A level of trust from past actions and comparing each, the branching out of Amazon and Bezoz with media, grocery stores, tech with AWS, and more is scary as well as how many industries they have killed / absorbed. I realize Google is doing this a bit as well, but it feels much less sinister. A friend of mine walked past a brick and mortar Amazon bookstore, which is really surreal to me. Amazon's work culture philosophy also doesn't inspire confidence. Amazon Key seems far more invasive too, and the way they attempt to integrate into your life doesn't inspire trust.
Google already owns my browser, my mail, Google Drive / Sheets, the best single sign-in, etc.
I understand the arguments for distributing your data - this is coming from someone who's given up on that privacy front sadly. If that doesn't apply to you, I can see why Amazon could make more sense for some products. For me, I more ascribe to giving my entire life to 1-2 that I trust and attempting to hold them accountable / influence their policies.
Google is faaaaaaar from perfect, but in sum it seems like the much better option for giving my life to.
Google literally makes its money from advertising directly keyed on your personal information and searches. Amazon makes money because you buy things from it. Google can't not share your information with advertisers if it wants to survive. Amazon, on the other hand, is extremely protective of private information to the point of defying law enforcement in a murder case (https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/28/tech/amazon-echo-alexa-benton...).
The advertisers don't get my life, they get the ability to insert their ad into my life based on my life. I've never understood personally how targeted advertising is really anyone violating my privacy (in terms of how I practically use the term). We have the technical know-how here - we know it's not Jim at Coke deciding to place an ad into my life personally because I just made a phone call that he was listening to where I said Pepsi. Advertisers don't know anything about me personally - they have the ability to target via Google. Even if they can figure out how to filter down to exactly me via stalking on social media, they don't get their information about me from Google. In the end, I get an ad (that I will block) either way. The practicality is fine for me. That's not the privacy I really care about.
I'm looking more at how much I trust the company to not leverage the data they have to give to NSA, turn the world into 1984, etc. Apple did the same type of legal protection of personal device data as Amazon, and I expect Google to do the same if asked, which will likely happen soon enough. What worries me about Amazon/Bezos in this regard more than Google is Amazon + WaPo + Whole Foods, all the industries they have swallowed and replaced, etc.
Again, both have that concern, and in the end I'm cautious but not really expecting either to turn like that. But it's one small data point. The Chromecast hookup is much more heavily weighted in this decision, but I think the psychology behind the argument above def nudges more towards Google as well.
Amazon at the time didn't have widely used social media, personal photo or video storage, person to person chat, email, etc. The basic info input by people was already collected via all the other companies. What does the NSA really gain from the Amazon dataset at the time?
I bet if Alexa was out and the NSA wanted data from these devices, however they got the rest to agree would have applied to Amazon. I'm inclined to believe it was pretty unavoidable extortion. That said, I hope that Apple / Google / Amazon can temper assistant always on recording by not doing it, let alone sending to a server. If they don't have the data it's hard to turn over when extorted.
Still, I concede my NSA standard looks to be failed by Google. That said, Google or Alexa, they have it all anyways, and I don't believe for a second that if the government decides to use these types of devices to collect voice data that they all won't take the same stance, whatever it may be. At that point, I'll be unplugging whatever one I have any serious conversations. Heck, I already do that to be safe now.
I'd still point to the industry breadth of Amazon as a concern. Though, these posts illustrate pretty well that privacy is a lost cause for most cases, or at least one technologically agnostic within our current major choices. Noted in case the Alexa / Amazon ecosystem improves.
"Two media buyers said Amazon showed some willingness to share more user data than Google and Facebook have traditionally — if the advertising budget was big enough."
Pretty much the only way Amazon will have significant success here (IE not just stay #3 or worse) is if it is more willing to share data than Google or Facebook.
Both companies have questionably trustworthy executives, aggressive expansions, and a cloud computing platform.
To me, the biggest difference is Google's biggest successes (Search, Gmail, and Android) come from giving something for free in order to increase ad revenue. Amazon's biggest successes (Amazon.com, AWS) come from selling things to me and profiting from the margin.
I agree it would be nice to be able to cast without Chrome on a laptop (looks like VLC had experimental cast support but removed it), but it's literally in the name...
As for Android, I was fairly certain iOS at least can cast as my Apple fanboy roommate was having fun messing with the volume and pausing playback.
But it's a crutch AND doesn't allow the same stuff: If I watch a YT video, it's in my browser. No way to throw it at the TV. If I watch Twitch, it's in my browser. No way to throw it at the TV.
Maybe it can handle URLs. But if I have to copy the URL, paste it somewhere, fiddle to get to the same spot in the video ... then I can just launch Chrome and curse just as much.
(Highly ironic that the player offers the option to install a Chrome extension to open movies in SodaPlayer. For me the whole selling point of the thing would be to .. not need Chrome ofc)
Publishing YouTube app on Windows Phone requires Google to put extra effort into developing an app for a completely new platform which I assume requires lot of engineering effort.
Selling Chromecast on Amazon probably does not cost Amazon any extra engineering effort. So, I do not believe that the two situations are equivalent.
Sure, since Microsoft didn’t show any ads for google. I think Microsoft might be pissed if google started hosting free copies of their software on their servers.
If a competitor removed your products from their store and banned your applications/services from running on their product would you not consider doing the same?
It's amazing how once Google retaliated Amazon finally allows chromecast on their store (but no streaming!)
My bigger complaint is Amazon banning anyone in their marketplace from selling the Chromecast or the Google home.
But now that Amazon purchased Twitch they removed the Twitch app from the Roku. Use to be a fan of Amazon but this is ridiculous behavior in their part.
What do you think about Google not allowing iOS or Firefox to become cast sources, or FireTV to act as a cast target? Does that piss you off, or are your feelings of outrage only limited to our own personal convenience?
What do you think about Google not allowing iOS or Firefox to become cast sources, or FireTV to act as a cast target
FireTV is not an open platform anyone can design for and use. It's closed and your app needs to be submitted through their dev shop.[0]
I just opened firefox up and had no issue casting from it. According to the below support thread[1] you may need to enable a flag in the about:config page. Although I didn't need too.
Does that piss you off, or are your feelings of outrage only limited to our own personal convenience?
Nope. Amazon can and has support Cast in the past. They are the ones doing their best to block it, not Google. FireTV is not a free and open platform, Cast is. Great comment though..
Nothing needs to be sold through Google Cast, no royalties, etc. All Amazon has to do is SUPPORT it. Or atleast allow homegrown solutions to thrive.
I agree this is a stupid 'feud' that only hurts consumers and I have my likes and dislikes for both companies but if you cannot see the difference here then I'm not sure how to help.
1. It's far more conversational. It understands vague questions far better, and the speech understanding also works far better for people with deep accents.
2. It has great integration with other Google services if you're already a heavy Google user (maps, mail, calendar, Fi/GV, hopefully Keep soon...)
3. It has fantastic uses with chromecast (netflix, youtube, pause, rewind, volume, etc).
Obviously, #2 and #3 will vary heavily for people; you can probably get most of #3 if you get a Fire stick. It really depends if you're already a Google/Android/Chromecast user or not.
For me I am agrevated with Amazon behavior and the Google home is just a lot better than the Echo.
Amazon removing the twitch app from the Roku after purrchasing Twitch is just wrong. Also Amazon banning any company from able to sell the Google home or Chromecast in their marketplace is also a problem.
Amazon does not need to do this anti competitive BS.
#/media/File:PRISM_Collection_Details.jpg){kind=link}