Sub heading; when writing tech articles it’s always better to get the technical experts to check your copy before publication. By the way, I’m rubbish at grammar and stuff – I’m a techy and hate journos publishing miss guided articles about tech which is why I do not write stupid luvy, dovy articles about someone plopping paint on canvass and calling it art.
Now, I wouldn’t normally bother if a newspaper gets it wrong, but sometimes it grabs me somewhere and I can’t resist. I suspect the somewhere in question this time was due to so many contacting me about the article
Angela Dear, we don’t. Many millions, ask a teenager, understand that when you go to a search engine or other free service it says in the terms and conditions we can do this, that or the other. It’s a bit like the terms and conditions of buying curling tongs, a hairdryer or the disclaimer alongside a makeup advert.
“The only mystery seemed to be how, exactly, it managed to achieve revenues of more than £15 billion last year.”, asks Angela. To which I shall reply, with adverts dear, adverts.
Angela continues, “Like 190 million others, I had signed up for Google’s free service Gmail to write and receive emails.”. Angela, pet, the key thing here is FREE. Now be honest did you really read the terms and conditions? No, I guessed you didn’t
Angela explained,” This was a new development for me, replacing Microsoft Office Outlook, which was largely trouble-free but which I found cumbersome to use away from my home internet connection.” Here Angela we may have some common ground; I’m not a fan of Outlook either. However, that is due to security issues nothing to do with connection issues. WAIT A MINUTE, you are using GMAIL via a web browser and assuming everyone else is doing the same – WRONG DEAR!
People use GMAIL with non Google products such as Outlook and Thunderbird – yes unlike you they make Outlook work anywhere in the world.
Also can I suggest that if anyone is really worried about a few ads on a FREE service they should subscribe to a PAID FOR service without ads – it’s rather like the choice of watching commercial TV or the BBC. One has ads the other doesn’t.
Now to my MAJOR concern, if the readers of The Mail were to believe this totally miss-guided article they could be forgiven for thinking that Google is spying on all e-mails. Angela, don’t be silly dear. The GOOD NEWS is that whilst few will defend Google, they will come to the assistance of such companies when completely inaccurate piece are published.
Angela Dear you are so wrong on so many counts that it is slightly embarrassing even for the Mail.
Angela concludes her piece, “As for me, I am switching back to the less sophisticated Microsoft Office Outlook. I’ve come to believe that free email is worth exactly what you pay for it.”
ABSOLUTELTY SIDE SPLITTING – YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS. So when you opt for the Microsoft owned hotmail account that works with Outlook that is magically something different to Gmail?
Oh Angela Dear, please ask a passing teenager to show you how simply it is to receive your gmail e-mails with an offline reader – as I said I prefer Thunderbird. There won’t be any adverts down the side of the page.
And for any Mail readers that might pass by:
1. Outlook can be used almost anywhere and is less cumbersome to use than an oven
2. Gmail can be read on Outlook, much easier than operating a washing machine