Phil Bradley's weblog

Google - Internet Stats Source

I was looking for some statistical data about the internet today and found an interesting resource over at Google. It says of itself "This Google resource brings together the latest industry facts and insights. These have been collected from a number of third party sources covering a range of topics from macroscopic economic and media trends to how consumer behaviour and technology are changing over time."

All well and good until I start to go through it, and discover that the data is all fairly elderly, with nothing in 2012, let alone 2013. It's at this point that I notice - almost hidden on the screen - "Last updated: December 12, 2011 2:53:19 PM UTC" Do you think they might have forgotten that it exists? Another one for the chop, I suspect.

Google adds animated gifs to search

Google has just provided us with the opportunity to search for animated gifs in image search. Simply run your image search as usual, then click search tools.

Your search results will then be animated. You'll get the confirmation of it in the function line above the images, like this:

Nice piece of functionality, and easy to use.

Lost your Google results numbers?

This hadn't really occurred to me, but I was asked the question the other day by someone who was a bit confused - they always used to see Google results being displayed, but then they disappeared. She was rather keen to get them back again. This is simplicity itself, and works with a single click. If you're seeing this on the screen:

simply click the 'Search tools' option and you'll get this:

To return to the tools option, just click 'Search tools' again, and you'll be back to where you started!

The real message from the closure of Reader

The closure of Google Reader came out of the blue for many people, including me, but really, it absolutely should not have done. If anything, it was staring us in the face. Google has a habit of trying things out for short periods of time and then, like the 3 year old toddler, throwing them to one side if they don't do quite what they expect. I've written about Google killing off products before, and I'm sure that I will again. It's abundantly clear that Google isn't interested in the number of users that a product has, since Reader had millions of them.They're entirely up front about this: "We know Reader has a devoted following who will be very sad to see it go. We’re sad too." What's really hard to stomach here is the total hypocrisy of that statement - they're not sad - it's entirely within their own power to change or improve or keep the product.

Let's not forget however, it's not just Reader that they've closed in this round, but they have done away with some scripts, APIs, Google Building Maker, Cloud Connect and others as mentioned in their blog post. So, what's going to go next? Due to Google's weird behaviours where they'll buy stuff up and play with it for a while, there are plenty of options. Google TV (what do you mean, you've never heard of it?) is going to disappear - it's never made any inroads and no-one talks about it, and that means it doesn't make money. Want something bigger? How about Blogger? Google has always had a love hate relationship with the tool; it bought it up, did nothing with it for years until people starting leaving in droves, then did a bit of fixing. They've not done much with it since, and there are lots of alternatives out there. Groups is another possibility; now we're powering ahead with G+ communities, I can certainly see them dumping Groups, much though I hope they don't because it's a useful tool. Baraza? What, do you mean you haven't heard of that one either? (Hint; neither has anyone else, that's why it'll disappear).

That's not the real damage though. It's that total lack of trust that I have with Google nowadays. (Well, if truth be known, that I've had since about 2004.) There are rumours that Google is going to announce a new tool called Keep, which is going to be a cloud based note taking service to rival Evernote. Now, for those of you with long memories, Google had a really nice product called Google Notebook, but they killed that off as well. This might be a new cloud based version coming back, but do you REALLY want to walk directly into the hands of the kidnappers to hold yourself hostage to a product that Google might just decide to can in the next few years? Think about it...

So; the real message, which is not a new one and is one that I bang on about now and then is simple:

Google is not your friend. Do not trust Google. Google just wants to make money.

Even more (33) Google Reader alternatives

The other day I gave you 20 alternatives to Google Reader. Now I'm giving you a whole bunch more that I've found. I haven't tried the vast majority of them, so can't vouch for them, but I'll be sure to tell you what I think! (Note: since I'm going to probably be referring to 'Google Reader' quite a lot, I'm shortening it to GR for the sake of my sanity and fingers)

Android Rivers is, as the name suggests, designed for Android devices.

BackStitch was one that I liked the look of; very smooth. Take a look.

