| 1:16 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I have been following this thread closely. Appreciate the expertise that has been shared by so many.
There is no reason to believe that G has "taken down" the WA. One of the ways to increase desire for something is to make it difficult to get. Look at G-Mail, still by invite? Still in Beta?
The other thing I would add, already alluded to by others, is that the claim of "faster" broadband connections does not have to have much validity. (I did not download WA.) The speedmeter that people reference could just as easily be like a hit counter that gives bogus numbers to create the illusion of a popular site.
The significant thing about WA is the data that G acquires at very little cost. Data about human behavior that is. Googlewatch has gained a new level of credibility in my eyes as I have watched this unfold.
I would guess that WA was downloaded and is in use by a statistically significant sample population by now. That means that G now has access to data about web user behaviors far beyond what is available to anybody else. That data is priceless, even without "personally identifying information".
A brilliant move from the perspective of market research and analysis. Believing that G has taken this down due to the outcry of the webmaster community, and applauding them for doing so, simply perpetuates the myth that G can "do no evil", IMHO.
| 1:47 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is one of those times when I'm glad I have a Mac.
| 2:42 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|It's not "good", it's not "bad" - it's just a very clever way to run a very large business, keeping people thinking that it's small and insignificant. |
I agree completely and they do a better job with keeping a smalltime image - better than those that are smalltime. Matter of fact everything in your post is aligned with my own thoughts/POV...hehe
|I don't believe this one has been put to sleep. They are probably just reconfiguring their DNS and servers, and then it comes back. |
I hope they kill off WA for good and come out with their own browser without the prefetch crap. There would be plenty of people to use it so they get the info/user data they want without screwing around with peoples sites. Just hope they don't run "adsense" in the browser (like newer Opera vers)or it will kill the publishers and that would be in poor taste.
The only thing they could have done worse IMHO with WA is to use the same IP range as their Googlebot - that would be bad.
|what is strange is all the rubbish GoogleGuy has been putting out lately: I'm just between meetings; gotta go for lunch; just going to sleep; well check over the weekend. hahahahaha...and all the time he says nothing useful. |
What do you want from the guy? He has nothing to do with the WA. Given the situation he went above and beyond what I would have done in his position. People have to realize this is business and don't shoot the messenger for something they have little to do with or control over. You know he has a life too and can't be at the beckon call of every member at WebmasterWorld....jeez
| 3:31 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Instead of discussing the well-being of a fellow member GG, lets return back to the big issue. Take a look at what Claus has just mentioned in msg#:420
>I don't believe this one has been put to sleep. They are probably just reconfiguring their DNS and servers, and then it comes back.<
This is very disturbing, indeed (:(
| 4:43 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I am suggesting that G dedicates a resourse to various boards. It's called industry relations.
Google's relation with websites is much like Boeing's is to Airlines.
In the old days, GoogleGuy gave us useful commnets, which would give us direction. Now he's too busy. Take a look at this WA thread, there are so many doubts and greviances about it. Many Senior Members of the worldwide website community are disturbed by what they percieve as a threat. And there is nothing but silence and a few comments coming from the people who have released it.
It is entirely in Google's interests to maintain excellent relations with the industry. How long before one of us writes a piece of code that blocks WA? This community has created GDrive, Alexa spammer, and so many other pieces of code that destory the intended good work of the corporations.
| 4:49 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Maybe I missed something here.
I got the impression (from GG) that the header for prefetches included 'X-moz' and/or 'prefetch'.
I download rather standard access-log files daily, each about 1 MB in size.
Searching thru the last few days, I cannot find ANY x-moz or prefetch words at all.
1) Are these terms supposed to appear anywhere in access_log listings? -or-
2) Are GWA users still so few, that none happened by yet on my site?
| 5:26 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Considering the structure of a corporation, it seems that a team in Google developed the WA and got permission to release it, 'AS IS', from Microsoft and Yahoo.
| 6:16 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Multiple choice quiz. Which of these three statements is true?
1. "Information wants to be free."
2. "The Internet views censorship as damage and routes around it."
3. "An Internet company with a $62 billion market cap views a decentralized market as both a threat and an opportunity, and will try to route everything they can through its own equipment."
Google will be back, and back, and back. By now webmasters are no better than populist scum to Google. They'll keep at it. Throw up a test balloon here, throw up another there, see what flies for the dumbed-down Internet surfers, and see it it also fools a sufficient number of clueless Wall Street pundits. Withdraw slightly, and temporarily, if it appears that it may have been a bit too much too soon.
"The greatest lesson that History teaches us is that no one learns from History."
| 6:19 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Larry (msg #:428)
What you see in your logs is "the request". What Google is talking about is the user-agent headers. You can see the headers that your user-agent is sending here:
There have been several posts saying how to block/query requests with the x-moz header. I haven't been totaly convinced by any of them. I wish jdmorgan would weigh-in on the subject.
| 6:31 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Not to belabor the point but:
Can I see if a G Windows Accelerator has prefetched files in my access_logs?
If so, exactly what do I look for? Something in the user-agent string? -Larry
| 6:35 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Hi Longhair: Our messages crossed in the wires.
