Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Google Earth 5.0 Silently Changes Update Policy

Posted by kdawson on Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:43 AM
from the jumping-the-shark dept.
mario_grgic writes "Recently announced Google Earth version 5.0 adds interesting new features like images of ocean floors and some detailed images of Mars. But it also brings another unwelcome change for Mac OS X users. Google Software update daemon is installed when the application is launched for the first time. The user is greeted with an uninformative message that does not really explain what is about to happen. After the user accepts, Google Update Agent is downloaded and installed. It updates all Google applications and not just Google Earth. Also, it runs on an unchangeable schedule of its own (instead of, say, only when one of Google's apps is launched), consuming system resources. Worst of all it can not be simply removed, since it is downloaded and installed again once Google Earth is launched. Users really have only two choices: live with it, or uninstall all Google apps. There's a discussion about the updater in this Google Group, including details of a way to disable it (not for the faint of heart). So fellow Slashdotters, has Google crossed the line?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • It's my computer (Score:4, Informative)

    by Z00L00K (682162) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:45AM (#26752607) Homepage

    And I want to be in control of if it's going to crap or not.

    • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

      by Aladrin (926209) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:46AM (#26752647)

      So don't install Google Earth.

      Wow, that was easy!

      • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

        by Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:06AM (#26753073)

        It's modded funny, but it is accurate. If you don't like Google's policy and they won't change it....vote with your feet. I actually uninstalled google earth because of this.

          • by jlarocco (851450) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:39AM (#26753731) Homepage

            If you dont want to fight, retreat. If you keep retreating you will lose a war without a single battle being fought, a cowards way to go out.

            No, actually, because companies need customers to survive.

            If a company is acting abusively you need to punish it via the government.

            Wow, that's just scary. Wait, I get it... I'm feeding a troll, right?

            Companies should not be able to modify your computer at their discretion, EULA

            And they're not. People are voluntarily installing the software Google provided and agreeing to the terms they set. The article summary clearly points out that the software warns that it's going to install the updater. If a person doesn't agree to the terms, then they shouldn't use the software. It's that fucking simple. Where did you get the idea that you get to set the terms at which you get other people's stuff?

            If Google has something, and you want to use it, you're gonna have to play by the rules they set for it, or not use their shit. That's just the way it works. What would you do if Google said "Well, we're just not going to release Google Earth at all."?

            • by Amazing Quantum Man (458715) on Friday February 06 2009, @12:16PM (#26754417) Homepage

              No, actually, because companies need customers to survive.

              But in the case of Google, you're not the customer, you're the product. Google's customers are the advertisers, and they're selling your eyeballs.

              • by i_ate_god (899684) on Friday February 06 2009, @01:06PM (#26755203)

                If people would stop being so apathetic to the world around them and start taking a stand, then industry would attempt to police itself more. The problem doesn't lie with abusive corporations, the problem lies in lazy people who don't do anything about it.

                And before you say "well I'm powerless to do anything", I'm saying the problem isn't you personally, but society as a whole. Writing a harshly worded letter to your politician is boring, the majority of the population, en masse, quickly moving loyalties from one company to another over perceived trust issues, that will keep corporations on their toes. History has taught us, the truth always comes out.

                Corporations aren't innocent, but their guilt exists due in big part to lack of consumer pressure.

              • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

                by jlarocco (851450) on Friday February 06 2009, @01:12PM (#26755291) Homepage

                Then I demand the rights to name your firstborn. I can if I state it in a EULA right?

                Yeah, that's fine with me, because I'm not an idiot. I actually read the shit I'm about to agree to, so I wouldn't use your product after seeing that in the EULA. Problem solved.

                No company has the right to being abusive and you can NEVER relinquish certain rights, even if you wanted to. I can't sell mysrlf into slavery and I can't give Google eternal and everlasting control over my computer, EULA or not.

                <sarcasm>Yeah, the "right" to use other people's shit on any terms you want is right up there with free speech and freedom of the press. I can't believe they left that one off the Bill of Rights...</sarcasm>

                I see this as a typically American point of view. If a goverment tries to do anything, it's evil, fascist, communist, stealing etc. When a company does it, it is seen as their right and if you don't like it you should stop doing business with them.