BazQux looks quite fun, as it pulls in comments from Facebook groups and G+ communities as well.

Bloglovin is a straight replacement for GR, and it also works on IOS. You can sign up either direct or via Facebook, and can import your GR feeds. I didn't really like the results - the posts were in a large format and I couldn't see a way to reduce this to just headlines.

BlogRoll is in development. Large, boxy news items. Good perhaps if you only read half a dozen blogs etc. Otherwise, totally inpractical from what I could tell.

Bookmarkchamp is a combination bookmark/RSS reader, but it doesn't work in IE. Looked quite traditional though.

Dotdotdot is designed for use with a tablet, and pulls all your digital reading together. From the demo it looks quite nice.

Feedbin looked quite nice and traditional. It was also $2 a month. Why would I guys, when there are so many free ones out there? Seriously!

Feedspot needs a clue, so here it is. Don't make me sign up before I can see what you're offering! It says it's 'rethinking the RSS reader', but so what? Show me what you've got at the outset!!

Fever says of itself "Your current feed reader is full of unread items. You’re hesitant to subscribe to any more feeds because you can't keep up with your existing subs. Maybe you've even abandoned feeds altogether." It also says $30. Pass.

FrontPage. Seems to be a GR replacement, but says very little, but it's designed for tablets and phones.

IFTTT is a great little tool that some tech savvy people are really into 'if this, then that' lets you create your own feeds. You may love that idea, or prefer something that's really been set up already for you.

Intigi is a marketing tool more than a reader from what I can see, but it has RSS elements to it. However it also has $19 a month attached to it. Not for the average reader then!

Memamsa looked quite reasonable, but a little on the 'boxy' side when it comes to listing posts. On the bright side, I really liked their graphic header!

Msgboy says of itself "Msgboy delivers a custom feed of stories in realtime, all based on websites you've bookmarked and visited most often. You can customize your feed so you see more of what you want and less of what you don't." It's also Chrome only, so they obviously don't really care at all about the other folk out there, so why should I care about them?

My Yahoo is Yahoo News with a personal twist. I never really think of Yahoo these days at all, which is bad of me I guess. If you however like Yahoo, take a peek.

News Maven is setting itself up as a GR replacement, launching in April. Says nothing else on the site which to be honest, is pretty damn stupid if you ask me. Why would I wait, in the hope that it's good?

NuesByte is a traditional GR lookalike.

Player.fm is an oddity on the list because while it's a news curation tool, it's via podcast, radio news items and so on. It looked as though it would be quite fun, but it's not a GR alternative in any great sense.

Prismatic is a news curation tool. Log in with your social media credentials from the usual suspects and read news stories. Looked a little like Zite, but I didn't get an account with this one, so I could be wrong - but it had the block/image based news squares of information look to it.

Protopage is more of a start page like Netvibes, but it displays RSS feeds in the start page type of news box.

RSSMiner has the traditional GR list of blogs etc down the left, and posts in the main pane in the right.

RSSOwl looks like it's nice, but it's a download product. Instant turn off.

Selfoss has a traditional GR feel, but you need to install it on your own server, which is more than most of us can manage, or would want to, so you'll probably pass on this by the time you get to line 4 which reads "Ensure that you have mod_rewrite and mod_headers enabled."

Skimfeed is minimalist RSS reading taken to the limit. Couldn't see any way to customise it or create an account though.

Skim.me is apparently a visual tool to let you get through the news quickly. However, since it wouldn't let me sign up via Facebook (which is what it offered) I have no way of telling you anything else about it.

Skimr is a straight forward listing of feeds, and when you register you can add your own, and import an OPML file. However, in order to see the updates you have to choose from the list that you've created, so it's a rather slow approach - but I can see how it would work for a small number of feeds.

Thunderbird is not only an email package, it reads RSS as well. You probably won't be interested in this one unless you're looking for a new mail client as well, but if you are, this is worth a peek.

