161 Comments

Summary:

Design guru Don Norman is the godfather of design in the technology industry, a veteran who has been around the block with companies like Apple and HP. Now he thinks that it’s time we started being more skeptical of Google’s ambitions — or risk losing something important.

Don Norman at dConstruct

Don Norman at dConstruct“What is Google? What do they sell?” asks Don Norman, the author of The Design of Everyday Things and a demigod of the design world.

It’s a question that gets asked a lot, especially as the company’s power and products continue to expand. In a talk on Friday at the dConstruct conference in Brighton, England, he pointed out that –despite the complexity of the organization — the answer usually looks pretty simple.

“They have lots of people; lots of servers, they have Android, they have Google Docs, they just bought Motorola. Most people would say ‘we’re the users, and the product is advertising,'” he said. “But in fact, the advertisers are the users and you are the product.”

Then he went further. “They say their goal is to gather all the knowledge in the world in one place, but really their goal is to gather all of the people in the world and sell them.”

These aren’t exactly new allegations. “You are the product” has become a popular rallying cry over the last couple of years, with plenty of ammunition fired at Google, Facebook and others for their apparent invasions of privacy, their ability to track what we do online, and their ambitions to profit from it.

Nor is Norman’s dislike of the company a sudden conversion. Now 75, he has a distinctive track record of piling on Google — including a famous essay in which he attacked the idea of Google’s simplicity, claiming that “Anybody can make a simple-looking interface if the system only does one thing.” In addition, as a former vice president at Apple, which has come increasingly into competition with Google over the years, you can imagine that he’s not exactly a disinterested party.

Still, his comments were forceful, and they have taken on a new meaning given the context of recent events.

For example, Norman argued that the company’s inhumanity — its inability to understand what is emotionally true about products like Apple’s — is a serious problem. More particularly, he suggested that Google’s approach to emotion, and to people, is the real reason for the debacle over real names on Google+.

“Real names, they say, turn out to be the names on your driver’s license and your passport and your credit cards so that they can track you. Are you happy to be a product?”

I saw more than a few developers in the audience bristle at this apparently uncomfortable idea, or taking umbrage with Norman’s attack. But Eric Schmidt himself admitted that the real names approach is about becoming a broker of online identities.

Ultimately, his charge was one that Google has seen many times before: that it is a machine which needs humans but doesn’t like them very much. Whether it’s in its social networks, its interfaces, or other elements of its design, Google is merely applying a thin veneer that often apes Apple’s approach without understanding it.

“Google doesn’t understand people,” he said. “Have you ever spoken to a Google support person on the phone? They don’t have them. Sure, they’ll direct you to their blogs — where you’ll be lucky if you can find the answer you’re looking for — or they’ll let you give feedback. But do they ever give you feedback on your feedback?”

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. It’s funny in a sad way to hear a former Apple employee ranting about the ‘inhumanity’ of some company when it’s Apple that wants to put us in a (not so) golden cage.

    I stay with the company that gives me choice. Especially the choice to leave.

    1. Really, Google give you choice?

      1. just use Bing

      2. tim jones = half-witted Fandroid troll. gSheep.

    2. haha, the absurdity of this statement is amusing. Sure, you can ‘leave’ by stopping using their products (why can’t you do that with Apple?) but they’re going to keep records of EVERYTHING you do for years after you’re gone. You can ‘leave’ but they keep every bit of information they have on you.

      1. That’s actually not true. You can log in to your google account and see all of the web history they’ve collected, and delete every bit of it if you so choose.

      2. I guess the absurdity of your statement and your lack of understanding is amusing

      3. quentin: They will keep a ‘photograph’ of days past, just as a news paper or a traffic camera.

        All of “Baby Boomers”, “Generation-X”, etc. see ‘privacy’ on a different light as “Millennial/Generation-Y”. There life depends on being seen, being tracked, actively or passively.

        They’re the generation who hates anonymity. That’s the real audience of Facebook, Twitter and Google. They can care less if they are the product (which is just a rhetorical rant), the raw material or which ever in between.

        Of course, he has a point, on feelings, which Apple gets. But we must remember that he’s doing a generalization, which explains why Android is beating Apple and why Microsoft can’t ‘get-it’. There’s just two markets (over 30’s and under 30’s). The first one likes Apple, the second one likes Google. Facebook must work in between and so does Microsoft/Bing.

      4. beenyweenies, You are right. You are also wrong. Have you ever heard of Google Cache. They keep everything on file for as long as they decide to, i.e. forever. Do you really think they don’t hold those files for Government Agents and Law Enforcement.
        The same as all the computer manufactures have back doors so the police and other agents can quickly and easily gather your info in an investigation.

    3. all the iSheeps sitting in rows staring at Steve Jobs big head, like Apple’s 1994 ad

      1. The pleural of sheep is sheep. The ad was a reference to 1984, the book. I am not aware of a similar work about 1994. Lastly, you are missing an apostrophe after Jobs.

      2. It was 1984. Get your facts straight before posting. And no need of name-calling, is there?

      3. In the book 1994 Large Sibling is looking? 2 + 2 = math? :D

      4. Haha.. putz.

      5. @Infobhan: “pleural”?! What keyboard do you use, that has an “e” between “l” and “u”?

      6. Pleural? And you’re critical of someone else’s writing? Lol.

    4. Apple gives you the choice to leave too. If you don’t like Apple’s product, then simply do not buy it or stop buying it.

    5. OK, so which part is incorrect?

    6. The choice to leave? I don’t understand this concept.

      I’m a PC-user, never much cared for Apple’s products. But with any product company, the premise is simple: If you like their products, you buy them. If you don’t any time in the future, you buy another. There’s no information stored or kept about you, and no reason you can’t leave. I’m confused with your statement about “staying” with a company that gives you the choice to leave.

      Looking at Google, bits and pieces of you stay live and remote, no matter how much you delete, if you decide to “leave.” Take Gmail: when you “delete” an email, still remains on the server if it’s deemed important or relevant to Google’s algorithms. Sure, it’s flagged to not be shown to you, the user, but the matter of fact is, you’re just but one interested party in that email, despite what you might think. Plus, Google has the ability to discontinue any product that you use, without the ability to continue to use it (Let’s say Microsoft discontinued Office, ridiculous of course, but you’d still have the software, the documents, etc. If Google discontinued Google Docs, where’s your data? What software do you use to edit it?). Google also has the ability to terminate your access to your *own* data at any time, if they feel they need to. Apple or Dell have no such power. Every time you turn your laptop on, unless it’s broken, your laptop turns on. Regardless of whether these companies still exist.

