Google Not Reciprocating On IFrame Usage? 115
theodp writes "Over at the Google Web Search Community, posters are questioning why Google feels free to IFrame others' web pages, yet blocks attempts to IFrame pages on its own sites. 'Google has so much contradiction in what it wants for itself and what it does with other websites [e.g., Google frames Slashdot],' quipped one poster. 'Do no evil, right?' And over at the Google Maps Help Forum, developers are also begging for Google to allow them to IFrame entire pages again. 'I know there are other options (&embed etc.),' explains a poster, 'but then there is no sidebar which is useless. I really need the functionality like it was before.' Can any Googlers out there explain The Mystery of 'This content cannot be displayed in a frame'?"
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
The summary seems to imply that Google has "magical powers" which enable it to block displaying its pages in IFrames, which no one else has?
The reality, AFAICT, is that everyone could block Google from displaying their pages in that way, also. They largely just don't (either want, bother or know how to do it), but I fail to see how that makes Google "evil".
Congratulations (Score:3, Insightful)
The threads you linked to have 18, 2, and no comments respectively.
While this is mildly interesting, it appears all the links you could find have trivial numbers of people participating.
Nobody cares, this is non-news. Oh wait, Google was mentioned?
There's even a comment about DRM! Everyone loves DRM articles!
Nevermind, proceed with the company-bashing.
Congratulations on spamming your private battle to thousands of people via Slashdot editors.
What? (Score:4, Insightful)
'Google has so much contradiction in what it wants for itself and what it does with other websites [e.g., Google frames Slashdot],' quipped one poster. 'Do no evil, right?'
I don't see the contradiction. Everyone is allowed to decide whether or not they allow their content to be displayed in iframes. If Google chooses no for itself but takes advantage of the fact that others have chosen yes, that is not hypocrisy. (If Google was forcing yes on others, the poster might have a point.)
There is plenty to complain about here, I'm sure, but that's not it.
Re:It's a business (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:There is no contradiction (Score:2, Insightful)
use the APIs (Score:5, Insightful)
Google has lots of APIs to let you do most anything. If you need to embed an entire page from google then you are doing it wrong. This is a security issue and frankly I'm glad they are acting responsible.
DOING IT WRONG:
I am designing a web site and I wish to make extensive use of google.com via iframing.
Re:Keep your motto amoral (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't break the law complete defeats the purpose of a motto. The idea of having and sharing the "don't be evil" motto is to show intent to be good citizens beyond simple regulatory requirements to abide by the rules the state hands down. Everything else you say is true it will be used against them but they believe, wrongly or rightly, that it is important to show intent to act in a moral/ethical way beyond what is simply required of them. This may just be simple advertising or it may be a genuine belief that this type of corporate cultural artifact is vital to being the company they want to be but either way it's not as simple as don't do things that can be used against you because it's not a simple tactics exercise but a philosophical one instead.