TinyTinyRSS is more of the traditional menu of resources on the left, pane of headlines on the right approach, so if you're a dedicated GR user, this may well look very familiar. It's also very much a one person operation, and I *think* you have to download stuff to use it, but it was very confusing at that point, so I tiptoed quietly away.

Viafeeds says "What makes it different is that we're going to charge money for it, which means we'll be able to continue investing time and resources into it. And everyone wants that, right?" Apparently not, no. You also have to wait a few months. Too late there guys!

Waurb is more of a news curation tool than an RSS alternative. Log in via Facebook, choose your interests from a small collection of subject areas and it will pull back content for you. I certainly found some useful material, but a lot that wasn't, so while it was a fun tool to look at, it's not going to be a GR replacement for you.

Wavii is a news curation tool that pulls content based on your Facebook/Twitter interests. It was quite accurate, but I wasn't overly taken with it personally. Too large and clunky were the results (as Yoda might say).

1kpl.us is a very traditional RSS/Atom reader with a real GR feel to it. Very simple, basic no frills approach.

20 Alternatives to Google Reader

So the really big news yesterday, outstripping that of a new Pope is the news that Google is Powering Down Google Reader, which for many people is a total disaster. Google's hypocrisy is taken to entirely new heights in their post on the matter; they say "We know Reader has a devoted following who will be very sad to see it go. We’re sad too." No, what they really mean is 'we don't care'. This is the usual typical stance that Google takes - a regretful 'but there's nothing we can do about it'. They are citing the decreased use of the product as the reason for closure, but if they'd wanted to I am absolutely sure that they could have done something to stop that decrease - there was some integration into G+ but they could have done a great deal more. I also love the line "as a company we’re pouring all of our energy into fewer products. We think that kind of focus will make for a better user experience." Tell me, how are self drive cars going to make my user experience better? At least be honest enough to say that 'we're pouring our energy into products that make more money for us' because that's the real bottom line. Google Reader doesn't bring in the eyeballs on adverts, so it's got to go. It really IS that simple.

So, what are the alternatives? There are surprisingly a fair number of them, but it depends on the platform that you use.

Tablet Devices

If you use tablets, you have an interesting array of choices. You can pull up news via Zite, which is an excellent tool and one that I use daily. It has recently had a makeover, which makes it even more interesting. It works in a rather different way to Google Reader, in that it pulls together stories for you based on your interests, which it presents in a visual magazine type format on the screen for you. You can then touch a story to see the entire thing, and tell Zite if you want to see more or less stories like that in the future, and if you like it. You can also highlight the source and ask for more or less from that source.
You can quickly flick through pages, open your list of resources on the top right hand side, and search for new material. However, you cannot import content from Google Reader, and you can't customise to the same extent.

Pulse is another alternative that works well with tablets. This is a more traditional RSS type reader in that you can set up a number of tabs, and then choose feeds to populate them. The posts appear in magazine format again, and it's easy enough to flick through them as needed, clicking to view the entire story. This is also available on the web, which makes a nice change. It looks like this:

There is the ever favourite Flipboard, which lots of people rave about, but I've never particularly cared for. This one allows you to link your social media accounts to it, so it's easier to see what your friends and colleagues are doing.

Alternatively, you can try News 360, Trap!t which works with social media accounts, Sulia, or Relevance. Or if you don't like those, try Feedly, which does pull content directly from your Google Reader account AND works on Firefox as well. Another very similar product is The Feed, which also takes content directly from your Reader account and displays it very neatly. If you really want to keep the Google Reader feel, these are the two that I would be inclined to look at first.

This is Feedly - don't be put off by the dark main part of the screen, it does this only when the user is concentrating on the list of feeds:

This is the screenshot from The Feed:

Web based news curation tools

There are a number of tools that you can use to pull information directly into your email accounts. Agreed, not the same thing as a Google Reader, but if we're looking at alternatives, we need to widen the net a little.