                The difference is that interactions with a company are voluntary. You don't have to use Google's products. There's Yahoo, Gigablast, Clusty, and hundreds more. There's MapQuest and WorldWind and others. There's OpenOffice, Abiword, KOffice, Microsoft Office, and more. You have all of those alternatives, and you can use whichever one you want, without anybody telling you otherwise.

                You don't have a choice with the government - you do what they say or they throw you in jail.

                If that's an "American point of view", then you're probably right. We are supposed to be the shining example of a free country, so it only makes sense that we'd prefer freedom over government bullying.

          • by Zakabog (603757) <john@jm a u g . com> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:41AM (#26753765)

            If you dont want to fight, retreat. If you keep retreating you will lose a war without a single battle being fought, a cowards way to go out.

            This isn't a war... If you don't like Google's policy don't install the software. That's not retreating, that's taking power away from Google (the less people using their software the less power they have.) If everyone "retreats" Google loses (it's hard to maintain a company with no customers), it's as simple as that.

            If a company is acting abusively you need to punish it via the government.

            What is Google doing that's worthy of government intervention? Google isn't breaking into your home and installing their software on your computer. You make the choice whether you want to use their software or not, if you don't like what the software does then don't install it.

            If you `vote with your feet they will take away every right you have. Companies should not be able to modify your computer at their discretion, EULA or not.

            I'm sorry but what rights do you have as far as Google's concerned? Software companies can't take away your "rights" since your rights aren't granted by the software companies. As long as you aren't being forced to install Google's software (and you're not) you still have your rights.

          • by mrvan (973822) on Friday February 06 2009, @12:00PM (#26754109)

            Sun Tzu says:

            A good general can fight a hundred battles and win them all

            A great general can win a war without fighting a single battle

            (or something like that, with apologies to the Master :-))

            Guerillas all over the world are winning from large armies by retreating and refusing to fight a large battle. If you don't use google and badmouth google to your less tech-savvy friends, they will feel the pain.

      • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

        by samkass (174571) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:41AM (#26753767) Homepage Journal

        I actually got this upgrader on my system from installing Google SketchUp on my Mac last month, so I don't think Google is limiting this to Earth.

          • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Interesting)

            by IamTheRealMike (537420) on Friday February 06 2009, @12:46PM (#26754899) Homepage

            For goodness sake. Am I the only one that likes the Google Updater?

            Let's review the benefits it has:

            • Apps are upgraded silently, with no notification. Yes this is a benefit. If you have a Mac you'll know what a pain in the ass it is that every app you start feels the need to dump an assload of ChangeLog in your face every other week. Do I really care that Adium updated to the latest libpurple? What does that even mean to me? 99.9% of the time I can't tell any difference. I trust the Adium developers, I wish they'd just do their job and let me use their app without bugging me. Of course replace Adium with any other modern app for the Mac. Except iTunes which is just as annoying except you don't even get a changelog.
            • Updates are downloaded as binary deltas, and on Windows it's done in such a way that it only uses the connection when idle (Windows Update does the same thing). So it's not intrusive.
            • The updater goes away if you uninstall all the apps which use it, so there's no problem there.
            • It takes about 500k of RAM and virtually no CPU, but it ensures I get security updates in a timely manner. For instance if there's an exploit discovered in Chrome, the wrong time to apply that update is at the end of my next session, by which time it's too late. The right time to apply it is when my computer is idle, before I start using Chrome again.

            I think people overestimate the resource drain this app has. Really, this should be a core part of Windows. I'd much rather desktop apps behave like web apps and just get silently better instead of expecting me to give a rats ass about the existence of a 0.0.1 point release.

            • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Interesting)

              by vadim_t (324782) on Friday February 06 2009, @01:52PM (#26755909) Homepage

              For goodness sake. Am I the only one that likes the Google Updater?

              Looks like it

              Apps are upgraded silently, with no notification. Yes this is a benefit.

              No, it bloody isn't. That's the sort of thing malware does. My computer is mine and things on it get installed and updated only under my consent.

              I think people overestimate the resource drain this app has.

              It's the principle of the thing. This action alone ensured nothing else of Google's will get on my computer.

