While Safari, when mobile is included, has ~17% of the market, that's not enough when you combine Google's browser share along with their search engine share.
25 karma · joined November 2, 2019
While Safari, when mobile is included, has ~17% of the market, that's not enough when you combine Google's browser share along with their search engine share.
Matters are even worse. Last year, the W3C became the "yes-man" of Google. They decided to stop developing the HTML standards and just start rubber stamping whatever WHATWG produces. WHATWG is run by Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla. And who has the most power in that relationship? Yep, Google.
Ageism is not an acceptable solution. We complain about this in tech all the time. Why would we find it acceptable in politics?
I find this intent for be very difficult to believe. Chrome's privacy policy[0] already lists a ton of information that Chrome sends to Google.
I am cynical and simply do not trust Google. I see this as a move for control rather than privacy.
The products are not necessarily useless, but they only help some people make some progress some of the time. They never live up to the hype around them.
Language acquisition is a multifaceted endeavor which takes time and effort. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either misinformed or lying. (There are some outliers who can learn/acquire languages with great speed, but they're very rare.)
For those who are outside of the service area it's less than <1%. While it may only receive a handful of clicks from outside the area a month, it eats into the already minuscule budget for the long shot of a person who decides to look up the service while on vacation or visiting relatives. It's not efficient ad spend for a business like this.
A SaaS business is a different case, but this issue is persistent and getting worse.