You can have News.Me which pulls data down based on your social media networks, but it only looks at the really big stories, so this is really more of an adjunct rather than replacement. Scoop.it is a great tool, but you do have to really go to the pages that have been created by people, so it's more like visiting their weblogs directly. Curate.me again pulls up stories for you in your email, but also on a web page, but it doesn't give you the same control that Google Reader does. Paper.li is a fun tool and it pulls up interesting resources for you, and you can personalise it - here's The Phil Bradley Daily for example. However, once again it's a rather different concept.

RSS Reader alternatives

So if you're not happy with anything I've looked at so far, lets go for some more traditional RSS readers. The first one that I would really recommend looking at is Netvibes. I love Netvibes with a passion - it's a start page, you can publish your own content for the world to see, and it's a pretty good RSS reader as well. More to the point, it looks like a traditional reader as well, although if you prefer, these can also look like widgets too.

I would recommend taking a look at this one, not just because of the RSS aspect, but because if you start to use Netvibes it will make your entire life on the web easier, guaranteed.

A beta outfit, The Old Reader is just starting up (so no screenshot!) but it does allow you to pull your Google Reader content right into their service. Another new entrant into the field is Taptu, available for web and tablet, plus smartphone. I have not used this myself, but it's getting good reviews, but it's another primarily news aggregation tool, pulling content from Twitter and Facebook contacts.

How about an oldie and a goodie? Yes, I'm thinking of Bloglines. It's still out there, and you can still use it. I haven't been back to it in quite some time, but it's a possible that's worth trying.

You could take a look at News Is Free, which you can use without creating an account if you just want headline stuff, but you can obviously open an account to use on the web. There are over 30K of RSS feeds you can choose from, but if you want to add your own, you'll have to go down the premium route.

As I mentioned, Feedly works on the web as well as tablet and they have a very handy blog entry on migrating your Google Reader account directly to their product. Newsblur is also quite traditional in its approach, but you can only have 64 feeds, unless you pay them $1 a month, which provides unlimited feeds, which sounds like a good deal to me. It also has a nice traditional feel about it.

How about downloading your own reader onto your desktop? It's a bit of a weird idea I agree, but when I first started out using RSS I used a product that was on the desktop, though it's so long ago I can't remember the name.  Feedreader is a download, and it's also available on the web too.

Summary

None of these tools are going to be exactly what you want. But then at some point in the dim and distant past you hadn't tried Google Reader, and it was a new experience. If it's any consolation I haven't used Google Reader in a while, though I would peek at it maybe once or twice a week. I prefer to use the tablet tools that I mentioned, and I get most of what I need from Zite, Pulse and Twitter. It takes a while to get used to the idea that you might be missing news, because you can't tailor the tool to your exact requirements, but then I always worried if I was missing really good blogs, so the worry stays, just about something slightly different. The important point in all of this is the networks that you have created. If you have good networks on Twitter and Facebook for example, that's key to a Google Reader free world, since your contacts will find the good stuff and keep you up to date. So yes, it's going to be a real wrench, but there are other options available to you.

Google Knowledge Graph behind the times

This is why Google is losing the real time media battle:

The new Pope was announced a couple of hours ago, but Google still hasn't caught up with the news. However you want to slice it, this is very poor.

How Search Works according to Google

The Story – Inside Search is a website that Google has put together which attempts to show us how search works. You'd think with a whole site that would be really helpful wouldn't you? In actual fact, it's a single animated infogram, which boils down to 'we find some stuff, do magic to it, filter out the crap that our magic didn't get and then give it to you.' Yes folks, an entire site to say that.

Wasted opportunity.

Google makes it easier for kids to find porn

Not what you expect is it? However, it happens to be true. Google recently revamped the way in which they display images on the screen to make it easy and quicker to view them. Selecting an image now brings it centre stage so that it can be seen more easily, and you can flip through them just using the keyboard. They talk about it in more depth in their blog. However, what they're also doing is ironically trying to make it harder to view adult images. Mashable has a good story on the background to this, and got a quote from Google:

"We are not censoring any adult content, and want to show users exactly what they are looking for. But we aim not to show sexually-explicit results unless a user is specifically searching for them. We use algorithms to select the most relevant results for a given query. If you're looking for adult content, you can find it without having to change the default setting — you just may need to be more explicit in your query if your search terms are potentially ambiguous. The image search settings now work the same way as in Web search."