      So I guess I really don’t understand how you have more of a choice to leave with Google than with Apple.

      1. Correct. Google does terminate accounts with no prior notice or ability to remedy a “violation” of their business rules (which are subject to change upon whim).

      2. The battle that you present, isn’t actually Company vs. Company, it’s actually Hardware vs. Cloud.

      3. “Google also has the ability to terminate your access to your *own* data at any time”

        Use Backups. The same way everyone else should. You can edit it in open office, vim, notepad, msPaint. Not the perfect editing tools, but editors none the less.

        ” Take Gmail: when you “delete” an email, still remains on the server if it’s deemed important or relevant to Google’s algorithms.”

        ISP’s are starting to do this. The kid across the street might be wiresharking you. Do you use any decent program to wipe your old data off your drives? Then your data is still there, waiting to be gone over with someone else’s algorithm.

        The company you work for probably has data on you. The grocery store. The credit card companies. Etc.

        Leaving data around is akin to leaving Carbon Dioxide when you breath.

    7. You think you have a choice? You think it’s okay for company to treat you as a commoditiy? Listen you idiot, I can choose to use or not use an Apple product. But you don’t even know that you are being lied to and your information being sold without your consent when you use Google product.

      Good luck with that “Choice” of yours.

      1. Would you please point me to the checkout spot where I can buy your info and how much would that be?

      2. Call Google and tell them you’re a company looking to buy logistics information about their users. They will show you the checkout spot.

      3. @travisgamedev

        Lying doesn’t make it true.
        Google grants access to location based demographics for people advertising through Adwords and/or Adsense. Companies like Microsoft when you sign up for Hotmail full on sells your name, demographic and contact details out right.

    8. Personally, I prefer a company where my relationship is that they produce something and I’ll buy it if I like it – commercial radio was rubbish, free-to-air commercial TV is mostly rubbish, and the commercial web we are being told is ‘the only way’ is mostly ad-cluttered rubbish.

      There is the freedom of open source, of course, but the server side web largely takes that freedom away from the user.

      Google actually remind me of the Apple of old – the ‘Think Different’ era when they used politics to sell their products. Now it’s Google that are the big business pretending they are the alternative.

    9. I know the other replies have already said this, but what are you talking about? In what world are you forced to stay with Apple? Apple offer you a product that you can either take or leave. There is no one forcing you to buy. There is no lock in. The choice between (say) Dell and Apple is like the choice between Ford and Toyota. Choose either, it doesn’t matter. Next time you can change your mind if you want.

      With Google it’s different. They offer good products at seemingly unbeatable prices (free). Google Apps for Domains, for instance, is a great product, but you pay a hidden price — your data. And once you’re invested in the Google way, it’s hard to leave. Getting a new mail server is not a simple task. Leaving Google Docs once you’ve got a reasonable library isn’t going to be plain-sailing. Disabling your Google Profile or leaving Google+ will limit your ability to use other Google services. And let’s not forget the tracking that goes on outside of your regular account — all of those little Analytics scripts in billions of pages across the web aren’t just there to give the webmasters pretty graphs you know.

      Me thinks you need some perspective.

      1. Leaving MS Exchange is easy – you just need a new mail server. Leaving Gmail is impossible – you would need a new mail server. Doesn’t compute.

      2. Any instances where someone saw their “personal” info being exposed by google to someone? Personally I feel Apple forcing having an apple account forcibly linking to a credit card, to download an free app, a stupid act….

      3. How is that different than iTunes? Perhaps only that iTunes doesn’t tell you up front?

      4. Look up how to disconnect your credit card from iTunes. It’s pretty simple and you could have chosen that option when you first signed up. You can still use it. You just can’t purchase anything. It’s a good option if you have kids using iTunes.

  2. And his point is? That crApple is better than Google or what? Or that we start using Bing?

    1. His point is probably that you should protect yourself from them all. But, when it comes to Apple, they do do a better job protecting your identity. Selling you is not their line of business. Same with Amazon. Whereas, it IS Google’s only business.

      1. Don’t trust close, secretive, neurotic crApple- it might show at your door looking for its lost iCrap

      2. Good response.

      3. @tim jones – you’re an idiot.

      4. @tim jones

        Yes, how absurd of a company to want to track a lost and then stolen prototype device in a business worth billions of dollars…

      5. yes your identity is safer in the hands of one corporate master than the other, it is safer to be a slave of Apple, than a slave of google. Yes it also helps the shareholders of Apple, but that is moot and is morally just.

    2. Good golly there are still idiots posting on the internet?! crApple, really? That’s all you bring to the conversation?

  3. Why should Google which is often “free” open its staff to potential personal verbal telephone abuse – people always know their problems far better than the help desk jockey who over a narrow channel without all the info may struggle to diagnose and fix the particular issue. After all software is a work in progress.

    As for the bottom line no “feedback on feedback” from Google this is a not-so-clever phrase which does not reflect the truth. Just two days ago over the weekend Brenda of Google in Seattle gave me an answer within 24 hours, and I am in a different time zone. In my experience Google online support is very good; I am sure that people will have bad experiences, some with Apple – it’s all part of life’s rich pattern.

    1. I think you missed his point. It’s not that they never respond, it’s that they do not view the user as a user, but, rather, a product, a commodity, so their responses are toned as such (from a company-wide standpoint, individuals paying proper attention to users can run counter to the larger corporate attitude)

    2. In a previous role, I managed Google For Business accounts. These are not free (we paid $5 per user per month, with around 150 users), but are pushed to the same forums full of people asking – but never receiving answers to – questions that the “free” users get pushed to.

      No matter how much you pay Google or Facebook, they have clearly made a point that customer service means treating their customers as individuals, and that’s not something they wish to do.

      And sure, many Google products are free to end users, but Google makes money from our use of those products through the advertising they can then sell.

      1. You must be a bad admin. When I check my Apps admin control panel there is UK, Canada, USA and Rest of the world phone numbers. I also use the Enterprise Portal not the free forum. So far average response rate from a Google employee is about 30 minutes. Not bad.

  4. You are always the product, regardless of whether or not you pay too. You either pay to be the product, are the product in exchange for a service, or live off the grid.

    People tend to forget that other apt adage, about wondering who the sucker at the table is. If by paying for a service, you think that your information isn’t *also* being monetized, then you’re not just paying for the service, but you’re also the sucker at the table.

    1. Ask Bjørn Hansen Jack C Monday, September 5, 2011

      No, sometimes you are the customer. When I buy an iPod from Apple I’m their customer. When I buy advertising from Google I’m their customer.

