<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Mathew's comments - Latest Comments in Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:13:10 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3216853</link><description>Should I stop using the word "cool" as an affirmative? Must I only use it to indicate temperature? &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Language is alive. Usage masters now accept "data" as singular. Infinitive verbs can now be split by a single adverb. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You may dislike the usage, but it is, in fact, idiomatic and entirely reflective of the polarized society in which I live (USA). &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So don't hate the player. Hate the game.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Frymaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:13:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3206007</link><description>What if I wanted to develop my own, personal search engine?  And run it on my own desktop? &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Would the publishers open their First Click indices to me?  Or would they only open them to large players, such as Google, MS and Yahoo?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I suspect that they would not open their indices to me. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And if that's the case, then it's not a question about Google vs. Microsoft, because they're both "big guys".  It's a question of big guys vs. little guys.  And if this is an option that is only available to the big guys, then it is not very net neutral.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jmy</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:33:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3204326</link><description>Agree, Shelley -- especially about the broccoli  :-)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mathewi</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:45:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3203885</link><description>I wish people would stop using the word "hater" for those who are critical, or who disagree. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Hate is something that should be reserved for cold-blooded mass murderers of babies or broccoli, not for those being critical (necessary for balance) or in disagreement (necessary for balance).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Shelley</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:30:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3186675</link><description>I mention this because I'm a pedant, but for many sites "the usual way" is via a Google search. That is, Google search is the #1 referrer for most of the sites for which I see stats.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dbarefoot</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:07:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3186110</link><description>That's a great point, Frymaster.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mathewi</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:04:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nick Carr is wrong on Google - again</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/10/20/nick-carr-is-wrong-on-google-again/#comment-3183067</link><description>I won't debate the merits of this tactic. I have little love for pay sites. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But I have to say to all the Google haters that the problem with Google's dominance is not how evil Google is. It's that they are so utterly and completely without competition. That's the problem. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It seems, counter-intuitively, that by focusing on delivering value to their users AOT generating revenue, Google has both cornered the market on search AND made more money than Voldemort. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Microsoft had to strong-arm manufacturers and buy/kill competitors to achieve this level of dominance. Google just does search better than anybody else. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Someday, uber-geeks and the VC that support them are going to wake up to the fact that beating Google means out-Googling Google. Not pissing and moaning. Not "serving the shareholders." It means doing a better job at the task at hand.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But that day is not today.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Frymaster</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:23:08 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>