So basically what they've done is put an automatic filter on images which defaults to safe search, irrespective of what you may choose to search for. The way that they have chosen to implement this on blocking words. So if I run a search for 'blue tits' this is the result that I get IF I have the safe search filter on:

Basically, there's lots of blue, and no tits, if you'll excuse my language. The word 'tits' has been filtered out of my search. So in order for a child to be able to do a search for the bird, the safe search filter has to be turned OFF. When that happens - plenty of images of birds and no naked flesh to be seen anywhere. So Google is perfectly capable of working out that my 'blue tits' search is looking for the bird, and not any adult content, rendering the initial filtering of the word absolutely pointless. If I do want to look at something salacious I have to add in more terms, so blue tits porn does bring up images of naked female torsos, but also explicit sexual acts.

Let's look at another example. If I search for 'breasts' with the filter turned on I get a lot of images of women in underwear, but it's perfectly fine, and what I'd expect. Turning the filter off gives me almost exactly the same set of results however. As Google says, I need to be more explicit in my search terms, but I also have to guess what those terms are! Without wishing to get into the whole schoolboy 'dirty words in the dictionary' saga, a search for breasts tits didn't bring up anything particularly naughty, neither did breasts adult, but breasts porn did. Now, you could agree that if someone wants to look for porn that's entirely up to them and why is this an issue? Simply because Google is making decisions for me once again. Any search engine which makes me have to think how IT wants me to think isn't doing its job correctly.

Futhermore, I have my doubts as to the functionality in the first place. A safe search for 'melons' produces 2 images in the first three where topless women are hiding their breasts behind the fruits. Now yes I know, this is all very juvenile, but it's making a very specific association, and one that children may well not have considered. The 'joke' is continued several times as I scroll down the list of results.

The ability to search images is further compromised because of the range and type of words that Google has deemed unsuitable for safe searching, such as 'naked', 'nude', (but 'unclothed' is ok apparently), boobs (but not Bristols), jugs is acceptable, despite returning some images that I wouldn't consider appropriate for safe search. 'Penis' is acceptable, and the third image in shows a sexual act! (Your results may well differ from mine, should you decide that you need to take a look for yourself.) Various terms for female genitalia also produce very explicit results (often of a medical nature showing things that only a medical person should be looking at I reckon!) I could continue, but quite frankly I was getting bored thinking up words to go off and check. The main point is Google has now fundamentally broken image searching.  In order to find entirely innocent images safe search has to be turned off. When safe search is turned off, I have to guess what terms Google will regard as triggering a pornographic search. Since I don't know what these terms are, it's possible I'll trigger a 'porn term' entirely by accident.

Of course, it doesn't have to be this way at all. Image searching over at Bing is a far more sane and civilised approach. It has three levels of moderation - strict safesearch, moderate (which is the default) and none. My blue tits search on strict works perfectly, giving me exactly what I would have expected. Moderate safesearch - same thing, and it's only when I turn it off completely that I get adult images. That's exactly how a moderation system should work in my opinion, and Google has got it hopelessly wrong. Furthermore, this is going to be replicated right across search engines, because many of the children's search engines use a version of Google custom search, and those results are going to be broken as well.

Still think Google+ can be ignored? Think again...

If you are still hoping that Google+ is going to go away sometime soon, then I'm afraid that you're going to have to think again. It's now moved up into second place in the rankings for the number of active users, still way behind Facebook, but in front of Twitter, as this graph from Zdnet shows:

Google+, which many people have written off time and time again actually grew in 2012 27% to 343m users. I can only see this increasing, with the use of the Communities function, which is where I'm getting most of my really good quality conversations now. There's no doubt that Google is going to be pushing the social network even more in 2013 than it did last year.

 

Related articles

Google+ passes Twitter as Google heads for Facebook's top spot