So the other day I did a Google search and a link from my blog came up with a warning after I clicked it.

Warning - visiting this web site may harm your computer!

LOL… What? Apparently this installation of Wordpress is a secret front for malicious software. With all seriousness I started to roam around as to why sites can get labeled as such. It appears all it takes is for someone to report it.

That’s a bit ridiculous. So now all searches from Google that head to my blog will not directly link here. Instead visitors will get that big ole’ warning and then they’ll have to manually type the link in to continue.

I’ve filled a grievance with Google and StopBadware.org. We’ll see when they get back to me, it’s been 3 days now.

Just noticed the sublinks under the MoFuse hompage on a Google search. Neat stuff.

While searching Google’s Blog Search they told me I was now being blocked because they think I am a robot. Funny stuff.

Mowser is dead – so the mobile web must be dead to. If you’re a reader of Read Write Web, TechCrunch and the others you would be lead to believe this as true. It’s the furthest thing from the truth.

Russell Beattie, CEO and Founder of Mowser, is in a tough spot financially. It’s not easy being an entrepreneur. His financial situation seems to have placed him in a rough patch and that frustration has come out and it was inaccurately aimed at the mobile web. He’s in a bad spot right now and I understand his frustrations, but I disagree with the reasons he felt Mowser failed.

There are a variety of reasons Mowser seems to have failed that have nothing to do with the mobile web being dead, see Mike Rowehl’s (co-founder of Mowser) take on why it failed. Mike sums everything up pretty nicely.

The blogosphere, going on Russ’s post, was quick to claim the mobile web dead, and in place of it the full web will emerge. They are all flat wrong.

Those people who are quick to jump to the conclusion that the mobile web is dead and that the iPhone pulled the trigger are wrong. The iPhone planted the seed. Apple has spent millions of dollars marketing the web on your mobile phone, creating awareness that you can access the internet from the device in your pocket.

Detractors will say, why do you need a mobile web when these mobile browsers can browse the desktop web? They are right to an extent. The iPhone lets you to browse the desktop web, yes. And the radio lets you pick up a television signal. Following me?

What I’m trying to say is that, yes, you can view the desktop web on the iPhone and it’s the best mobile browser out there. But visiting an iPhone specific website is a much better experience than visiting that same site’s full-desktop-version.

Facebook is a great example of this. I much rather use Facebook’s iPhone version on my iPhone rather than trying to navigate their desktop version through the periscope that is the Safari mobile. Same goes for Digg, Bank of America, LinkedIn and Google.

Websites of the future will be designed for three screens. The larger smart phone screens(iPhone), smaller mobile phone screens(RAZR, etc) and the desktop screens. You fit the content to the media it’s designed for. You can’t take something designed for a 19” screen or larger and then simple zoom-it-out so that it fits on a tiny screen. Nobody wants to look at the web through a periscope and you wouldn’t put a YouTube video on a matchbook cover (thank you David Harper).

My final take, the mobile web isn’t dead, far from it. Ask the other founder of Mowser, ask the guys at AdMob, ask David Harper, ask myself. Here at MoFuse we’ve seen consistent mobile pageview growth of at least 40% month over month.

About 20 days ago I wrote a post about my shitty Polaroid television set that I purchased one year and six months ago, that post can be found here.

My opinion was quite clear, I bought a product that was cheaper and I paid the price for it, but I didn’t expect their customer service to abandon me for an issue that I did not cause.

Regardless, the search term polaroid televisions on Google now shows that post on the front page. Now anyone that is consciously about to make a decision about purchasing a Polaroid television will probably end up reading that post. When I say consciously I mean doing their research before making a purchase.

This next piece is not meant to be pretentious in anyway, but they will probably lose a customer or two because of that post and its top position on Google for the generic search term. Whereas if Polaroid sucked-up the $80 it cost to fix the television for a defective part, they would have gained a customer or two because that post would have been about how great their customer service was to me.

Don’t believe that I would have wrote a post commending their customer service? I’ve done it on more than once occasion in the past regarding Microsoft’s customer support of the XBox 360. To date I’ve sent my XBox back for repairs 4 times and I’ve been out of warranty for years. They’ve never charged me a dime, they always overnight it to me and the most recent time they even gave me a free wireless control.

That’s good customer service and they won’t lose any customers from that effort. Polaroid on the other hand will, and they probably deserve it.

Note: To be fair, the VP of Customer Relations did get in contact with me and offered to send me the replacement part, but it was a lengthy back and forth process of approvals that immediately made me say it’s not worth the $80 to go through it all.