Google CEO Eric Schmidt is the latest Silicon Valley CEO to draw ire after suggesting that folks seeking privacy might not want to look to the Internet to find it.
"I think judgment matters," Schmidt said, appearing on CNBC (see video below). "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines--including Google--do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."
In some senses, Schmidt was merely stating the truth about the U.S. law as it currently stands. However his "maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" comments, in particular, seem to have raised the hackles of privacy advocates and others.
Among the most interesting reactions was a posting on a Mozilla veteran's personal Web page suggesting that users might want to switch to Bing because of its better privacy policy.
"That was Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, telling you exactly what he thinks about your privacy," Mozilla Director of Community Development Asa Dotzler said on his personal blog, referring to the CNBC comments. "There is no ambiguity, no 'out of context' here. Watch the video."
From there, Dotzler shows how one can easily switch Firefox's search engine from Google to Bing, adding, "Yes, Bing does have a better privacy policy than Google."
To be fair, that Patriot Act and other laws apply just as much to Microsoft as it does to Google. Still, I think Dotzler's posting raises some interesting issues. Plus, it's particularly noteworthy that a Mozilla worker is willing to raise the issue given how the lion's share of Mozilla's revenue comes from the Google traffic generated from Mozilla's search bar.
The difference, in my opinion, isn't that Microsoft is somehow subject to different laws than Google, or even that it would behave differently in the face of a government challenge (both companies kowtow in China, for example). Rather, the two companies seem to have a different approach toward privacy issues.
Google's attitude tends to focus on the great benefits that open information can, and often does have. Plus, of course, its stance is an outgrowth of the fact that Google has built its business around gaining revenue by doing the best job of organizing that information.
That shows up in all kinds of ways. Mozilla Developer Relations Director Christopher Blizzard noted in a Twitter posting that sites users visit in Chrome get sent to Google.
"Everyone knows that every site you visit and all address bar searches in Chrome go to Google, right?" Blizzard wrote. (I sent an e-mail to Mozilla seeking its corporate take on things, but did not immediately get a response.)
Microsoft's approach, meanwhile, stems no less from its economic interest, but its zeal is tempered by years of heavy regulation and consumer backlash.
These differences in attitudes, and shifting tides in the center of power in the tech industry, I expect to be major issues in the coming years as regulators and consumers decide where to place their attention.
That said, Schmidt is hardly the first to point out that the idea of privacy on the Internet might be outmoded. "You already have zero privacy. Get over it," former Sun CEO Scott McNealy famously intoned, drawing many of the same criticisms.
Obviously, privacy advocates argue that protections must extend to the Internet. In a blog posting, security expert Bruce Schneier makes a passionate argument, although I think it is interesting that he digs up an essay from 2006 to make his reply.
"Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance," Schneier wrote. "We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need."
So what do you think? Is privacy a basic human need, or a quaint, outdated notion, or is it, paradoxically, both of those things?
Mozilla and Opera are both unhappy with Microsoft's proposed "ballot screen" to let Windows users in Europe select their default browser, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.
Microsoft's proposed browser ballot screen is its attempt to satisfy the antitrust investigation from the European Union over Internet Explorer's dominance in Windows. The screen would present the user with a menu to install other browsers, including Firefox, Opera, Google Chrome, and Safari, and let the user pick one as the default.
Microsoft became open to the concept over the summer as an alternative to removing IE from Windows for the European market.
At the time, the idea appealed to Opera CEO Hakon Wium Lie, who declared, "It's a happy day for us. We certainly think the ballot is good news and think it will give users a genuine choice." But Mozilla Corp. CEO John Lilly adopted a more wait-and-see approach, saying he wanted to see the specifics before reacting.
EU officials asked rival browser makers among others for their input on Microsoft's proposal, sending them questionnaires over the summer, according to the report.
After checking out the ballot screen and the proposal from Microsoft, the European Union for Interoperable Systems (ECIS), which includes Opera Software ASA as one of its members, said it presents too many hurdles for the average user.
According to Sunday's Wall Street Journal (subscription required), ECIS and Opera attorney Thomas Vinje said that selecting another browser requires "the user to confirm and answer threatening and confusing warnings and questions. Microsoft has cunningly found a way to accept the Commission's suggestion of a ballot screen, but to do so in a way that will be entirely ineffective."
In response to an e-mail from CNET, Vinje said that Microsoft's current ballot screen falls short of having any effect on competition since it fails to offer users a seamless and unbiased choice of browser. However, he felt the problem could be fixed with some trivial changes.
He said that despite choosing an alternate browser through the ballot, Internet Explorer would remain turned on and that only an additional procedure would allow the user to deactivate IE. So the ballot screen is simply installing another browser in addition to IE rather than offering users a choice of a single browser.
