The internet (news) has been more exciting than usual today for several reasons, one of which was the unveiling of Bing by Microsoft - a new search product. I haven't had a chance to try it out yet, so this is based mainly on what reviews I have read of it so far*. It is intended as a direct competitor to Google, a massive rebranding of the pre-existing Microsoft search with enough improvements to push people into actually switching.

Kudos to Microsoft for trying again (for the nth reincarnation of its search offering). Monopolies are never good (as we're told constantly by the European Competition Commission but nevertheless usually necessary for a business to make money, especially in technology (as we're told in our Business Studies course).

I digress however, since my issue is with all the internet commenters who (rather like sheep) instantly criticise Microsoft at whatever they do. For example, from Wired:

"They're desperately trying to play catch-up with Google search (which is clean, simple and just works), and they manage to ruin what sounds like a promising effort by bungling the interface and plastering it with prominent advertising."

This person hasn't even had a chance to try the site! How can (s)he jump to this conclusion so quickly?

Or like this commenter on The Register's article about Microsoft making it harder to exploit pool overruns:

"...That is sort of the point, wintards. Basically s[eaking, for the slow learners out there, a proper OS doesn't allow apps to do stuff they shouldn't do, not without explicit user authorisation anyway.

Whether itunes is crap or not is irrelevant. If it wants to do crap it shouldn't be allowed to do the OS should stop it.

Windows = Epic Fail

It's no wonder windows pc's are constantly being p0wned by every script kiddy that is out there..."

Firstly, the grammar (or lack of) in that comment wants to make me hurt myself. Secondly, his argument is wholly unsubstantiated and horribly biased. I suppose that's the beauty of commenting on the internet - you can say whatever you want and no-one cares!

In essence, I'm really just annoyed at fanboys, and more-so, people bashing the incumbent for no good reason.

A final example, my Security course supervisor Joseph Bonneau wrote an article for the Computer Lab's Security Group Blog on photos not being deleted from various social networking websites in a timely fashion. Comment #10 says:

"Read the TOS (Terms of Service) on sites like Fecesbook … they are under no obligation to delete the photos. Once you upload a photo, it isn't yours anymore. It's theirs with which to do whatever they please. If this is a problem (and yes, it is a problem) then the correct solution is DON'T USE FECESBOOK."

This is instantly *facepalm*. I wonder if he actually bothered to read the article (or at least in any sort of depth). This comment misses the point of the study and restates a fact which is mildly relevant but presumably already known to the intellectuals who authored the study (and anyone with a keen interest in privacy aspects of social networks). Why did he bother posting the comment? I suspect he just wanted to 'make a funny'. Ha-Ha.

This comment from the same article on The Register mentioned previously says it all really:

"Geeks arguing about things that dont matter make the baby Jesus cry."

I suppose the act of writing this post is futile and pointless as the comments above. Which comes to the crux of writing on the internet - anyone can do it. I think I'm going to stop reading comments on stories though, there's enough biased text in the articles themselves! Anyway, readers, you should feel appreciated. Apparently 5.6% of the blogs that Technorati tracks haven't been updated in the past 4 months.

Speaking of exiting news, Google is so win today.

*Apologies for the lack of suitable references but I haven't got the time nor the second monitor at the moment!

P.S. This is probably the equivalent of a cultured flame.