      • by Doctor_Jest (688315) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:57AM (#26754047)
        Why can't something that has nothing to do with Google Earth not be installed? People want to install Google Earth. They DO NOT want to install Google Updater. What's so hard about that to understand? What is Google trying to be, Microsoft? (Movie Maker, IE, Outlook Express, Messenger, etc. etc.)

        why not make it a "check for updates on startup" (of the app), and allow the user to disable that? Is that so hard? OR, be forthright enough to tell users AT THE TIME OF THE INSTALLATION that they're agreeing to install an app that they have no control over, and one that keeps coming back even if you get rid of it? I don't see the point, nor do I see why Google insists on making it some kind of requirement that they are obtuse about in their instructions? What happened to "Don't be evil"?

        I remember what these sorts of things are called... malware. :) It really is my computer. If I choose to install something, I should be at the very _least_ aware of the consequences of the installation. AND if I remove it, stop trying to put it back. If it isn't on the computer, there _is_ a reason. So, I'm not installing Google Earth until they fix it. It's not worth the hassle and wasted cpu cycles.
        • by DavidR1991 (1047748) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:54AM (#26752841) Homepage

          Wow, I guess you don't know how to read: "So don't install Google Earth."

          i.e. don't install it to begin with

          • by multisync (218450) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:32AM (#26753581) Journal

            Wow, I guess you don't know how to read: "So don't install Google Earth."

            i.e. don't install it to begin with

            So are you just not ever going to install anything on your computer? Or did you not bother to read the part that said:

            The user is greeted with an uninformative message that does not really explain what is about to happen

            Would you tell someone finds out the toys his kid has been playing with were painted with lead-based paints "just don't buy your kid any toys and you'll be okay?" Or do you think that when we find out someone is doing something that is just plain unacceptable, we should shine a light on that behavior and motivate them to smarten up?

          • by Lostlander (1219708) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:40AM (#26753747)
            Cuz that's the way to go lets ignore the fact that this is a sudden unprompted and uninformed update to an already existing software which installs extra software which then uses up system resources on an unchangeable schedule.

            It has nothing to do with installing the software and everything to do with a major change in policy with no warning. If Microsoft makes a change like this people never say "so don't use their product" they wail on and on about user rights. Google on the other hand is defended like a religion.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 06 2009, @10:49AM (#26752707)

      ... so you bought a Mac???

      • by b96miata (620163) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:56AM (#26752881)

        the troll has a point. Apple is the king of installing background crap on your computer. (well, they are if you use their software on windows, at least)

          Even if you kill apple software updater, no matter how many times I click "no" and "don't ask me again" iTunes still pops up a (@*&(#*&$@(* do you want to update box whenever I start it.

        • I have you beat. Everytime I close iTunes (without my iPod plugged in even), it decides I didn't really want to do that and opens back up again. I have to camp on the process monitor and premptively kill the process two or three times before it'll stop trying to come back to life.

          I've been told an uninstall/reinstall will fix it, but if it does, the problem seems common enough that it only 'does' for a couple of runs.

          • by parkrrrr (30782) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:30AM (#26753535)

            It does pop up at random times when you don't have iTunes running.

            I don't use iTunes. Never have. It's installed on my computer because my wife uses it, but she has her own account. I still get the stupid updater asking if I want to update iTunes and all the cruft that comes with it.

            Worse, I use a non-admin account for day-to-day stuff. Even if I did want to update iTunes, the account I'm logged in to doesn't have the privileges to do so. You'd think someone would have thought to check that.

            • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot&worf,net> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:54AM (#26753987)

              I do not have iTunes or Quicktime installed on my computer because apparently Windows 2000 is not shiny enough for watching mov files. /me thinks it is drm related

              Or you can't read... here's a clicky-clicky link [apple.com].

              Here's how I got there:

              1) www.apple.com
              2) Click on "iPod + iTunes" button at the top
              3) Click on "Download iTunes"
              4) Scroll down, just under the Spanish option, you see, OMG - "Windows 2000 Users". If you have NoScript enabled, the link may be obscured behind the text, but it's at the left column at the bottom. Not at the very bottom of the page, though. If javascript is enabled, it's plainly visible.

              It's not iTunes 8, but they're apparently still supporting iTunes 7.5.2.

              Anyhow, remember to right-click on the QuickTime icon and set your QuickTime preferences to not startup at windows startup to eliminate that annoying process.

      • by King_TJ (85913) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:45AM (#26753839) Homepage Journal

        Oh, come on..... I've been primarily a Mac user since around 2000, and yes, one reason I did so was because I want to feel in control of my computers.