Adding an alternative browser is unnecessarily complex, according to Vinje. The ballot screen, set up as a Web page in IE, requires many unnecessary clicks, displays threatening warnings, and poses confusing questions before another browser can be downloaded and set up. He believes users will be discouraged from selecting an alternative browser.
The ECIS feels that a powerful, yet trivial change to Microsoft's proposal is needed: the ballot screen must be designed to offer users a seamless choice in which a single click for an alternative browser is sufficient to download and install that browser, without warnings or questions, and without leaving Internet Explorer active and visible.
"Choosing an alternative browser must not be more cumbersome than choosing Internet Explorer," said Vinje, "which can only be accomplished in a real ballot screen application--not in a Web page."
Countering with suggestions
Mozilla has said that a ballot screen is a good step, but as currently proposed, it's not good enough. A blog written August 18 by Mozilla's general counsel, Harvey Anderson, examined Microsoft's specific language and functionality in the ballot screen proposals. Anderson addressed several concerns and countered with his own suggestions.
Anderson praised Microsoft's effort to not include links or shortcuts to IE inside Office 2007 but said it should be expanded to include all Microsoft software. "If Microsoft applications need to launch a browser, they should only launch the user's default browser," he wrote. "The proposal should be modified such that this provision applies to all Microsoft desktop software, and certainly to the already announced Office 2010."
Anderson also expressed concerns about the ballot screen itself, saying IE could automatically become the default browser in a number of scenarios. It could end up as the default if the user ignores the ballot or can't figure out how to use it. It could also wind up the default if the user runs into problems trying to install one of the other browsers. But in this case, his only suggestion was that the ballot require the user to make a choice.
Finally, Anderson said that the ballot doesn't educate the user as to what a Web browser is or how each browser differs. "The ballot should introduce the user to at least a simple definition of what a browser is before offering the user a choice in browsers," he wrote. "It should probably go one step further and explain that the different browsers compete for superiority in the areas of ease of use, security, and customizability. "
Other voices have chimed in to criticize the ballot screen. Mitchell Baker, chair of the nonprofit Mozilla Foundation, detailed her concerns in a blog on August 17. Despite the user's ability to choose a different default browser, Baker said she believes IE would still have the upper hand with a prominent position on the Windows desktop and Taskbar.
"Choosing another browser as a 'default' does NOT mean that the other browser takes the place of IE," stated Baker in her blog. "For example, the IE logo ("shortcut") still remains unchanged on the desktop. The shortcut/logo of the browser the user has selected does not replace this, it is added elsewhere. As a result, the familiar location remains IE, not the user's choice."
Baker also expressed concern that the average nontechnical user may have trouble navigating the different screens required to choose a different browser. She said she believes the ballot screen only helps users download alternative browsers and should be designed to help them install, open, and make other browsers the default. "As proposed, we expect to see many people who want other browsers get lost in the process before they actually succeed in making an alternative browser their main browsing tool," she wrote.
The EU had hoped to wrap up this final phase of its investigation into IE, especially since all parties have agreed at least in principal to the idea of a ballot screen. But the competition could stall final approval if Microsoft is forced to wrestle with the finer points of the complaints.
Vinje believes that Microsoft only superficially accepted the EU's suggested remedy and that the ballot screen as designed does not restore competition. He said the EU will be careful to make sure that any proposed solution would be effective. And in this case, the ECIS would be surprised if Microsoft's proposal were accepted without "significant modifications."
On Tuesday, Microsoft spokesman Kevin Kutz said: "In July, we made a new proposal to address EU competition law issues related to Internet Explorer and interoperability. The Commission welcomed our proposal and announced it would assess its effectiveness. We continue to look forward to the next steps in this process."
Requests for comments from Opera and Mozilla were not immediately returned.
Update 12:15 p.m. PDT: Added comments from attorney Thomas Vinje.
Artists put the finishing touches on a replica of the Golden Gate Bridge constructed from soup cans. The June stunt was aimed at drawing awareness to Microsoft's Browser for the Better campaign, in which the software maker is donating to a food bank for each download of Internet Explorer 8.
(Credit: Microsoft)Microsoft is extending a promotion that is designed to spur downloads of Internet Explorer 8 with the promise of donating food to the hungry.
The "Browser for the Better" effort kicked off in June. Under the plan, Microsoft was donating $1.15 in food for each download completed through the program's Web site, up to a maximum of $1 million.
The program was slated to end early this month. However, Microsoft never took the site down and announced formally last week that it is extending the promotion through the end of September.
Microsoft declined to say how many downloads the promotion has received, but the site's Web site reflects the updated deadline and still says that Microsoft will donate a maximum of $1 million.
