 |
 | |
| | 
Jerm
join:2000-04-10
Richland, WA
| Hey guys... Why do you doubt Google's reasons for pulling it? Remember, Gmail was invite only - that controlled the pace that people could sign up and tax their servers.
Web proxy's use MUCH more bandwidth and CPU power than web email. Think about it. To make caching worth it, you have supply reliable bandwidth for each person at the speed of each person's connection, and you have to cache all that data.
For all we know they could have pulled it because the server's were getting tax'd to the point where it was more of a web-decelerator! | |
|
| 
failedproducts
@verizon.n
| Ahh, google.. this company will probably hit a soft patch for a few year while broadband gets it sea legs with 10+megabits deploying to many parts of the USA and until that becomes reality, they'll have to hone that new "IPOD" of a killer app well so that when the time comes, it will make thing much better.. If I were them, I'd try getting something along the lines of a visual google search engine that immediately takes a snapshot of evey web page it pulls in the search results, immediately available without acutally going to the site that is more intuitive, becuse people can see the kinds of content they want instead of a (primarily) text based search kind of like a remote control flipping channels among content eventually bridging the gap between TV, broadcast and Inernet content | |
|
| 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| said by GOLFnSUN  :I think Google froze new downloads, not because of the fact it was beta, but because it wasn't a useful product for broadband and because many users saw serious security issues. That could be. Google Labs (where the Web Accelerator was launched) is a spot for Google to put up conceptual tests that may or may not pan out into their own "Google application." Right on Labs.Google.com, they say that the applications "are still in the beginning stages of development" and "may disappear without warning or perform erratically."
My guess is that someone at Google used their 20% time to develop this and got the green light to toss it up onto the Labs site. Google will most likely end the trial run at some point, take the Web Accelerator site down, but use the underlying technology other areas of their site. (Perhaps integrating some aspects of it into the advanced functionality of the Google Toolbar.)
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| 
Viper007Bond
Premium
join:2002-09-26
Portland, OR | Hmm, I thought I noticed a difference. *shrugs* | |
|
alg
Just a shot away
Premium
join:2001-04-10
Houston, TX
clubs:  | Pointless Sorry google, you failed with this one. | |
|
| davidcb13
join:2004-02-06
Branchville, NJ | Re: Pointless.....for us This is only pointless for us.. Im sure google has a use for it otherwise they wouldnt of come out with it | |
|
| | raderator
join:2003-07-22
Conklin, NY | Re: Pointless.....for us Been using it on 2 'puters...no noticeable diff.
What the world really needs is a better browser which will NOT re-download content from a site you just visited 2 seconds ago. | |
|
| | | 
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI | Re: Pointless.....for us You mean every browser there already is?
What you probably want is webmasters to properly use cache headers for dynamic content so the browser doesn't think the page has always changed. | |
|
| 
Sat_Man
Monotonous Isn't It
Premium
join:2001-09-14
Gray Court, SC
1 edit | Re: Pointless It was pointless for me also. Since I'm on Satellite, behind a nat and using proxy I didn't see any difference. In fact the time saver indicator never changed. It stayed on "0". I ran it for about four days and deleted it. Thanks Google for the try, but this one is a bomb!
--
Fred US Air Force Retired
G11, 990, DW4000, DAK 4.2.1.10_P-15, XPpro Host, XPpro client, XPhome Laptop client, W98 client, NetWork: DI-614+, DWL-650+, DWL-120+ (2), DWL-800AP+ Repeater.
| |
|
kyle76
Premium
join:2003-07-10
Houma, LA | I dont see the point in using it I have to say that I was curious about google's new accelerator so I gave it a try and I uninstalled not long after. I just dont see the point in using it with a Broadband connection.
--
The Duke | |
|
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey | its Spyware The purpose of this is get a view, of what people are looking at, then create more adverstisting. It just another spyware program in my opinion. | |
|
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| Re: its Spyware I wouldn't call it spyware because:
1) You know it's being installed. Spyware installs itself via misleading ActiveX controls, exploits, or by hiding within another application. Google's Web Accelerator is something you have to purposefully download and install.
2) It can be uninstalled at any time. Spyware typically takes steps to prevent it's uninstallation. This can range from simply not providing an uninstaller to employing "helper programs" to re-install/re-activate the program should it be removed. Google's Web Accelerator provides an Add/Remove Programs entry for easy removal.
3) You are informed as to what it will do before you install it. Spyware will hide it's true purpose. Nowhere will you be told that your every move online is going to be tracked. Google's Web Accelerator's web page informs users up front about what may happen if they install the program. (See »webaccelerator.google.com/suppor···#basics5 )
I'll agree that Google's Web Accelerator is unneeded, but it's not spyware.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
clickwir
join:2001-06-21
Dickson City, PA
| Here's 2 reasons I have 2 perfect reasons.
