• http://www.facebook.com/michaeldanderson Michael Anderson

    Free services are not free. You pay for them with your information. Just gotta decide if it’s worth the cost, just like any other product. Thanks for the heads up on this!

  • TingVoo

    Sounds like a very good plan to me dude. I liek it.

  • Flemming Kaasgaard

    Maybe another difference is the perception of the two companies? Google have their Don’t be evil high horse attitude, whereas Microsoft have been percieved as evildoers for a long time. This means that when Google does evil, they must be punished, when Microsoft does evil, it’s business as usual…

  • http://twitter.com/FilmRic FilmRic

    Well, its ironic that some people forget is that you DONT have to see, pay attention or do business with advertisers. Truth is, if I am highly targeted by an advertiser that has obviously used some overt tracking process to annoy me I will pop them into my blacklist and seek out any future products from any of their competitors. Besides I dont use Google to seek products anymore anyway. Usually, Its Amazon or Buy that receives my search.

    I am utterly flabbergasted that most of these companies are not pondering any negative branding issues that result from web entities talking them into laser focusing on Internet users! But then, advertising has been a mystery magic show for much of the industry anyway.

  • xmichaelx

    Tech writing is an echo chamber, and anything written about Google or Apple will instantly be parrotted by every tech writer on earth. This wasn’t news when Google did it, but having a sensationalistic headline with “Google” is guaranteed to generate some click revenue, so everyone covered it. And covered it…

    Look at Techmeme every time there’s an unsubstantiated Apple rumor as product launch time nears. You’ll see hundreds of rumor headlines at the top of the page and little else, even though there’s absolutely no news.

    No one cares about Microsoft, though, so MS click-bait isn’t nearly as common.

    Of course, MarketingLand knows this, or they wouldn’t have bothered with this article (and its accompanying click-bait headline) to begin with. “Google” and “Attack” look great together on Techmeme, don’t they Danny?

  • http://searchengineland.com/ Danny Sullivan

    Headlines are designed to attract attention. That’s the point. That’s the way they’ve worked for hundreds of years. Nor is that wrong. It’s an issue when they are misleading. There’s nothing misleading in the headline above for this story.

    The reason so many wrote about Google was primarily because Google itself announced the news in a big way on its official blog post, followed up by notices on the Google site that you couldn’t escape, as well as emails to users. I’ve explained all that in the story above.

    The reason so few seemed to write about Microsoft is because it hardly announced this at all. It didn’t make it into a news event in the way that Google did, and that seems to have paid off in not generating attention to the change.

    That brings me back to my conclusion. The lesson, if you’re Google, to take away from this is that if you have a big change that might concern users, don’t talk much about it. Seems a bad lesson to be teaching companies.

  • Andrew Fox

    Um….how exactly are Google making it hard to control your data? Look at this page while signed into your google account… https://www.google.com/dashboard/?hl=en

  • poponhop

    I haven’t really touched my Zune in over a year so I guess it’s ok

  • Nick Roosevelt

    Google news is generally more exciting than Microsoft news just because it is Google. That’s because more people use Google for personal stuff than they use Microsoft, so with Google, they were talking about vastly more personal info than Microsoft was!

  • Samuel Nelson

    +1 for Flemming Kaasgaard – that’s exactly how I feel about it. Microsoft is evil, and they have been for ages. Their terms and conditions have always been ridiculously convoluted and ambiguous.

    It’s not that Microsoft doing it is any less evil than google doing it, but it’s expected from Microsoft. Personally, I really don’t care about the changes (I do, to an extent, trust google), but I do think that it’s more newsworthy when google does something that negatively affects its customers than when Microsoft does it.

  • George

    May be…
    But i can’t say exactly…!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=744916256 Ryles Malone

    I trust Microsoft with my data and information more than Google. Google is interested in advertising first and only. Microsoft is interested in software first, and services and products with their own value.

    When it’s all free, you’re the product. Google is evil and non competative.. The only product I use of theirs is Youtube and I feel unclean when I do.