Besides extending the deadline, the software maker is making one other change to the program--doubling the donation per download (to $2.30) for those who are moving from IE 6. Microsoft has said it would like to persuade more users to move off IE 6, but must nonetheless support those who choose to remain with the years-old browser.
According to Net Applications, IE 6 has 27 percent of the global browser market, as compared with 23 percent for IE 7 and more than 12 percent for IE 8. Various versions of Firefox account for 22 percent of the market, while Apple's Safari holds 4 percent market share.
The Browser for the Better push is just one of many ways that Microsoft is promoting IE 8, including a promotion with Nickleback as well as the boring-but-effective methods of pushing it out through Microsoft's automatic updating mechanisms.
Firefox launched the latest update to its browser, Firefox 3.5, in June.
At about 8 a.m. PDT Friday, Firefox crossed the billion-download threshold--a notably large number for Mozilla's open-source Web browser but one that doesn't tell the whole story.
Firefox fans love their statistical milestones, and Mozilla enjoys fanning the flames by providing plenty of opportunities for self-congratulation. In 2008 was the Firefox Download Day, with more than 8 million downloads in 24 hours. Next came the Firefox 3.5 debut and its download tracker.
Mozilla boasted that Firefox downloads surpassed 1 billion on Friday.
(Credit: Screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET)And now we have the billion-download figure on the Spread Firefox site. That includes updates people have fetched deliberately, not automatic updates, Mozilla said. To maximize the marketing potential, Mozilla also is touting the 1,000,000,000 + you site.
That site probably could be named better. Firefox director Mike Belztner said in June that Mozilla estimates there are 300 million Firefox users, up from 175 million a year earlier, so don't go thinking there are a billion people using it. Indeed, I find the total user population a much more interesting statistic than downloads.
Firefox has truly achieved real success, eating steadily into Microsoft Internet Explorer's dominant market share to become the second-most used browser. The newest version is downloaded between 40 and 60 times a second worldwide at present.
IE 8 downloads surpass 200 million
But lest Firefox fans get too carried away with their success, there's another number that shows what Mozilla is up against. According to a source familiar with Microsoft's statistics, IE 8 has been downloaded more than 200 million times in the last four months since its release.
That's a fifth of the way to what Firefox achieved since Firefox 1.0 was released nearly five years ago. And Microsoft hasn't even begun pushing IE 8 through update in earnest yet. Microsoft's 200 million statistic doesn't include updates such as bug patches and security fixes.
So let's face it: being installed along with the world's most widely used operating system remains a huge advantage for IE's use, antitrust concerns notwithstanding. Microsoft declined to comment on its download statistics.
(Credit:
Mozilla)
So what do all these numbers really show besides browser makers' urges to thump their chests about their popularity? This: the world of browsers is in serious flux.
Next-gen Web en route
That's because after years of near-dormancy after IE crushed Netscape in the 1990s, the browser wars are back in full swing. The growing migration of personal and professional activity to Web applications, the growing adoption of broadband Internet connections, and the growing adoption of truly Web-capable mobile phones are combining to make Web browsers a strategic asset in the computing industry. Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla, Google, Opera Software, and others all want to be the gateway to the world's most vibrant medium, the Internet.
Even the fifth-ranked browser can claim notable success. Opera's desktop browser has been downloaded more than 270 million times from the company's own servers since 2003, and the daily download rate has jumped from 30,000 to 40,000 back then to about 200,000 today, the company said. Throwing Opera Mini for mobile phones into the mix increases the total to about 500 million.
The download rates show that there's a powerful movement afoot to "upgrade the Web," as Mozilla's marketing catchphrase would have it.
It's a gradual change, with plenty of laggards such as corporate users who can't upgrade from IE 6 or cybercafes with locked-down PCs. And there's plenty of turmoil about next-generation Web standards. But the herd is gradually moving to more sophisticated browsers that collectively enable a more sophisticated Web.
Many people think that the browser is starting to replace the operating system as the center of the personal computer.
Naturally, the view that Windows is on a path to irrelevance is not one generally espoused by Microsoft. That said, at least some inside Redmond's walls argue that the Web browser needs to start acting more like an operating system.
Helen Wang
(Credit: Microsoft)"Some of today's browser policies are not very safe," says Microsoft researcher Helen Wang.
Wang, who has been at Microsoft since getting her doctorate from University of California at Berkeley in 2001, argues that the Web browser should act as more than just a file clerk that rubber-stamps each request that comes its way. Rather, it should act more like a traffic cop, keeping things moving smoothly and ensuring that the computer's resources are fairly allocated.
In short, Wang says, the browser needs to act more like Windows does--making sure that different Web applications are protected from one another--even those running within the same site. So Wang and her team came up with a prototype, called Gazelle, that does just that.
