absurd bullshit, they kept on repeating it long after Google themselves retreated when they realized their attempt to smear a competitor was having a counterproductive effect.

    Also, DuckDuckGo uses Bing (and not in a "Bing copies Google results!!1!" sense, but as in some of its searches are actually directly executed through Bing), among other search engines. So, guess what, you're using Microsoft products. Who's the fool, again?

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  19. Re:MS DID get caught, sniffing peoples google sear by rgbrenner · · Score: 3, Informative

    what is the difference between what Bing did and what google does?

    http://www.benedelman.org/news/012610-1.html

    Run the Google Toolbar, and it’s strikingly easy to activate “Enhanced Features” -- transmitting to Google the full URL of every page-view, including searches at competing search engines.

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/187670/Google_Toolbar_Tracks_You_Even_After_Being_Disabled.html

    Let me rephrase what happened in reality: A google employee noticed that the bing toolbar reports search terms back to bing -- just like the google toolbar does.. and Google decided score some easy points, and make Bing look like a copycat.

  20. Re:MS DID get caught, sniffing peoples google sear by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you just went to google.com and typed in a search, the IE toolbar wouldnt report things back to bing. It is only if you used the search box of the toolbar that this was happening.

    The difference between the IE toolbar and the Google toolbar is that the google toolbar cannot be configured to use any search engine other than google.

    Now, next time be totally honest about what was happening. I dont think its too hard to do that. Microsoft still looks bad when being honest.. no need to exaggerate.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  21. Re:MS DID get caught, sniffing peoples google sear by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

    what is the difference between what Bing did and what google does?

    The difference is that Microsoft has spying technology built right into the browser, it's called compatibility view updates, and their search suggestion system. With Google you have to choose to be tracked.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"