1) bypass the corporate proxy which is slow and often down
2) bypass the corporate proxy which filters things
Of course these only apply if you are behind a corporate transparent proxy and you don't have another outside one that is fast or reliable enough. But it is a perfect use. I love it. I'm able to get to webpages when the rest of the office can't AND I can go anywhere I want. | |
|
|
clickwir
join:2001-06-21
Dickson City, PA | a 3rd reason.... Just remebered a 3rd reason. Prefetching.
It's great! It doesn't always prefetch the correct link, but when it does, it's an instant page load. Pages load as fast as clicking the back button. | |
|
| 
blazerx
join:2003-10-07
Lakeport, CA
1 edit | Re: Here's 2 reasons Yeah it bypasses our Lightspeed content filter here at the county office of education. Every school district in the county is behind that filter, unless they used a proxy like what Google had.
I blocked access to it the day it came out. Can't have kids getting through my filter. Sorry kids. | |
|
| | 
kfsutops
Premium
join:2002-08-19
Brandon, FL
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Here's 2 reasons said by blazerx :Yeah it bypasses our Lightspeed content filter here at the county office of education. Every school district in the county is behind that filter, unless they used a proxy like what Google had. I blocked access to it the day it came out. Can't have kids getting through my filter. Sorry kids. We got blocked by it too.. LOL. Funny. That didn't take long. | |
|
| 
qos1
join:2003-09-19
Beverly Hills, CA
| This is the exact same thing that I said as soon as this came out and it is great for that purpose...
For those that haven't tried it here is a download mirror!
»home.insightbb.com/~google/ | |
|
| | 
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA
1 edit | Re: Here's 2 reasons Dont download from ripn's link its not the google accelerator its a spyware loaded program he should be banned for posting that.
--
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." | |
|
| | |
qos1
join:2003-09-19
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: Here's 2 reasons WTF are you talking about spyware???? That is pretty god damn dumb...I downloaded that straight from google!! Stop being a dumb sh!t and post some proof, if you are going to make claim's you sure as hell better back them up and show PROOF!!! Til then STFU | |
|
| | | | 
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
| Re: Here's 2 reasons I too would like to see some posative log files of that.
My thought process being concern of downloads on forums I frequent, and the fact someone is being blantantly negatively called out with not even mention of basis, I downloaded this and tested for myself.
With Ad-Aware SE Pro, and Spybot S&D (both with current defs)
My method was 4 tests:
- Before install
- After install / before first run
- After first run
- Browser active / Google app enabled
Negative all the way around.
=================
Since I installed it - my thoughts on the app ..... I saved 2/10 of 1 second in a 30 minute session. Oh my god TWO-TENTHS OF A SECOND !!
DSL Web Accelerator = oxymoron at its peak.
DV | |
|
| | | | |
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: Here's 2 reasons said by DiscardedVet :I too would like to see some posative log files of that. Did you download from »home.insightbb.com/~google/Googl···ator.msi because right after I
installed it at first I couldnt open firefox then when I opened IE (which I havent used in ages)
I got a prompt for something called 'SITEBAR'when I saw that I went into
task manager and exited out of IE and rebooted. When I came back I started
getting IE popups for spyware removing programs.
I'm very interested if anyone else had the same problem after downloading GWA from that site.
--
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." | |
|
| | | | | |
kfsutops
Premium
join:2002-08-19
Brandon, FL
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Here's 2 reasons said by BodyBumper :right after I installed it at first I couldnt open firefox I wasn't able to open firefox either, but could open IE. I also started seeing 4or5 instances of IE in the taskmanager. I ran AdAware, but nothing showed up.
I uninstalled it though because I couldn't get it to work with Firefox. | |
|
| | | | | | |
qos1
join:2003-09-19
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: Here's 2 reasons What version of Firefox? and what plugins/ext's do you have installed? Maybe there is a compatability issue with a ext? Mine worked fine and tested it on 3 machine's, but some people say they had problem's with GWA crashing FF.
But I know for a 100% fact that my link is for the original google installer... | |
|
| | | | | | | |
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: Here's 2 reasons said by qos1 :What version of Firefox? and what plugins/ext's do you have installed? It doesnt matter I shouldnt get frequent popup ads in Windows right after installing GWA I still believe it was loaded with spyware.
quote:
Maybe there is a compatability issue with a ext?
I'm positive remember spyware/adware was installed I'm not having problems with the browser crashing.
quote:
Mine worked fine and tested it on 3 machine's, but some people say they had problem's with GWA crashing FF.[/Q]
I wish the only problems was crashing 
quote:
But I know for a 100% fact that my link is for the original google installer...