Microsoft first outlined Gazelle earlier this year, but has only recently started to detail its thinking. Wang plans to present a paper on Gazelle at the Usenix security conference next month, and last week Microsoft posted an article on its Web site explaining more about Gazelle.
Wang isn't trying to suggest Windows is going away. Indeed, she says, Gazelle depends on Windows, acting merely as the middleman for Web pages seeking to access a computer's resources.
"We're really trying to leverage the decades of operating system experience and apply that in the Web and browser setting," Wang said.
Microsoft is also trying to be clear that Gazelle is not the immediate replacement for Internet Explorer, which has been losing share to rivals, including Mozilla's Firefox and Apple's Safari. The company has yet to commit to commercializing Gazelle in any way, meaning it remains just one of scores of projects incubating inside the company's research labs.
Many outside Redmond, though, see the browser finally starting to take on the preeminence that many had assumed it might back in the early days of Netscape. Google's decision to offer Chrome, some think, was more about having an engine for running its Web applications than it was offering an alternative means for serving up traditional Web pages.
Modern browsers, Wang said, have taken a step in the right direction by isolating different browser tabs so that if one tab crashes, the whole browser doesn't get taken with it. Wang said that Chrome and Microsoft's IE 8 take steps toward increasing the reliability of Web browsing, but she argues far more drastic steps are needed.
"I think Gazelle marks a significant departure from all previous browsers, including Chrome and IE 8," Wang said.
For now, Gazelle is very much a prototype. It borrows much of its actual rendering technology from Internet Explorer itself. And although it can display 19 of Alexa's top 20 Web sites, there are still plenty of things it can't do. It also runs more slowly than Internet Explorer, particularly when opening new Web sites.
But Wang said it offers Microsoft--and the industry--a road map for how the Browser should evolve.
"I think this is the right way to go and I think this can be practical," Wang said. "It will also take a lot of work."
Internet Explorer 8 now comes with a Nickleback.
No, Microsoft isn't again offering cash to get people to download the browser. This time it has partnered with Live Nation and the band to offer a custom version of the browser.
(Credit:
Amazon.com)
The software maker is sponsoring Nickleback's 2009 tour as well as Live Nation's Bamboozle music festival. As part of the tie-up, users can download music-themed versions of the browser.
Those who download Internet Explorer 8 from a special Web site gain access to a new live version of Nickelback's hit single "Something in Your Mouth," as well as video of the band on tour. There is also a Bamboozle version of Internet Explorer 8 available at a separate Web site.
Microsoft routinely allows others to create and distribute custom versions of its browsers. Of course, the timing of this is rather interesting considering it comes the same day that Mozilla launched Firefox 3.5, the latest version of its Web browser.
There is also a start-up, Brand Thunder, that creates custom branded versions of Firefox.
Aiming to react quickly to Google's Chrome announcement, Microsoft focused on how Chrome stacks up against Internet Explorer.
"The browser landscape is highly competitive, but people will choose Internet Explorer 8 for the way it puts the services they want right at their fingertips, respects their personal choices about how they want to browse and, more than any other browsing technology, puts them in control of their personal data online," Internet Explorer General Manager Dean Hachamovitch said in a statement.
Just last week, Microsoft released the second public beta for its IE 8 browser.
(Credit: Microsoft)Hopefully for Redmond, though, it recognizes this as far more than an attack on Internet Explorer 8. Google was already a big supporter and partner of Mozilla. If it really just wanted a better browser, it would have just stepped up its investment in Firefox.
In Google's own words, Chrome is as much about being a platform for Web applications as it is a means for viewing Web pages.
"What we really needed was not just a browser, but also a modern platform for Web pages and applications, and that's what we set out to build," Google said on the company's official blog.
Although today one needs Windows to run Chrome (Mac and Linux versions are coming soon), it is not hard to see how Chrome is a threat to Microsoft's operating system dominance.
Imagine, in the not too distant future, a Linux-based machine with Chrome and lots of Chrome apps. Hmm...That's starting to sound like a pretty big threat to Microsoft indeed.
That said, people have predicted the browser would overtake the operating system since the Netscape days and the OS has remained important. The key question for Microsoft is can it create enough experiences that are better outside of a browser/Web app engine to maintain the OS as not just relevant, but worth an extra $100 in the cost of a PC.
The competition, though, is not limited to PCs. A more competitive browser-as-platform from Google could mean more headaches for Microsoft on the mobile front as well. Microsoft is already playing catch-up in the mobile browser arena as it tries to take on the iPhone's Safari browser. Microsoft has promised to have a version of Internet Explorer 6 on Windows Mobile by year's end, but it is unclear how close that will get the company to its already existing competition, let alone new entrants.
- prev
- 1
- next