      The iPod is Apple’s product. Someone searching on Google is their (paid) product. Google have lots of free products, too.

    2. Apple makes a whole lot more money when I buy an iPad than they could serving me ads. Apple measures customers in the millions. To put it another way: if they start violating my trust, they lose my business, and in quite short order, lose their business as well.

      Google makes all its money selling access to my peripheral vision. Their customers number in the billions, and are often unwitting. If they start violating my trust, I’ll try to protect myself, but if I stop using their services they don’t lose much.

      Google has much less to lose by abusing your trust in them. Yes, any company might sell your data, especially in a going-out-of-business pinch, but that doesn’t mean there is a real and qualitative difference between the company whose business plan is “sell your data” versus one whose business plan is “sell products to you”.

  5. > “Google doesn’t understand people”

    That’s why Schmidt says G+ is an ‘Identity Service’ right ;)

  6. These attempts to demonize Google are growing rather stale. All that play on words and silly distinctions on what’s the product are meaningless – Google doesn’t hide the fact that it makes money from advertising. The deal is very clear – you get free services (in most cases) in exchange for viewing ads.
    The bits about Google’s design are also just silly. Why does he try so hard to make what Google’s doing sound bad? Did they ever claim they were the only ones capable of making a simple interface? No. They made the choice to use that design, and that’s it. However, if we take for example Chrome’s design, we see that the minimalism *is* actually appealing to users, and suddenly everyone else is designing their browsers a lot more like Chrome.
    This example goes to show that it’s just meaningless to treat a company so big as a single entity, and make dumb claims that it’s inhuman etc. There are PEOPLE working there, like you and me. Some of them may be less sensitive to most people’s emotions, but the vast majority (by simple laws of probability) will be normal people.

    1. “The deal is very clear – you get free services (in most cases) in exchange for viewing ads.”

      No, you’ve just highlighted the fact that people don’t understand the deal. You get free services in exchange for Google analyzing your personal data and viewing habits in order to target you with ads.

      Ads I don’t mind. Google reading my email to find out what ads are most relevant? That I mind.

      1. It’s not my fault you’re stuck in the previous century, when then were very few targeted ads, and the common business model was generic ads on the TV, newspapers etc.
        The world has changed, and targeted ads have proven very effective across the whole advertising industry, not just Google. It is still early in the game, but anyone who doesn’t acknowledge that the ads he sees aren’t exactly the same as the next person is just ignorant. As the saying goes: Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

        In this case, however, I think many people who are aware of targeted ads fail to realize it is probably in their interest as well. There is no point in showing me an ad for, let’s say, female hygiene products, because I happen to be a man. The ad space could be much more effective if it showed me tech products for example, or promotions for a sports event. In this sense, it’s a win-win situation.

        The downside is indeed the uncertainty of who has information about you and what it can be used for besides these ads. But we’re straying quite far from the original argument – the point remains that Google is most of the times upfront about its collection of your data (barring the very notable street view wifi incident), and has yet to be proven to mishandle that data. I’m not saying it can’t happen or that you shouldn’t be wary, but there’s no point in mud-slinging based on future potential wrong-doings.

        P.S.
        The same cannot be said for Facebook, for example, which has been shown several times to mishandle your private information. That’s a much bigger privacy problem than Google at the moment.

      2. “Google reading my email to find out what ads are most relevant? That I mind.”

        If Google is “reading” your email to suggest ads then so is Microsoft, they are “reading” your Word document to suggest the correct spelling. Oh look there is a red squigly, Firefox just “read” what I typed.

      3. “The world has changed, and targeted ads have proven very effective across the whole advertising industry, not just Google.”

        True. But, is this good for the consumer?

        I’d argue that it could be, and quite often is, but is often enough not. For instance, when you are barraged by ads for Hooters on every web page you visit because you sent an off-color joke via your gmail account.

        Given socially-retarded face-palms like Buzz, do you trust Google to make the “right” choice about when serving targeted advertising benefits the customer and when it does not?

        “If Google is “reading” your email to suggest ads then so is Microsoft, they are “reading” your Word document to suggest the correct spelling. Oh look there is a red squigly, Firefox just “read” what I typed.”

        Surely you are technically competent enough to realize the difference between an in-memory operation which leaves no permanent record and a cloud-sourced operation which by design leaves records in multiple cross-referenced databases which are backed up and retrievable by anyone who cares to retrieve them, right?

        Google scans your mail using a proprietary AI algorithm which is intended to decipher what topics you are interested in from the content. It then records those topics of interest, along with who you sent the mail to and when, so that it can more reliably “serve” you advertisements which exploit those interests. It is not perfect yet (although you have *no idea* how close to perfect it really is!), but that is certainly Google’s goal. “Google reading your mail” is a perfectly apt description of the process.

    2. Once again, we get an Indian named guy, probably engineer, defending Google.

      1. Seems like Jorge loves Indians :-)

        LOL
        (by an Indian)

      2. “[…] an Indian named guy, probably engineer […]”

        …by which you mean, more intelligent than you?

    3. finally a voice of reason. google is some big evil corporation out to bag you, tag you, and sell you off to the highest bidder, they dont go through your email and read your private conversations, they are just a bunch of programmers, artists, and engineers. far as i understand it google has the most higher ups which actually understand technology, most decisions are made by consulting the individuals working there. most products are open source so anyone can work on them even if they arent employees, and they can make them better.

      there is an impulse in many people to see something which lots of people like and which lots of people say nice things about and trust and just instinctively think “they are evil” this in turn leads to a cognitive bias against the company and anything they can find to support this bias they latch onto.

    4. i was just wondering, if Google gives Most of its Products for free i.e Android OS then how the hell will they make money to pay their staffs? i know for sure that No body opens Business just to give stuff away for free, Profit usually is involved. so therefore i will agree that they may be involved in other Stuff to make money, like getting and selling user Data. now it all makes sense!

  7. “demigod of the design world”? Apple designs overhyped, overpriced crappy trinkets

    1. Jealousy? Just because they do it well? Seriously, how naive do you have to be to actually believe that Apple’s success is due purely to a brainwashed cult-like following buying garbage products because they don’t know any better? It’s simply astounding that you can be so poor at critical thinking to end up at this conclusion, of all things.

      1. calm down, iSheep

    2. Poor thing. You are a pre-pubescent child.

      1. Tim Jones, you need new jokes. iSheep? crApple?

        You’re not funny and you sound like an angry person who didn’t get hired by Apple. I fee sorry for you.

