Google and Microsoft: A race for the bottom

It’s been a lively few weeks here in Cringeville, as my inbox will attest.

First, before anyone else sends me another email on this: Yes, I messed up in my second post on Google’s Wi-Fi lies (“Google’s Wi-Fi spygate troubles have only just begun“). In that screed I said “a number of the regulars here in Cringeville believe people who leave their Wi-Fi networks secured deserve whatever they get.”

[ For a humorous take on the tech industry’s shenanigans, subscribe to Robert X. Cringely’s Notes from the Underground newsletter. | Get the latest insight on the tech news that matters from InfoWorld’s Tech Watch blog. ]

What I meant to say there, obviously, was unsecured, though people who do secure their nets also deserve something — maybe a merit badge. Thanks to the half-dozen readers who immediately noticed the gaffe; it’s nice to know at least some of you are actually reading this blog instead of leaping straight into the fray in the comments fields.

Of course, I also got a fair number of reactions to my original rant about Google (“Lies, spies, and Wi-Fi: Google fesses up“). There was a vigorous debate over whether Google should be blamed because it scooped up information that people had carelessly broadcast out into the street. Cringester J.A. offered up a typical reaction.

Well, you’re right of course … Google can’t be trusted.

On the other hand, doncha think anybody using an unprotected Wi-Fi network deserves whatever happens to them? It’s sorta like leaving home with with your front door and your fly open. Aren’t there awards for that kind of stupidity?

My response to J. A.: I think leaving your door open means you shouldn’t be surprised to walk in and find a stranger sitting on your couch, but I don’t believe it gives the stranger a right to be there. Wi-Fi routers have been poorly marketed for a decade now, and a lot of nontech people have them. The industry has done a poor job of teaching those folks basic security or giving them dead simple tools to make it easy. I don’t think they should be forced to sacrifice their privacy as a result.

Reader S.S., on the other hand, had this to say about the matter:

OK, now I like Google but, I like my privacy even more. They should be forced to financially compensate each individual they stole private info from. The amount of compensation should vary with the type and amount of data stolen. This info should be also disclosed to the victims as well. Steps to rectify the risk of identity theft should be taken at Google’s expense. The FCC is there to protect us, aren’t they?

What we need, I think, are two things: a) laws that offer some kind of privacy protection for personal data traveling over the Internet, even on unsecured lines, possibly with some kind of financial penalty for transgressors; and 2) idiot-proof out-of-the-box-secure routers.

But it wasn’t all Google all the time here in Cringeville. In “Psst, Microsoft! Here’s how you unseat the iPad,” I suggested that Microsoft give Windows 8 — er, Windows RT — tablets away for free, just to survive the Apple onslaught, and I asked readers what they’d be willing to pay. Not surprisingly, nearly all of them liked my price point best.

But for reader and iPad fan D.C., even nothing was asking too much.

As a former Windows enthusiast, I’ve watched way too many of my days evaporate with unexpected rebuilds of Windows systems for myself and clients. When servicing Windows networks became an ethical issue for me due to their inherent unreliability, I eventually stopped taking new Windows clients. …

I happen to own an iPad, because when I turn it on, it works. … I have a Linux machine because it is incredibly reliable, easy to use, and I never have to pray that the key code will work, because there isn’t one! Both machines keep working without a lot of fuss. That has never, ever been the case with any version of Windows I’ve owned.

Finally, in “Now accepting applications for Internet Hall of Shame; inquire within,” I discussed the newly christened Internet Hall of Fame and asked who readers would place in a shrine honoring the dishonorable. Reader K.O. immediately suggested Canter & Siegel, the immigration attorneys widely credited with sending the first spam (via Usenet groups, not email) in 1994.

But Cringe fan Enderland nominated Mr. Churros himself, Bill Gates. His achievement:

… putting Internet Explorer on millions (billions?) of computers, thereby making the world’s most popular browser a hodgepodge of versions that vary widely in their ability to ward off attacks, from poorly to godawful, but which all have one thing in common: a resistance to W3C standards.

I don’t know. I think Gates might be a little lonely roaming the hall as the only Microsoft representative. Don’t you think little Stevie Ballmer ought to join him?

What tech issues are getting under your skin? Scratch your itch below or email me: cringe@infoworld.com.

This article, “Google and Microsoft: A race for the bottom,” was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the crazy twists and turns of the tech industry with Robert X. Cringely’s Notes from the Field blog, and subscribe to Cringely’s Notes from the Underground newsletter.