Might be an exploit on google's end hopefully this happened to alot more people than me so microsoft or google can come out with a patch because removing the spyware/adware is a major PITA even with Trojan Hunter,BitDefender,SB S&D and Adaware.
--
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
1 edit | Re: Here's 2 reasons But here lies the problem, so far it is only you to have a comprimised machine.
Unless others DL from ripn's link and test it as I, it's 2 to 1 that the compromise is within your machine, GWA not being a factor.
Until you can get other members to test ripn's link, or until you can show proof the infestation came from ripn's link, the link becomes irrelevant in your infection.
DV | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: Here's 2 reasons I finally tracked the sucker down right after I installed GWA something called 'Elite Tool Bar' was installed on my computer I still don't understand how it got on my computer but I don't believe ripn had anything to do with it as I suggested earlier and I apoligize but I do believe there is an unknown exploit in GWA.
--
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." | |
|
Rob A
Same Old Jets
Premium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ
| Not bad I've been using it since it came out. It aint bad, it actually does load some pages faster, on 3Mbps dsl. I dont get the point of prefetching though. I dont notice a difference with it on or off. Using Opera 8.01
--
Cruising with Verizon DSL 2793/714 & The Opera Web Browser »verizon.net »opera.com | |
|
| 
illek
Premium
join:2005-03-23
Tulsa, OK
| Re: Not bad said by Rob A :I've been using it since it came out. It aint bad, it actually does load some pages faster, on 3Mbps dsl. I dont get the point of prefetching though. I dont notice a difference with it on or off. Using Opera 8.01 Maybe that is because it only works with IE and Firefox which Google makes very clear on it's download site!
--
"Put down that coffee...coffee is for closers" | |
|
| |
Rob A
Same Old Jets
Premium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ
1 edit | Re: Not bad Heh, not true. Works in Opera, and quite well.
From the google faq:
Can I run Google Web Accelerator on a browser other than Internet Explorer or Firefox?
For other browsers running on Windows, you'll need to manually configure your proxy settings to 127.0.0.1:9100 for HTTP connections.
I set my proxy to 127.0.0.1:9100 and it works.
--
Cruising with Verizon DSL 2793/714 & The Opera Web Browser
»verizon.net
»opera.com | |
|
jml_1288
join:2005-02-26
Nobleboro, ME
| works great for me I have to give Google credit because this app, despite it's privacy concerns, has been very productive for me. According to the statistics it provides, the 1751 pages I've loaded over the past few days have been loaded in 58.4 minutes, versus 1.4 hrs it would have taken without it. That's saved me nearly 25 minutes, practically 1/4 of my browsing time. It makes me think about the time wasted waiting for pages to load pre-GWA, even if it only shaves a millisecond or two off each page every time. Definitely recommended, and if I don't trust it on a certain website, with 2 clicks I temporarily disable it. I don't think it's unnecessary or largely pointless at all. | |
|
| 
larytet
join:2004-11-26
Unity, ME | Re: works great for me prefetch sucks bandwidth out of the servers you visit. because it attempts to load all links found on the page it's huge waste of your downstream and upstream of the servers | |
|
| |
Rob A
Same Old Jets
Premium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ | Re: works great for me Very good point, thats why I like to leave it off. | |
|
| | | 
wwdubbia
join:2002-06-03
Clinton, NY | Re: works great for me I wish I they cached their stock IPO and I could still buy it at $85 bucks a share... now THAT would be a beta I'd hop on... | |
|
cork1958
Cork
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI | My point exactly!! "no point in the app, calling it unnecessary and largely pointless" | |
|
GJetson99
join:2003-07-07
Acworth, GA | I'm shocked! a disastrous beta? Nooooo..... Now they just need to get rid of the google groups beta.....another and bigger fiasco.
It sure makes one wonder. (like, who have they been hiring lately) Such a successful company with back to back screwups. | |
|
jekler
join:2000-11-23
Cincinnati, OH
clubs:
| Works fine for me Although a lot of people say it's pointless, no use. I think it works just fine, I've been using it on both computers here since it came out and it reports that I've saved about an hour total (Between the two computers which I split my time about 60/40 with). I think the reason most people are disappointed is because they are expecting something that's going to improve their speed by a massive amount. What the GWA does is give you a very minor improvement. To me, faster is faster. If it's saved me an hour in about a week, that means it'll save me about 4 days worth of time over the course of a year. And honestly, this week hasn't been one of my surf-heavy weeks. I've been spending more time playing Guild Wars than anything else.
Mind boggling that so many people would scoff at a free speed boost. If my ISP called and said "Want us to up your cap by 1Kbit, for free?" I wouldn't respond "No, that's not enough." I'd be more like "Eh, why not?" | |
|
|
|
|
Google Fills Accelerator Beta
·
With broadband connection; not useful product