        That is, I don't like web sites arbitrarily pushing out and launching apps/applets via Active-X and security vulnerabilities in Windows, and I don't like having to run a bunch of resource-intensive software in the background to help "shield" my PC from malware.

        Apple's built-in updater in OS X allows you to deselect any update you'd like it not to install, and it lets you select the frequency it goes out to check for updates. As updaters go, I always thought it was quite well-behaved and well-integrated.

        (By contrast, look at something like Microsoft's whole "Microsoft Updates" thing. They've got the process that you can let run in the background to notify you and optionally auto-install any "critical updates" they push out. But at the same time, you have to visit their "Microsoft Updates" web page and manually select the rest of the stuff. Many times, it wastes double the bandwidth because you'll visit their page to grab a slew of updates, only to find the background process is ALSO simultaneously trying to download the critical updates the update site tagged and is downloading. It's not smart enough to integrate the two together.)

    • by mario_grgic (515333) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:27AM (#26753457)

      Yes indeed. It just strikes me that Google is beginning to show it's true face of an advertising empire that it is, with a technology front to keep our minds from thinking about it too much.

      • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

        by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:03AM (#26753015)

        You can turn it off with Lingon [tuppis.com] which is a launchd [wikipedia.org] editor. I would suggest taking this route over trying to just delete all the files. You can probable even change the schedule to only trip every night at 3 am or so. The program may see the config files are gone and just re-install them.

        Second, does this 'run constantly in the background' or is it launched like a cron event? For those that don't know, launchd [wikipedia.org] is Apple's replacement for "init, rc, the init.d and rc.d scripts, SystemStarter (Mac OS X), inetd and xinetd, atd, crond and watchdogd". You can set up launchd events for about anything. Launch on startup, launch every X seconds, launch when a folder is changed, etc, etc. I can't imagine that this is actually a daemon but instead just a scheduled event.

        • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Informative)

          by MightyYar (622222) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:35AM (#26753609)

          Second, does this 'run constantly in the background' or is it launched like a cron event?

          To me, it looks like it is run once through launchd on startup, and then uses launchd to fire it up every 2 hours. So yeah, I don't think it's a daemon.

      • by lysergic.acid (845423) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:06AM (#26753071) Homepage

        and users should also be allowed to pick & opt out of any update they want. i hate how Apple Software Update, which comes with the Windows version of iTunes, will keep prompting the user about the same "updates" (often completely unrelated to iTunes or any other application the user has installed) until the user downloads and installs it. if you don't, the update will keep popping up or remain in the notification area/system tray.

        just because i want to keep iTunes updated doesn't mean i want to install Safari (how is that an update anyhow?) or Bonjour/Rendezvous. at least now Apple makes an attempt (though a feeble one, as they're still using their "updater" to peddle unrelated & unsolicited software).

        • Re:It's my computer (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Skater (41976) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:19AM (#26753331) Homepage Journal

          They did fix one thing in this version that several people complained about: GE 4.3 for Linux required a certain processor flag (SSE2) that 32 bit AMD processors don't have. Strangely, they did not require it for the Windows version; I was able to use GE 4.3 on this AMD Sempron without a problem under Windows.

          Fortunately, GE 5.0 doesn't require that flag under Linux. I'm glad they fixed it, because I wasn't going to upgrade my desktop computer just to run the latest GE. GE 4.3 Linux requirements update [google.com].

          So it appears the team does listen to feedback. I hope they'll listen to this new concern as well.

  • disable on mac (Score:5, Insightful)

    by musikit (716987) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:47AM (#26752661)

    usually when i want to disable anything on mac (dash board, spotlight, etc) i usually change the file permissions to 000. this wont work with google updater?

  • by RogueWarrior65 (678876) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:49AM (#26752693)

    Does anyone have an "in" with somebody at Google Earth or the outfit they contract with to provide the imagery? A large portion of central and northern Arizona hasn't been updated in years i.e. the images are still in low resolution. The reason I ask is that I belong to a Search & Rescue team and we are currently looking for evidence of a downed aircraft reported missing two years ago. However, much of the possible crash area is still way out of date. In general, not having current imagery makes our job more difficult than it should be.

    • Have you considered paying for a commercial product?

