Re: Re: Microsoft tells MVPs ³We¹re in it to win² Really?

In article <1174363671.717407.219500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
<"gimme_this_gimme_that@xxxxxxxxx"> wrote:

Is that the plan? If you're a Google apologist hide behind the word
"ARCHIVE"?
There is no plan. I am not a Google apologist. I am not hiding.
It is a simple fact that Google purchased and runs an archive. Sure,
they have added some things onto it, but as they don't work like
newsreaders do, they aren't a substitute for newsreaders.

Why shouldn't groups.google.com be used for daily reading? (Huh?)
Because of the poor comparison to what a newsreader does.
Because of the poor performance and the advertising.
Because of the increased traffic, load, and inefficiency.


Wouldn't google.groups.com be much better if people could post images?

NO! NO! NO! You apparently don't understand either the point of the
archive or the point of newsgroups. It is a DISCUSSION medium.
As an archive, it needs to be searchable; thus, it has to have words to
search through.
And obviously, including images would make an enormous difference as
far as traffic and storage space required. Probably hundreds of
magnitudes more. In pointless effort, since many of those images are
probably duplicates or slightly altered images of the same stuff. And a
huge amount of it would be spam.
In my opinion, it would be terrible to give people yet another excuse
to avoid making themselves clear in words; contributing to a literacy
problem that I hear about all the time.

Isn't it time to move into the 21st century?
I think you have a misguided idea of what that means.
It would not be improving anything for Google to include images in
their archive of newsgroups; it would probably begin a transformation
of both their service and Usenet itself into a horrible example of
everything we don't want the internet to become.

For instance, if Google archived porn images, porn sites wouldn't have
to host their own material at all. They could just use a URL to link to
a few billion images. People would use it as a clip-art service, an
image browser, a personal archive, a company archive.
It would probably transform most of the discussion groups into places
where most people tried to post images in their messages; probably to
the extreme detriment of language and the ability to write at all.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: google finally fracked up
    ... Nor do I use google sites maps (another theory afaicr that was banded ... Images serves me better than ever before (more images referrlas than text ... Open Source sucks less." ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Google Serving More Lies & Disinformation
    ... Google Replaces New Orleans Map With Pre-Katrina Images ... Chikai Ohazama, a Google product manager for satellite imagery, said the ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: PR update
    ... Very erratic Google. ... Google Images traffic declined moderately. ... Yes, a decline of BLs. ... A few people choose to HotLink, ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Meta Tags & Search Engine Submission
    ... "Rob Giordano (Crash)" wrote: ... read images so that could hurt you. ... Google for SEO info..but don't fall for anything that charges you money to ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: google finally fracked up
    ... broken links - nope ... Nor do I use google sites maps (another theory afaicr that was banded ... Images serves me better than ever before (more images referrlas than text ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)