Skip to main content

Google arrogance: Chrome vs Hotmail

Chrome is Google's new browser. So far it hasn't overtaken any of the major browsers in terms of user adoption. I have switched because it's much faster and uses less memory than Firefox. But it does have it's shortcomings (after it's just a baby compared to the others).

Now I have noticed that Microsoft's Hotmail doesn't quite work in Chrome. You basically can't type anything. So while it's good for reading your hotmail email you can't really really. 

Today, I saw Google has come out with a work-around for the problem: simply pose as Apple's Safari browser and Hotmail works fine. Minor fix! But leave it to these 2 big guys to get in a spitting match about whose fault is it and who should respond faster with a fix:

Google position: Normally you think of Web pages being faster to update than client-side software downloads. In this case though, Chrome updates near-weekly, much faster than Hotmail did. Another illustration that velocity and speed of iteration matter (We are better than Microsoft even though our browser is bare bones)

Microsoft: That's a rather naive statement. You think that Hotmail is a Web page and you expect a service with hundreds of millions of users and thousands of servers to stop what it's doing, fix a bug for a browser that the majority of its customers do not use, and spin up an out-of-band release? We've already committed to addressing this issue in our next service release (already started to roll out to the site) which IMHO is an acceptable reaction (f**k you, we've got better things to do. Call us when your puny little browser gets mass adoption)

Google: Google runs Web services with many users and servers too and we launch changes weekly or faster :-p We run gmail and we do it better than you do Hotmail )

In this case I think Microsoft is right. Why should they get bent out of shape fixing their product because a niche browser doesn't display it well? Unless of course, the niche browser is backed by an arrogant giant.


BTW, they didn't actually say the stuff in red. That's my translation :)

Comments

  1. LOL. They always have a pissing contest. What amazes me however is how come Chrome hasn't been fully ported to the mac despite Google's CEO sitting on the board of Apple. They should work closer together to fix that itch. On the PC, it's always chrome for me, not unless I have to hop on a Sharepoint based site requiring a ton of Activex controls for version control of documents.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice information, valuable and excellent design, as share good stuff with good ideas and concepts, lots of great information and inspiration, both of which I need, thanks to offer such a helpful information here. hotmailmsn.online

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

InfoPath & SharePoint (Part 1)

A departure from sports and politics. This one is about technology.

InfoPath sucks and SharePoint is the most expensive piece of crap ever. InfoPath, as a development environment, has absolutely no redeeming value. It's worthless and if your boss ever thinks of using it, you have three options:

convince him not to (not easy once he's been brainwashed by the Microsoft marketing presentations)use one of Al Gore's lockboxes to store away your sanity 'cos you'll lose it. Also, pad your estimates very generously. You'll need every bit of time you can get.
quit immediately while you still have your sanityFirst, InfoPath:

To me InfoPath is like programming in assembly language. Sure it makes it easy (too easy in fact) to bind data to controls. But it doesn't provide you with easy access to your controls. Why is this important? Say you want to disable a button:

in most technology: buttonA.enabled = false (or something similar).

In InfoPath, you simply can't do this.…

Does InfoPath (still) suck?

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blog post titled "InfoPath & SharePoint (Part 1)". Back then I had just started working on a project using InfoPath 2007. So, expectedly, the post wasn't very complimentary to InfoPath (or SharePoint). In fact, I said:
InfoPath sucks and SharePoint is the most expensive piece of crap ever. InfoPath, as a development environment, has absolutely no redeeming value. It's worthless.... (more)Since then my opinion of InfoPath has changed slightly. It still suffers from all the flaws I pointed out in that post. However, I think when used right, InfoPath can be an OK tool. I think it's well suited for designing one off forms and not for anything that requires complex logic or multiple iterations (like most software development requires). Alas, most CTOs fall in love with its point & click simplicity and integration with SharePoint that they try to use it to replace more developed technologies like ASP.NET. What do you get? A horri…

Technical Certifications are worthless

Technical certifications, especially in the IT field, are totally worthless. Why? All a technical certification prove is that you were able to buy a couple of exam prep books, cram them in a week or two and take an exam. My monkey (if I had one) could do that. I can't tell you how many times I have interviewed certification-carrying candidates for open positions at my company only to find them severely lacking in thorough understanding of computer science. I don't care that you have an MSCD or MCP or whatever it's called these days if you don't know foundational concepts in computer science and database design.
For example, I don't want someone who just knows that you store things in a hashtable using keys. I need you to know why a hashtable is better than an array in some cases. I need you to know when an interface is better than an abstract class; when to use recursion; the different kinds of joins and when to use each one; I need you to understand how crucial sou…