    • by RogueWarrior65 (678876) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:32AM (#26753567)

      Let me amend my earlier posting. Our Search & Rescue Team is 100% voluntary. We provide our own gas and vehicles. To say we don't have a pot to p*ss in would be an understatement. The area we cover is around 8000 square miles. Much of that is pretty rugged country and more often than not, the Google Earth imagery is useless to us. At the same time, we're dealing with USGS topo maps that haven't been updated since man walked erect. What I'm seriously asking for is a point of contact who can at least enlighten me as to why some areas are updated on what appears to be a monthly basis when there are so many areas that are woefully out of date. And yes I have looked at a commercial product. It's VERY expensive. Clearly there is some method that Google uses to get current imagery. I'd just like to find out how you get on their satellite schedule. BTW, snarky comments aren't helpful. I'll remember them next time you get lost.

      • by Alioth (221270) <no@spam> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:55AM (#26754009) Journal

        It seems they get them from all over the place, look at the message on the bit of map you're looking at, that usually gives you a clue where they come from. Being voluntary, you may be able to approach whoever-it-is directly and see if they will be kind.

        For example, where I live (Isle of Man) we didn't have even a street map let alone images that were better than about 1 pixel per km^2. However, a couple of years ago the Isle of Man Government flew a light plane up and down the island - and guess what the information provider shown by Google is - Isle of Man Govt. (Many of the hi-res "satellite images" aren't from a satellite at all, but from an aircraft flying relatively low).

      • by IamTheRealMike (537420) on Friday February 06 2009, @12:57PM (#26755071) Homepage

        What I'm seriously asking for is a point of contact who can at least enlighten me as to why some areas are updated on what appears to be a monthly basis when there are so many areas that are woefully out of date.

        I am not in the PR team here at Google, so this is not an official, accurate answer but I'll do the best I can. If these answers aren't quite accurate, well, tough noogies, it's Slashdot. That said, here are some answers to your questions:

        • Some areas of the world are just easier to take photos of than other areas, for instance, it's quite hard to take satellite pictures of the north of the UK because it's always cloudy there, so you need to do it all via aircraft.
        • Some areas are updated more frequently because lots of people live there, so they're more interesting areas to refresh.
        • Some imagery is donated by, eg, local government.
        • You cannot "get on the satellite schedule" sorry. The fastest way to get clear imagery in Google Earth is to pay for it, and then donate it. However there are quality bars that the imagery must meet before it's included. Yes it's amazingly expensive. Why do you think Google Earth was so revolutionary when it came out? A large part of it was that Google spent mind-boggling amounts of money on buying up imagery, then let people look at it for free.
  • by Gizzmonic (412910) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:50AM (#26752731) Homepage Journal

    I still don't understand why all these companies feel like they need to create their own bloated ecosystem on top of the OS. All the #$%@#! application needs to do is check for an update and link me to its website (even that is not necessary). Adobe is the worst at the this-they have their own $^$#&*$@ file browser, for $@#%'s sake! And their updater nags and doesn't work properly half the time.

    I'm not excited to see Google go down this path. If this is cloud computing, I'd rather be from the moon!

  • Sparkle (Score:5, Informative)

    by Midnight Thunder (17205) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:51AM (#26752763) Homepage Journal

    Why on Earth can't they use something like Sparkle [andymatuschak.org], which is so much less obnoxious - this only warns you when you launch your application, and also self updates if you say yes. If all software started acting like Google Software Update, then we would spend half our day simply closing update windows for software which we haven't used in a month.

  • by scorp1us (235526) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:54AM (#26752843) Journal

    I really love the unified update system of the Linux distributions. One process updates all the software.

    Right now, I have the following updaters running:
    Windows
    Adobe
    Kapersky (Anti-virus)
    Java
    Apple

    Isn't it time everyone gets on board with 1 system? This way, Apple can't sneak Safari in, we can set a coordinated restore point, and there is only one update user interface.

    As software releases become a more fluid experience relying on weekly builds and not annual or semi-annual releases, I think all these updaters are going to eventually create a clusterfuck and a negative user experience if we don't get everyone on the same system.

  • by wiredog (43288) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:58AM (#26752937) Journal

    Admittedly, I moved to Mac after 10 years running Linux, but the procedure, cut 'n' pasted below, seems simple enough.

