Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Casey Marshall
67 followers
67 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Casey Marshall commented on a post on Blogger.
I saw this on a different blog and thought it was a joke, and/or some terrible "designer's" attempt to "remake" a "brand," unasked for.

Lol terrrrrible

Post has attachment

Post has shared content
CrossFit, Inc has notified us of trademark infringement of our app in the Apple App Store; they are demanding that we not use the term "CrossFit" in ANY materials related to the app, even as a descriptive term.

We have modified the app description and title, and have submitted an update to the App Store; it should be available again in a week. The app itself has not undergone any changes, and it should still be available, just with any mention of "CrossFit" removed.

We believe that CrossFit, Inc is engaging in bullying over their trademark, and are demanding even fair use instances of their trademark. We recognize that CrossFit, Inc has a trademark over the term "CrossFit", and that they must protect that trademark in order to maintain it. In this case, however, we believe that they are overreaching by making such demands.

Thank you all for the support over the years; my only aim in making this app was creating a tool that would help everyone track and improve their fitness, and I hope I can continue to do so, regardless of the situation.

Oh look, App Engine deprecated one of their storage options, which was the only one available when I created my app, and upgrading is a manual, complicated process.

Thanks a fucking lot, assholes!

Fuck Google+. It sucks.

Post has attachment
Answer my programming question, dammit.

Post has attachment
Photo

Post has attachment
Someone, tell me how to make this not suck.

And/or: hey Google, make App Engine not suck.

Post has shared content
I don't know if it's just me, but this just sounds like it reaffirms something I've felt about Google engineers: they seem to honestly believe that Google is an honest, engineering-first company that really is trying to better mankind. I mean, Google wields a very big stick and has lots of control over the technology landscape. Where, ever, has that led to ethical, humanistic behavior out of a public corporation?

The biggest suckers Google has duped are their engineers.
Time for a small rant. Since I work on Chrome, I tend to read a lot of news about it. People say a lot of ill-informed things about Chrome, and mostly they don't deserve a response, but I have one comment after reading MG Siegler's http://parislemon.com/post/14695710791/pay-to-stay today.

From the conclusion: "One thing is certain: Google is not paying Mozilla a billion dollars out of the kindness of their hearts. Doing so would be irresponsible to their shareholders. Again, they’re paying all that money to a competitor."

People never seem to understand why Google builds Chrome no matter how many times I try to pound it into their heads. It's very simple: the primary goal of Chrome is to make the web advance as much and as quickly as possible. That's it. It's completely irrelevant to this goal whether Chrome actually gains tons of users or whether instead the web advances because the other browser vendors step up their game and produce far better browsers. Either way the web gets better. Job done. The end.

So it's very easy to see why Google would be willing to fund Mozilla: Like Google, Mozilla is clearly committed to the betterment of the web, and they're spending their resources to make a great, open-source web browser. Chrome is not all things to all people; Firefox is an important product because it can be a different product with different design decisions and serve different users well. Mozilla's commitment to advancing the web is why I was hired at Google explicitly to work on Firefox before we built Chrome: Google was interested enough in seeing Firefox succeed to commit engineering resources to it, and we only shifted to building Chrome when we thought we might be able to cause even greater increases in the rate at which the web advanced.

It's not hard to understand the roots of this strategy. Google succeeds (and makes money) when the web succeeds and people use it more to do everything they need to do. Because of this Chrome doesn't need to be a Microsoft Office, a direct money-maker, nor does it even need to directly feed users to Google. Just making the web more capable is enough.

So sure, Google gets some direct value out of Firefox users searching with Google by default. I'm not contesting that. But the whole "You're funding a competitor!!!" angle is misguided. Google is funding a partner. We and Mozilla are working together to make the web awesome.

Post has attachment
My God, people, what the hell.
Photo
Wait while more posts are being loaded