Filed under: Software, Security
Gruber begins dissection of Google Desktop
In our sneak peak at the new Google Desktop for Mac, Scott wondered at Google's use of a proprietary installer. Like many Mac users, I get annoyed at installers, though I understand that sometimes they are necessary. Similarly concerned, John Gruber at Daring Fireball performed a test install and then did a file level comparison of his system before and after. As Gruber notes: "This matters with Google Desktop, because there are a lot of files, and they're installed into some interesting - if not suspicious - locations." This includes an Input Manager and some possibly questionable kernel extensions (which are likely necessary to make the full system-wide search possible). I should be clear: nobody is accusing Google of doing anything underhanded, but if you like to know exactly what's going on with your system, John's article is worth a read before installing Google Desktop.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Everyday Weekender said 10:25PM on 4-04-2007
I'm always suspicious of what gets installed.. maybe I'm just paranoid.. but i hate not knowing what's going where... i need control
http://www.everydayweekender.com
Reply
Joshua said 10:37PM on 4-04-2007
I hate it when these sorts of things come out. Stupid people take it all the wrong way, and assume Google is stealing their credit card numbers, when all they're really trying to do is make a better product with more hooks into the OS for smoother and deeper integration.
Reply
Colin said 11:39PM on 4-04-2007
@Joshua:
If stupid people are going to be stupid, it's better they ere on the side of caution. At any rate, Gruber is opening a perfectly valid discussion regarding Google's installer application. I'm sure Google's not doing anything underhanded, but it would be nice to see what it's installing, and where.
Reply
Chris Knight said 2:00AM on 4-05-2007
I find the Spotlight extender MoRU to be problem free and very powerful - without the worry of files sprayed everwhere.
Reply
trent said 5:37AM on 4-05-2007
But the worst thing about MoRu is that it cannot find anything that is written in the description field of a file while spotlight can.
Reply
Nick said 5:45AM on 4-05-2007
John Gruber's quite right to look closely at this. AFAICT, earlier commentators didn't even think to.
I'd not expect Google to do anything nefarious. It wouldn't be worth the bad publicity for them. A large company with a reputation to lose would have to be as stupid as Sony to risk the wrath of the public pulling stunts like that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal
Unlike Sony, Google's not stupid.
However, while I trust Google's probity, that doesn't mean that I want *any* software vendor just doing as it thinks best.
I don't particularly like application installers; I don't like an installer just installing anything anywhere; if an installer is to be used at all, I'd prefer the vendor were to use the Apple installer; and, finally, I don't like not to know what the installer is doing.
There are matters to consider. For example, Gruber notes that the Google installer puts something in System/Library. Really, I'd prefer independent software vendors to stay out of System areas.
Google doesn't have to intend anything nefarious to give one pause for thought. They could adversely affect the stability of your machine without in the least intending to. If they're going in places Apple never intended ISVs to go, what they install could break on Apple's next software update.
And what are they offering me anyway? It would seem they're offering something like what Spotlight already does.
Besides my Mac, I've got a Windows machine. When I bought it, it was replete with what is known in the Windows world as "crapware", including Google Toolbar and Google Desktop Search. I removed everything like that. Crapware is the bane of the Windows world:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070111-8598.html
It's a *huge* bonus that Apple machines ship free of this stuff. I'm not about to voluntarily put it on myself.
I'm sure this application will suit some people for whatever reason, but for myself I'm very wary about installing anything I don't need and that does things to the machine I may later regret. This has got nothing to do with my suspecting Google of doing anything illegal or unpleasant: on the contrary, I'm sure they wouldn't.
Reply
anonymous said 6:26AM on 4-05-2007
Have G-desktop on my windoze machine at work, and still doesn't do what I get from Spotlight. Just can't imagine what I need GD for on my Mac, especially now that mailsmith works with spotlight. Maybe if it looked inside filemaker files.
Reply
icerabbit said 10:09AM on 4-05-2007
No Google Desktop on my machines. I even avoid the Google search engine for reasons like: data mining & data sharing, contributing to a slew of SPAM sites & website/forum SPAM, poor search results, ...
Reply
Geoff said 1:00PM on 4-05-2007
I'm not as worried about what Google Desktop installs as I am about getting it to work. When it first started indexing my files, I would get search results from my gMail account, but after the indexing stopped suddenly my email searches are coming up empty. I think the article on LifeHacker mentioned a similar problem. Checked all my gMail login preferences, but nothing's helped so far.
Reply
John Brissenden said 3:51PM on 4-05-2007
The worst thing about Google Desktop, having tried to live with it for 24 hours, is how much it slows my machine down (late-model G4 PowerBook, 10.4.9). I've just uninstalled it, and my Mac's suddenly come back to life.
Second worst thing? It only shows a maximum of 15 desktop results! WTF?
Reply