    Something like this will do it:

    1) Quit all google apps

    2) Delete the launchd entries (one or the other files may exist)

            $ sudo rm ~/Library/LaunchAgents/com.google.keystone.agent.plist

            $ sudo rm /Library/LaunchAgents/com.google.keystone.agent.plist

    2) Delete shared google stuff

            $ rm -rf ~/Library/Application/Support/Google

            $ rm -rf ~/Library/Google

    3) Recreate the above folder as "root" to prevent google apps from installing the updater agent code again when re-launched

    $ sudo mkdir ~/Library/Google

    By changing the ~/Library/Google folder to be owned by root you should avoid going through this shenanigans again. Just check for a /Library/Google too and do the same to it. Don't give google apps your password.

    You need Terminal.app experience for those commands. You can use the Finder too.
    After recreating an empty ~/Library/Google select File>Get Info. Use the permissions at the bottom to add the "Administrator" with read/write. Change "..(Me)" to read only.

  • HP's updater (Score:5, Insightful)

    by British (51765) <british1500@gmail.com> on Friday February 06 2009, @10:59AM (#26752945) Homepage Journal

    HP is yet another one of those companies that insists on a background process to update printer drivers, etc. I realized one of the last updates fixed a security flaw. I think my next move will be to uninstall the updater altogether, and thus not have to worry about security holes in a freakin' updater.

    It used to be every software house insisted on a systray icon, even though it didn't need it.
    Now the latest trend are background "updater" processes, even for stuff that doesn't need it(Adobe reader, etc).

    Typically there's no indicators of it being installed, and trying to uninstall it is a mystery.

    This needs to change. Identify it as malware or something. Anything.

  • by NonUniqueNickname (1459477) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:01AM (#26752975)
    I'm sure the automatic updater will remove itself the day Google Earth comes out of beta.
  • Don't be rude? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LaminatorX (410794) <sabotage@p r a e c a ntator.com> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:04AM (#26753035) Homepage

    I don't know that this rises to the level of "evil." On the other hand, I would call it inconsiderate, self-important, and shoddy workmanship.

    • Re:Big Deal? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Sockatume (732728) on Friday February 06 2009, @10:52AM (#26752787) Homepage
      Bonjour is a "discovery service", like the thing in Windows that detects what printers, computers etc. are on your network. It's probably needed for iTunes' media sharing functions.
    • Re:Big Deal? (Score:5, Informative)

      by guruevi (827432) <evi@NospAM.smokingcube.be> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:09AM (#26753155) Homepage

      Bonjour is the network discovery protocol (DAAP) that makes it so your computer can find and connect networked or wireless speakers, printers, share music libraries and more without having to manually find and type in IP addresses especially when you're on DHCP in your house (which you most likely are). I use it at work to advertise machines with certain services (like distributed computing/compiling) to the network so that I don't have to scan for them. It also gives you great DNS services without needing to configure a DNS server (like P2P for DNS).

      Bonjour is one of the reasons networking is so 'easy' on Mac's and even on Linux (if you install it). It's similar to Windows' equivalent of Windows Zeroconfig (Microsoft's Link-local Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR)) but it adheres to the published and open standards unlike Microsoft implementation which is also the reason that there is only 1 printer at my job that is discovered through Microsoft's protocol and ALL printers (HP Laserjet, Brother and inkjets) are discovered through Bonjour.

    • Re:Scary! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TrippTDF (513419) <hiland AT gmail DOT com> on Friday February 06 2009, @11:02AM (#26753003)
      I tend to agree with you, but I think it's a long ways off.

      If you look at the economy, we're (potentially) on the verge of a 2nd great depression. That's because the people that ran companies around the great depression are now 1 or 2 generations removed from the people that run the things now. The new people just don't have any concept of the Great Depression, and just see ways to make money, and now we're winding up in a similar boat.

      Right now Google is helmed by people that are incredibly smart and chant "don't be evil"... what happens in the 2nd or 3rd generation of management 40 years down the line? Will the montra still be there? I bet not.
    • Re:It just works. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by clang_jangle (975789) on Friday February 06 2009, @11:15AM (#26753247)

      I didn't think Mac Users cared about doing all of that nerdy fine-tuning and tweaking of their system. I thought their mentality was that things like "file control" and "preferences" were for geeks

      Of course there are Mac (and windows) users for whom that is true. However, OS X is a BSD variant, and as such makes a very powerful and very geeky platform for those of us who like it that way. In fact, disabling the Goog's updater by changing its permissions is trivial using chmod. As for "cannot be simply removed", that is false. I can easily remove anything I want in OS X via the terminal. If you want it "simple", use sudo mc F8. :)