Will there be something in "the request" that indicates the GWWA has been by or not? Something I can see in my log files listings? - Larry
| 6:37 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
The only way you can see if GWA has hit your site is to look for requests coming from the folloiwng Class C subnets:
and those hits have normal browser types (e.g. MSIE or Firefox) in their useragent strings. There may be other IP address ranges that GWA is using, but I am not aware of them.
| 6:44 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Thanks KenB: A clear answer at last. Its a lot harder to search for DNS numbers though, I was hoping for something simpler and faster. -Larry
| 6:53 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Some results KenB (and thanks again)
I checked all 4 partial DNS #s. Out of 2 days of logs, maybe 1800 KB worthm I found only two files downloaded, an html page and the .gif image that the page calls. Scarcely any impact on bandwidth so far. -Larry
| 7:20 pm on May 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think for now, many sites will feel little to no impact because GWA is in beta and not very widely disseminated. When it will begin to have a big impact is once it is out of beta and being promoted to the general public.
| 6:14 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
With Web Accelerator enabled the Alexa toolbar says my IP is blocked because of a possible violation of Alexa's Terms of Service, and it's not my IP it's Google's.... Took me awhile to figure this out.... I am on Road Runner so my IP is always changing, I didn't suspect that a Google application would break Alexa, but it did! To fix this you turn off Web Accelerator...
Here's the error.. We're sorry but you do not have permission to access null. Your IP address, 18.104.22.168, has been blocked due to a possible violation of our Terms of Service.
Alexa's terms of service, available at pages.alexa.com/help/terms.html, grants a limited license to make personal use of the service and expressly prohibits commercial use, copying, and the creation of derivative works. If you need programmatic access to Alexa data please use the Alexa Web Information Service (available at www.amazon.com/webservices).
To unblock your IP Address, click the Submit button below. Please note this will work only once.
OrgName: Google Inc.
Address: 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
City: Mountain View
NetRange: 22.214.171.124 - 126.96.36.199
NetType: Direct Allocation
TechName: Google Inc.
OrgTechName: Google Inc.
| 6:27 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Should I understand that Alexa is blocking GWA?
| 6:49 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes Alexa is Blocking Google Windows Web Accelerator
| 6:56 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
<Yes Alexa is Blocking Google Windows Web Accelerator>
Thanks for the good news :-)
Have a great day and a successful week.
| 7:02 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
That may be a bit of an exaggeration. I don;'t have the alexa toolbar but can visit alexa.com with the WA on or off.
| 7:08 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Okay the Alexa toolbar breaks when using GWA.. And the only fix is to turn GWA off.
| 7:41 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just downloaded the Alexa toolbar. It seems to run fine in conjunction with the WA. Did you actually do anything against alexa's T and C?
| 8:23 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
No I just surfed the web with GWA turned on for 2 days, I guess I got the lucky copy of GWA with that IP 188.8.131.52, it doesn't happen right away, just surf around a bit and the Alexa toolbar loses all data and says you are blocked. I turn it off and Alexa comes back.
| 9:14 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm still thinking about the fact that Google could intercept form data... as they state - and wondering how that would be possible...
I would think it could only be if the form results are displayed on an insecure result page that it would be cached - not that Google takes the submitted data and passes it on to form scripts etc... any other ideas?
| 9:28 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
razinkane, and others that have the WA installed:
I'm trying to make a list of the IP's of this thing.
It would be very helpful if each of you that have it installed would visit one of those sites where you can lookup your IP, and then write the IP number in this thread with the country/region you're in (or state, if you want), like:
184.108.40.206 - US
| 9:34 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
IP Is 220.127.116.11
Proxy Detected Is 18.104.22.168 in the US
| 10:32 am on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
thanks razinkane :)
It's only the IP of the WA / proxy that i'm interested in, not your own IP. I wasn't clear on that in the previous post, sorry.
| 2:51 pm on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Claus, I see the request to cdp.google.com which is cname'd to cdp.l.google.com which is 22.214.171.124.
| 2:53 pm on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My inquiry form on my website uses
<input type=hidden name="env_report" value="REMOTE_ADDR">.
That only produces my IP when using the WA.
| 8:20 pm on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've been watching the mainstream media looking to see is there was much mention, if any, about the WA flap or the DNS fiasco over the weekend and it's been surprisingly very quiet unless they are just slow to catch up.
Most specifically I was looking around places where I get my updates on companies for making stock buying decisions - stone cold silence. The only downturn story was about the off topic CPM ads could "unseat their dominant position as a contextual search ad service".
The only thing new that showed up on my radar this afternoon was some fluff PR piece:
"Google To Cut Seconds Off Surfing"
Must be nice to get paid to regurgitate press releases without doing any investigating on the topic.
I need something simple in my life like that.
| 9:17 pm on May 9, 2005 (gmt 0)|
elbpdx that IP is very close to a Googlebot IP. Both of these have been used by Googlebot:
126.96.36.199 - googlebot
188.8.131.52 - googlebot
Also, it is the first time this range has been reported. Are you absolutely sure that this is the IP for the Web Accelerator?