    3. Beware the green-eyed monster…

    4. Hey, Tim. I heard someone said something bad about Google over at Reddit. Why don’t you go over there for a while?

    5. Yes. Probably that is why they get those tons of design awards and huge respect from the design community for their “trinkets”…

      Overpriced? Hello, the 90’s called, they want their argument back –in several markets Apple keeps beating competitors on price (tablets, high end and ultra-portable laptops).

      Overhyped? Could it be because people, er, LIKE them?

      Are you one of those guys that threw a Windows Vista launch party?

    6. Tim Jones did you have surgery at a very young age? It seems like you did to me, there could be no other explanation for your stupidity. It’s as if they made a large hole on the top of your cranium. After, they removed all brain tissue from your skull, and replace it with bags of shit. Not just any shit, but shit that had been ingested and digested repeatedly. They might’ve added some boiling spoiled semen. Lastly they garnished your shit filled skull with scrotum sweat.

  8. Another case of making good the enemy of perfect. Politicians are usually the master of this tactic, and it’s a common marketing weapon for companies to highlight their competitors flaws on minor issues while ignoring their real advantages, but Norman sounds like another iphone fan putting down android.

    If you’re on a search for the perfect company, you’re going to have a disappointing life. While I think Apple is a great company (my favorite and most valuable holding of all the stocks I own), they are far from perfect. I could spend all day describing aspects of their computers, tablets, phones, and services that frustrate and annoy me, just as I can with Google. However, while I can provide even more complaints about companies like Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc. (that set is much bigger). those companies have far less redeeming value. And if your target is companies that hoard personal information and sell it to third parties, Google would be nowhere near the top of the list of offenders.

    Constructive criticism is valuable. Vendettas are not.

    It’s also not fair to compare Google’s business model with Apples'; Google sells information and Apple sells hardware. Apple has no need to monetize any information it gathers, other than to create products that people will buy.

    1. I don’t see anywhere in the article that said Apple was perfect. Criticism of Google doesn’t equal blind praise of Apple. There is a clear, visible distinction between how Apple designs it’s products around the human element in comparison to other companies though. Saying Apple is better at it, doesn’t mean they’re perfect. How do you make that leap?

      1. I’m sorry, the comments about Apple were meant as a reply to PXLated’s comments above. I should have kept them separate, or at least referenced those comments, but I got a little lazy.

  9. Speaking as a some-time Google support person on the phone, they do indeed have them :)

    1. Mind sharing your phone # and extension, so we can reach you? :)

  10. wow more scare mongering by a former Apple exec. If buying a cheap mass produced Apple device manufactured by pitiable and massively exploited slave labor in China fulfills the emotional needs of users, then users need to get a life. By the way the real consumers of Apple Iphone are the carriers, the carriers buy the Iphone and sell it to the end users.

    1. Do you actually believe that Android devices aren’t created in the same type of factories and conditions? Or the hardware that runs Google’s data centers? HA

      1. poster never mentioned Android, all that was mentioned was Apple’s crappy trinkets. This iSheep is freaking out that Apple crappy cash-cow iPhone is getting further and further behind Android

      2. Forget it, quentin. People like him live in a little dream world where Apple = EVIL and Google = GOOD. Jobs is Mussolini. Moble Flash = choice. Nothing can dislodge the meme.

      3. Dont worry Quentin, anyone who uses the term iSheep as an argument is far more of a sheep themselves than they realize. Every one of Tim Jones’ comments on here indicate that he’s a die-hard fandroid, one of the sheep of the Android kind – so blinded by the light shining out of Sergey’s buttcrack that he can’t think for himself anymore.

      4. I know that, but article states that apple devices are emotionally satisfying. So I just took a potshot. I know everything is manufactured in China. I just question his assumption that selling hardware devices is morally and ethically superior to making money via advertising. I would argue, since google democratizes access to information ex a shanty dweller in Brazil gets the same access to information that the CEO of Apple gets via google search, now how empowering is that. I would argue that google business model is superior to Apple. But that is silly. I enjoy products from a lot of different companies and yes that includes Apple.

      5. @Bob:

        Fair enough. I’ve gotten fairly minimalist and anti-consumer society myself, although I still love good tools, and when I buy them, I want the best. Since I’ve given up a high salary to live in a developing nation and to have a lot of free time, I can’t always afford the best, so a lot of the time I make do. It’s a choice I’ve made and I’m mostly happy living with it.

        I do love Apple gear. It’s worth it to me to economize in other areas to be able to afford it. I just pulled the trigger on an iPad, which I am planning to use as my primary PC (we’ll see how that goes). This means I’ll be using public transportation for the next several months or so, which I don’t mind. OK, that was a lie. Public transport here is a pain in the ass. Wednesdays? That’s the bus drivers day off, so if I want to go to town I have to walk 3 km to the highway and catch a bus there. Could be worse, but it’s a pain in the ass. Still, I’ll put up with it because the iPad will be worth it for me. I considered the Macbook Air, but I really want my own car or motorcycle before the end of the year!

      6. more @bob:

        Also, having worked at times in the advertising industry I can say, yeah, it’s pretty evil. Not as bad as the music business, though, so they at least have that.

    2. If you knew what you were talking about or had actually read the article and comprehended it you would know his time at Apple is minor.

      Oh and hey Android kiddies and whiners…you know what computers are overwhelmingly used at Google? Macs. Macs everywhere you look.

      1. Oh and also at Motorola, Macs everywhere, plus Cisco, Oracle, IBM…

      2. yes and Eric Schmidt called Steve Jobs the best CEO ever, your point child ?

  11. So far, I have doubt but still I have high hopes for Google, I want them to be trusted keepers and guards of the internet for the citizens of the world. Apparently now they want to be an identity service, but with no checking of IDs. Wait, what?

    Is that a service we need? If they do start using actual true information to correct problems, and it worked, globally, it would be very convenient for companies and military dictatorships, but not so much for consumers and citizens. I don’t really want that sort of a service.

    I trust Apple to make great products that also run HTML5 so all complaints of a closed system for users are ignoring a basic feature of the iOS. I don’t really trust Google anymore to do anything but show ads on web pages.

    1. I used to be really jazzed by what I perceived as idealism at Google. Since I can’t fix a particular point of realization, I guess I should say that it slowly dawned on me that Google was just another corporate monstrosity that happens to make some useful things, but that doesn’t have my best interests at heart. I still use Google services. Apple, too, is a corporate monstrosity, but they make really nice and useful stuff. They might not have my interests at heart, but they make money directly from satisfying me. I think that does put it a notch ahead of Google. But that’s just me.

      1. if Google were not threatened so much by facebook and apple business models, Google would have probably remained the gentle and jolly giants. This is not an excuse, just an observation on why Google is changing into a different sort of beast.

  12. If you have followed the nymwars at all you would know that Google is working with the US Government to provide an identity service to help with homeland security. Cries of ‘paranoid’ do not alter the fact that they are used constantly to monitor people. They are now the major players in the identity business and you have no recourse to see your file, no guarantee of it’s secure location and no possibility of erasing it, no legal rights if it is misused etc etc.
    To believe they are simply supplying a good free service in return for you looking at some ads is astoundingly naive.

    1. Sorry, check the mirror… your tin hat is slipping.

  13. I think it’s pretty safe to assume that, given the choice, MOST people would prefer to see targeted ads than generic ones with no relevance to them.

    Anti-Google types love to hit this issue of data collection over and over, claiming they are evil because they analyze your behavior and therefore “you are the product.” But the relationship is more complex than that. You get free stuff like Chrome, Documents, Picasa, etc. in return for letting Google see the sites you visited, and even then you can ALWAYS log in to your Google account and delete the entire history they’ve collected.

    It’s also never been shown that they’ve abused that information. Unlike Facebook, I don’t think there’s ever been a data breach, a case of them selling people’s data to third parties or anything that the average person would consider an inconsiderate use of their private information.

      1. There is no Google plus here.

      2. Anon, +1 has been used to show approval on many sites long before Google+, Halfbakery for example.

  14. How would many male tech geeks ever learn about feminine hygiene issues without getting those “non important” product ads? Beware the singualrity of knowledge you seek to have.

  15. It’s funny, i’m feeling deja-vu! Ten or more years ago…everybody was thinking that $gates was the guy who gives us the internet, the gui, they are so proud of $gates that any criticism made to him sparkled a war…last week someone made a comparison of $gates and… you know who?

    1. Anyone who things Gates gave us the internet knows very little. Microsoft was actually quite late to the internet.

      1. Duh, it was Al Gore! Are they no longer teaching memes in school?

  16. Kristine Schachinger Monday, September 5, 2011

    Google’s G+ is an Identity Service provider for what will be the NSTIC or the “National Strategy For Trusted Identities In CyberSpace” It will not be about selling your information, but about developing an online “trust” (read tracking) system where a few private companies will hold your online identity, so you can be “held accountable (Schmidt’s words)” verified, etc etc under the guise of security and efficiency.

    This is not comspiracy theory or supposition, it is factual and the reason Eric Schmidt called it an identity network…. because it is one….noting too that Google held the international meeting of the UK version of the NSTIC in its George Orwell room (ironic isn’t it?)

    PS go to Google.com/Dashboard to view how Google is already keeping track of your social relationships even ones you did not give them access to…

    For the supporting documentation on G+ as part of the government’s Identity Ecosystem google — Real Names: G+, Government & The Identity Ecosystem … additional links in the comments

  17. Soylent google is people!

  18. Great products are dime a dozen. Quoting an excerpt from the book
    “Can you personally make a better hamburger then McDonald’s?”
    So far 100% of the people I have talked with have talked with about their new idea have said “yes”. They can all prepare, cook, and serve a better quality hamburger then McDonald’s.
    At this point , I ask them the next question: “Can you personally build a better business system than McDonald’s?
    Some people see the difference immediately, and some do not. And I would say the difference is whether the person is fixated on the left side of the Quadrant, which is focused on the idea of the better burger, or on the right side of the quadrant, which is focused on the system of business.
    I do my best to explain that there are a lot of entreprenuers out there offering far superior products or services than are offered by the mega-rich multinational corporations, just as there are billions of people who can make a better burger than McDonald’s But only McDonald’s has the system that has served billions of burgers.
    -Robert Kiyosaki “Cashflow Quadrant”

  19. Does Apple ever give you feedback on your feedback?

    1. Insofar as a human will contact you within 24 hours, yes.

    2. Yes, I can get a return phone call at least within 24 hours, often sooner. And even though I have a 4 year old Macbook, by explaining the problem I am having, its typically at no cost and its accurate. I have called about 6 times in 4 years.

  20. I’m in with him. I like Google searches. I like gmail. Whenever they try going outside that, it’s a monstrosity.

  21. Jeez doesn’t anybody know who this guy is?? He’s been an academic in usability since the sixties. He joined Apple as a Fellow in 1995 and left in 1998. Apple has not been a significant part of his career.

    Try not to see everything in life through the lens of your favorite football team rivalries. Everything is not Coke vs Pepsi.

  22. Makes sense. Apple has a set of strick policies, they don’t sell iTunes info and for in app store purchase you need to opt-in for personal info to be sold. This of course drives magazines and newspapers nuts since they don’t sell these products they also sell their readers. The logic is would our customers want us to sell their information would we want our info sold? This is very very different. There may be screwups, e.g., location data software bug that got fixed, but this is not the same as we sell, but oops got caught, e.g., Android.

  23. Howey Feltersnatch Monday, September 5, 2011

    “Real names, they say, turn out to be the names on your driver’s license and your passport and your credit cards so that they can track you. Are you happy to be a product?”

    That’s why my company is on Google+ while I – as a human person – am not. My company is happy to be a product, because, well that’s what it is.
    I think Don norman is right and I got it right as well.

  24. Awesome article! Don Norman is amazing!

    Screw Google! De-googlify yourself now!

  25. I’d pay to stop seeing ads.

    1. probably not enough

  26. By and large the dichotomy between Google and Apple is that Apple regards your personal information private and isn’t looking to monetize on it and that Google has to monetize on your information to maintain their business model.

    This fact in and of itself tells you everything you need to know about the humanity of each company.

    For the record context based ads are terrible, simply because they can only tell you about things you searched for or weighted heavily in the past. This does not give credence or knowledge of anything I want in the future, nor does it have any context for why I was searching for the original term.

    For example, we needed new office chairs at work. I spent 5 days searching for office chairs, now I get ads for office chairs daily. I’m not interested in office chairs, but my office is. More to the point I research any terms I’m not instantly familiar with. That leads to a broad and mind numbing number of useless contextual ads. In fact I’m constantly wondering how Google Ads make any money whatsoever because I can’t imagine a day wherein I would actually click on one.

  27. Michael Kaplan Monday, September 5, 2011

    Once you decide to go public, then what? I mean, everyone already has your identity. Is there anything to hide? I get tired of entering the same data in multiple places. Hopefully this social identify issue will get fixed. Just fix it, Google! Make it all converge.

    1. JUST FIX IT!!

      What’s up wit’ dat?

  28. MichaelBrianBentley Monday, September 5, 2011

    To read Don Norman referred to as “a former Apple employee” brings on a smile.

    I think the article ought to at least mention, if only a little bit, what Dr. Norman has been doing for the last decade, perhaps even what he is doing now.

  29. Google sheep: Give them free food, and they’ll follow you straight to the slaughterhouse!!

  30. Why are you echoing the ramblings of a known Google critic?! It’s a huge over simplification. They offer you product in exchange of showing ads. It the same business model as television!.
    Oh, and as for customer support they have them:
    http://searchengineland.com/google-customer-support-suprise-1000-reps-handling-10000-calls-a-week-from-60-countries-91616

    1. “Same business model as television.”
      Exactly. Notice all the highly-intelligent TV? Oh. Not. But there is a huge collection of demographic-driven pandering.

  31. If you didn’t pay for it you’re of the customer. You’re the product being sold.

    1. Damn auto-correct. I meant to say… If you didn’t pay for it you’re not the customer. You’re the product being sold.

  32. Alex Freire Alexorbit Lotado Monday, September 5, 2011

    They not only sell you but manipulate your results and your choices! you are exactly who they want you to be (online)… be carefull!!!

    1. THEY are algorithms… you think THEY are real people spying everyone every milisecond of all stupid lifes around the world. If THEY really can do it… then THEY are GOD by definition. If you dont like it, just dont use it. I am very happy programming using linux and playing blurays on windows and writing here using android. But I really hate iThings

  33. It’s like the old Playboy ads. “His lust is for life”, went the tag line followed by a description of the demographics, young men with money. Playboy wasn’t selling women, it was selling men.

  34. Man, you Apple haters are pathetic.

    This is really true about Google. And anyone who tries to lead the conversation away from the criticism of Google (as if it’s the anti-Apple) is obviously missing the point, and are just looking for excuses to vent their spleens against Apple.

  35. Well … I don’t love Google … nor do I love Apple …

    But at the end of the day, it’s only an ‘ad’. People are supposed to, and they do, use the filtering process of what they want and what they do not. An ‘ad’, it’s promoter, and producer are not Almighty!!! They cannot force you to buy anything, unless you really want to.

    And the same goes for Apple products. No one can force an individual to buy anything … NO ONE … except the individual himself.

  36. To a Fools Fool Monday, September 5, 2011

    It’s amazing that you are all so clueless about how you are sold at every company. Everything you do “online” is tracked. If you are reading this, you are currently being tracked. Watch DirecTV, use Verizon, or your fantastic iOS or Apple products? Yes you are being tracked and sold.
    If you have done anything of these things while thinking you were some kind of magical mystic online that went un-noticed, you can raise your hand to the “I’m an online idiot” club.
    You can make Google out to be something “evil”, but you better go find a cave and toss your tech world goodbye if you want to try and feel “free” from being just another product to a company. I bet you are the same fools that shop at Wal-Mart… Wal-Mart, but they wouldn’t hurt us… they love us. They wouldn’t track me… or would they? Awe wait, they do it too! Damn you just got fooled again.
    How can they track me at Wal-Mart? I didn’t use my bank card or my Visa. I even thought I would be smart and say screw it to paying for it. I’m so scared of being tracked or used as a product I just stole the damn item I wanted. Please don’t abuse me Wal-Mart, please don’t, you are my only friend. Have you tried it or did you notice the security cameras on the ceiling? If you are lucky, you can get away with it, but for how long? Chances are you will probably be picked off by security. No way I am the master thief, they will never catch me… Everyone gets caught sooner or later, why do you think the jails are so full of scum. Just think about how great it will be when you do get picked up for petty theft, how great the abuse/tracking will be at the station. Once again you will be entered into a computer database, tracked and filed.
    But Apple doesn’t use the information? Ever have a problem with a device? (I’m sure you are going to say no, because Apple products never break. While play with your magical Elves and living in your day dream world, because Apple is so great). All electronic items will have issues either new out of the box or years down the line, it’s only a matter of time. It is after all, tech. When request help for your broken iTunes account that is not working, it must be magical how they are able to find you, yes you on their system, because you are such the master of deception. Or they can’t track me… I just switched out my old iPhone for a new one, they wouldn’t know who I was… no way. Sorry to tell you, but you have been tracked. Yes you are being used. You cheap little product you..
    How else is a company going to stay on par with what a customer wants if they don’t abuse your information and track what you are doing? Kind of crazy how they always seem to know at iTunes what the most popular songs are across the country. (Must be freaking magic right? throw your hand up idiot).
    Close your iTunes account down and see if your “special” information is truly deleted from their system. I’m sure the great customer service at Apple would all but bend over backwards to assist you while hitting the delete button repeatedly. Just for special old you. I bet they are removing your personal information as you read this, just for you so you are not going to be their abused little product monkey. Only a fool in a fool world would ever think that they are not being used as a product.
    When it comes to your personal information… Well try committing an online crime. Your computer, device, service provider knows who you are. The government with permission or without can easily track you down. They know who you are, you give them the answers with your account, Facebook, email, itunes, internet service, DirecTV, Verizon, your IP address. Don’t you feel so tricky now? So special because this isn’t happening to you?
    This article is pointless and says nothing new that people have not been doing for centuries to others. Maybe this will pop your magic bubble and bring you back to the real world.
    – As a side note
    By the way the fastest computer to be hacked still is the Apple… makes you feel safe doesn’t it? But damn it looks so nice….you poor product you (but wait… Apple cares about us, they want us to be safe… Then why the security loop holes that have never been corrected?)

  37. hey iSheeps, Bing this: FRUIT THEMED PHONE MAKER Apple’s IOS operating system (OS) has fallen eight per cent in popularity over the last year, while Google’s Android OS market share has doubled

    1. Don’t let the facts get in the way of your inane ramblings, sport. iOS is the most popular mobile operating system, by over a 50% margin. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS are the #1 and #2 selling handsets. The only market segment where Android is “winning” is mobile phone OS. That’s like saying that Apple is the most popular OS on >$1000 laptops. It’s true. But meaningless in the big picture. In fact, it’s much less meaningless than Apple’s position in the laptop market. Apple’s winning the high-end of the laptop market — Alpha consumers, who are much more valuable commodities to companies. Android is winning (again ONLY on mobile phones) by inundating the market with BOGO or free-with-contract phones.

      Hugs and kisses!

    2. yeah cheap ad-kiosks with built in phones sell well

  38. Since patent harvesting seems to be all the rage at the present time

    Why doesn’t every individual patent themselves; at which point nothing about them can be used without permission – otherwise it is a patent infringement and a revenue generating scheme for the individual concerned

    This would be one sure-fire way of preventing people being used as products/tradeable commodities

    i.e. Google has to pay each time your details are used

  39. James Wallis Martin Tuesday, September 6, 2011

    People have always been a commodity since the dawn of civilization. Nothing has changed there except the marketing message. Apple wants to make you think they built it for you, Microsoft want to make you think they built it for your business, and Google says we built it for you to use, but the usage statistics and data belongs to us for selling.

    Personally I don’t have an issue with that. Credit card companies, banks, and supermarkets have been doing it for decades. Privacy is an illusion. Don’t believe me, read the Patriot Act.

  40. Listened to Don Norman yesterday and I think this article misses some information (which I don’t know if he mentioned at dConstruct).
    He clearly stated yesterday that we are the product of Google and that in a certain way that is strange (and maybe worrying). HOWEVER, he also states, as he did yesterday, that he “is not a fan of the Apple business model” and therefore uses an Android phone.
    I think his comments on Google actually show a concern for the company and for the overall issues of privacy for all of us. Moreover, he also highlighted yesterday that “Google is run by a group of really honest and good-hearted people”.

  41. So let me see, of course Apple cares about us as people. Take jailbreaking, people make the most awesome features for the Apple iPhone day in, day out. They work, they do things with the hardware that is nothing short of amazing. And yet… apple doesn’t put them in to the phone legally. Wow, apple really “gets” the “people” who buy their stuff.

  42. The thing is, this is true of every publisher too. What GigaOm sells, for example, isn’t content – but us, the readers, our attention. Google is just more precise about it (at least in theory) because it knows more about us as individuals than any single site or publication can ever manage.

  43. You know, reading through these comments really saddens me at just the level of ignorance we live with in society. Some of you are so mindblowingly ignorant, it’s really just sad. But it’s not only the ignorance that’s sad, it’s also the immaturity and complete obnoxious behavior that’s even worse.

  44. The most constructive comments have no reply. This tells a lot about human communications. U can argue only at things that you (small) minds can comprehend.

  45. Wait…. so you’re saying that they’re not getting their fortunes by simply providing free stuff, therefore defying all concepts of business? AdSense as been around for years.

    As usual, like Apple, this guy finds something old and treats it as his great revelation to the world.

  46. Microsoft is evil (said Apple users). Apple is users (said PC users). Google is evil (said by former Google employee).
    Google IS evil. Search criteria is limited and “ranked”. Google’s APIS flaws. Google’s email breaches. Injection of Google picture searches. And that is just what the users see. Ever been to Google? each floor is like a college dorm chat room with communist food outlets (if Everyone likes the drink, it will be stocked). The only hire young talent (5yr, double masters, and PhDs need apply) and discriminate over-35 (and rightly so if you haven’t made your +1Mill by 40). Google took over the yellowpages: money made over names, advertising and statistics. don is 100% correct but also a hypocrite because Apple does the same thing (internally). Apple is Form over Function. Google is Marketing. Google+ is too little, too strict, too late.

    1. Sounds like someone is upset that they didn’t get hired.

  47. If you look careful enough, it’s the way Microsoft used to do things. A graph would probably be a better example, however in that direction and make things clearer in a timeline.

  48. Apple’s breadbasket appears to be the hardware their software is designed to run on, and software extensions. To that end, their gimmick or incentive appears to be intuitive OS software and easy integration of purchased extras. Their OS software tends to be constantly refined and given away or sold very cheaply, but you pay for the hardware and extras.
    Google’s breadbasket appears to be information on it’s customers and other mined information, sold to third parties and/or used to target people for advertisement. The gimmick, or incentive, is open source software refined and focused for mass consumer use. The real product is information on you, you searches and online habits, sold in a way where the average customer probably has no idea who is buying your information or what they are buying or what they are using it for.
    If one business model is “scarier” than the other, I think it’s the one where everything seems free but your information is really being sold for who knows what. Maybe one thing that would make me more comfortable with google’s model is full disclosure of their customers that purchase your information, or exactly what on you is being sold or given to who. It seems at some point, information on you and your habits or what you store on their servers and sell to someone else is something you have rights regarding as well.

  49. This article seams to be talking of a different Don Norman, not the one I saw giving a talk yesterday in Portugal.

    He told exactly that, we are google product, but it didn’t had the negative stance that this article is implying, and to prove it he said that he uses an Android phone (along with a lot of google products) and has no problem with it.

  50. CoreAn_Crack3rZ Tuesday, September 6, 2011

    If google sells us, what do we get from them in return? :D

  51. Teajai Stradley Tuesday, September 6, 2011

    I’ve contacted Google support and they are extremely helpful and real. And if the goal is to gather all the people in the World in one online location and give them what they want I don’t see how that is bad for either party. Isn’t that what true sales is all about? Everyone gets what they want out of the deal? Really surprised to see the thoughts by Don Norman, not at all what I expected.

  52. I just discovered that, once you place your email data into Gmail/Google Apps, it is impossible to move it out. Sure, it is technically possible to move it – but Gmail/Google Apps has a frailty that, if too much data is moved in a 24 hour period, the account shuts down. In my experience, even copying about 80 emails from one IMAP folder to another is enough to shut down the account for a few hours. Google says they are aware of this tech problem, and are trying to solve this – but you must be sceptical when you find blog posts of people having this same problem for several years back. The practical consequence is that, if you ever wanted to shift your IMAP data to another IMAP provider, the sheer amount of data transfer would cause your account to lock up for 24 hours. Thus, by conveniently not fixing this so-called technical problem, Google makes it effectively impossible for you to move your IMAP email data out of Google. It’s quite disgusting.

  53. I tried once, but my comments disappeared, so I’m re-entering. Apologies if it results in duplicate posts.

    Gmail/Google Apps has a tech problem. If you transfer too many emails out per day, the account shuts down. I’ve been able to trigger the shutting down of my Google Apps account by transferring around 80 emails from one IMAP folder to another.

    Google lists this as a known problem, and Google says it is working for a solution. But cynically, if you search the Google help forums, this problem has been there for 3+ years. Don’t tell me Google can’t fix a problem like that in 3 years.

    No, I suspect Google are keeping the problem, because it presents a practical impediment if you ever wanted to transfer your IMAP email data out of Google. It can be done technically, but this bug will prevent you from doing it.

    This is so sneaky.

    To see the problem, search for — Gmail “too many simultaneous connections”

  54. Yep. Livin’ in the age of Moloch.

  55. Companies need to be humane like a company that hires the police to illegally search people’s houses and threaten their immigration status?

  56. BlueCollarCritic Tuesday, September 6, 2011

    If any non-celeb were to say this they are typically labeled a “Conspiracy Theorists” and or told to take off their tin foil hat. Maybe the bit about Google not being so “GOOD” after all is something to give serious measure to?

  57. I’ve been trying to sign up for Google+, but the site has been saying it’s in ‘limited Field Trial’. What happened to Beta? it used to be most of Google’s products were perpetually on Beta. If I have to wait for much longer, I’ll probably just skip Google+. I don’t update my facebook as often anymore, so starting + will not have much of an impact.

  58. Consider?, in a world that has war!, gaining power by less extreme methods than war surly exist.
    We are living now at a point just before explosive exponential technological growth. Synergy of AI,Bio,and micro/nano circuitry enter rapid exponential creation.

    The point is on the horizon where the web will be considered another dimension of our environment. Four dimensional data, that is 3D plus navigating time, The 4th dimension being time in the form of past records. Whether or not we care about being tracked now, Humanity is going to face the result of the action. It will be as real as any powerful technology that enters the hand of humanity. Always consider human nature, its naive not to.
    Granted the tech is not here, nor tomorrow, precisely when doesn’t matter the point remains. For many of us it will be in our life time.
    We are living now on the line between the old world and a world where the physical world and the matrix are considered normal environments we enter for daily life. Not suggesting like the movie Matrix. Take the web, real time data, global mapping, 3d screens or head gear, search engine, social data, a game maker such as Zynga. Add the exponential technological growth we are now at the edge, AI,bio,micro/nano/photo circuits mash it together and we are there! in an augmented reality, or 4D matrix.

    We will probably be more concerned about the, implied consent data tracking modlel? For now, out of site out of mind.

  59. I don’t see anything wrong with Google’s true intention. Sure that they are tracking everything about you, but that’s what you are compensating them for using many of their free products. It’s simply a trade, that you use their products for free by letting Google get more information about you. If you don’t want to let them get your information, then simply don’t use Google’s products. Regardless of what you think about Google, the world needs Google, so if you don’t like Google? I suggest you STFU…

  60. People are free to talk…and I always enjoy hearing Norman’s thoughts…very interesting :)

  61. Wow, google takes a really really good care of its products!!!

  62. The same thing can be said of free advertising-sponsored over-the-air TV: you are the product, the advertisers are the customers, and the TV shows are the lure to acquire more product (eyeballs) to sell.

    That means Google and Facebook are selling the exact same product, they just use different lures to get the product they sell.

    The big difference is, they can only estimate how many people are watching in aggregate. There’s no fine-tuned demographics capable of isolating individual people from the crowd.

    Google, however, has those demographics, and that gives them a much more powerful product to sell: instead of aggregate audiences, they can sell anonymized individuals.

    1. Google uses open standards for almost all of its products. You always have a choice to leave Google. Have you ever heard of data liberation?
      Though some may agree that we are the product for Google, but te point is that we are always treated with high priority and respect in all google services.

      For Apple fans, have they implemented flash yet? Are they listening to you?

  63. Do you really think that was good? It sounds like a bitter ex-Apple Exec who is angry that Google developed these services, while Apple was focusing on the thin veneer of humanity for their products.
    Yes Goggles’ business model is to track what you do on-line, *while using their free products* … which is why they are free. You don’t have to use them, if you don’t like this. Just as, if you don’t like your phone tracking you movements in an encrypted file, you don’t have to use an iPhone. Is he suggesting that iTunes, Amazon or AppleTV don’t track usage to suggest new products. I have no time for this false outrage when others are just as guilty of using you usage to sell you products … but Google is just better at it.
    I find it also hypocritical to attack the simplicity of their interface. Just look at Yahoo! It was a very clever and practical decision in the early days when internet speeds were much slower and other search engines took ages to load.
    People have different priorities, some are happy with cheap’n’simple things that just work. Others are focused on luxury and products that make people feel better. Both Apple and Google know this and who their customers are. The argument about “Humanity” is entirely bogus.
    It sounds like he may have suggested something to Google and it got rejected. Not that I would expect much of a “Customer Support Facility” for *free* products. But before anybody mentions customer support they should consider Jobs’ response to the iPhone4 reception problem. This is a classic example of people who live in glass houses should not through stones.

    I think they will let anyone make speeches these days. I wonder how much he got paid for this tirade. I expect his next speech to be about the how kids in the neighborhood keep kicking their ball into his garden … ;^)

  64. I don’t agree with you sir
    I had many experiences with Google support and they help me every time
    and for privacy, I tell you that if you this that there is a way or a company that keep you private on the web so you are wrong .
    all companies record data about customers
    and I can’t understand how people compare between a hardware company (Apple) and a web services company (Google)

  65. “Do they ever give you feedback on your feedback?” – Yes, I’ve made suggestions for corrections to Google maps and have received feedback from a real person. So, Yes.

  66. RT @ImpressiveWebs: Does Google sell products? Or people? Interesting piece → http://t.co/VJCWp4zb

  67. Casey A. Gollan Saturday, November 19, 2011

    “Google doesn’t get people, it sells them.” Don Norman http://t.co/Gwg10j1G

  68. Google doesn’t get people, it sells them http://t.co/uufVB4Jx

  69. Don Norman: Google doesn’t get people, it sells them — http://t.co/If8g4HdI

  70. E.B. Boyd (Liza) Tuesday, November 29, 2011

    Int’g wrd chc: Google’s inability to understand what is “emotionally true” abt products like Apple’s is a serious prob http://t.co/z8Sz1SO1

  71. Sebastian Hassinger Tuesday, November 29, 2011

    Don Norman dConstruct talk: Google’s product is people! http://t.co/qEJZCMmy

  72. Kevindoylejones Tuesday, November 29, 2011

    For Google & Facebook, we are the product, our data, and their customers are their advertisers. they are selling us. http://t.co/cPjDT3iu

  73. Don Norman: Google doesn’t get people, it sells them http://t.co/wYmYJ5vZ

  74. Don Norman: Google doesn’t get people, it sells them http://t.co/POY4lEb0

Comments have been disabled for this post