![]() What's happening with the pictures, then? It looks as though Google is trying to reach the huge mass of people who like some sort of personalisation. The idea that the front page is sacrosanct has been abandoned. That is, adverts by Google itself - for its Chrome browser, or its business solutions - have been included (third parties are still locked out). This, when they were a company with no revenue, and lots of outgoings.īut the no-advert policy has been repealed. In those early years, they even turned down a very large sum from Visa, which wanted to have an advert - the only advert - on that front page. So, why? Larry Page and Sergey Brin used to be adamant that nothing should spoil the clean lines of the Google page: when it first appeared, it dazzled compared to the rest of the web, where the major search engine was AltaVista, which was succumbing at just that time to a serious bout of portal-itis, in which the page becomes inflamed with flim-flam. ![]() So Internet Explorer users might as well use Microsoft's Bing, which has been doing this sort of thing since its relaunch. The image adds to the time required to load the page (even if it's only 11K, that's still 11K that didn't have to come otherwise), and while you can change the background image to white, that means that you'll only be able to see the text on the page through its shadow - which doesn't work well in Internet Explorer, if at all. ![]() What's mystifying, at first, is what Google thinks it's getting out of this. Why? What is Google trying to do? Google said of the feature (which at the time required you to sign in to a Google account) that it "brings a whole new level of personalization to Google by letting you add a favorite photo or image to the background of the Google homepage." Well, if that's what turns you on.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |