Shared publicly  - 
Guess how Googlebot for smartphones sees this page ... :-/
Enrico Altavilla's profile photoMichael Mahemoff's profile photogeorge ruethschilling's profile photoManuel Vicedo's profile photo
Makes a change as some websites add 10-20% on Apple users prices. As if they can afford Apple prices they can pay the extra.

Shay C.
Childish behavior.. 
Is someone going to make a convenient Apache/Nginx module.

[   ] Block because you don't like OS's users
[   ] Block because you don't like browser's executives
[   ] Block because you don't like users' country
[   ] Block because you're feelin kinda moody

Error code 452?
"feelin kinda moody" is built in to lots of webservers already :)
Hi John sorry to say, but this is what I get on an iPhone when I visit Google Night Walk: Ah snap, the Night Walk experience is not optimized for your device or operating system - Download Chrome.

Maybe someone need to talk to them ;)
+SEOwarp profosyonel : the point is: that content is sent not only to iPhone users but also to search engine spiders that check what contents are sent to smartphone users.

As a result, that content is indexed by Google and this could lead to some issues.
+Stephen Hind : well, if you search for the text on the screenshot you can find a lead to the website, but the webmaster has just removed the block of Apple devices, so there is nothing to see, now.
Well done.
But with an unintended side-effect.
Effectively Google democratizes the banning to ALL smart phones. ;-)

Showing GoogleBot something different does not solve this in the long run, because Google's  algorithmic intelligence can zero-out also politically motivated cloaking. :-)
"Showing GoogleBot something different does not solve this in the long run"

And makes it even worse. You've gone from <incompatible on some browsers> to <proactively cloaking>.

"sorry to say, but this is what I get on an iPhone when I visit Google Night Walk"

Chrome Web Store also shows the hand to other browsers. (Came up on Twitter recently /cc +Addy Osmani).
+Michael Mahemoff

You are absolutely right.

A more subtile variant of this is how many websites want people to use their smartphone apps. A good example is G+ and  Facebook, most built-in android browsers and iOS mobile Safari browser are less buggy than social network time-line and stream "smart" viewers.

The Google Crome Web Store provides access to Google Chrome specific apps, that do not run on other web browsers AFAIK.

Crafted to be "<incompatible on some browsers>".
I would even this consider as a type of cloaking.
+george ruethschilling Even though CWS doesn't support other browsers, it's still a public website, just like Play or iTunes' web presences. There are numerous use cases for checking out Chrome Web Store outside of the browser where you can install it. (I don't say "outside of Chrome" because it's also inaccessible from Chrome mobile.)
+Michael Mahemoff

Well, we are digressing from the original topic/question
how the GoogleBot sees such bad practices.

My guess is GoogleBot sees it differently. ;-)

The intent behind is often marketing but sometimes also for technical reasons.

( )

I do not see any good reason why to turn the open web into a landscape of walled gardens.

So we are coming again to the point does Google do it better?

Excluding without technical or legal reasons some devices or web browsers from accessing content on the web is evil!
How is this any different from having the aforementioned site dictate how its users should access it?
Add a comment...