

Google Goes Renegade, Creates Own OpenID Fork - ComputerGuru
http://neosmart.net/blog/2008/google-doesnt-use-openid/

======
jmackinn
I don't think this blogger actually read the post by Google. The neosmart
article emphasizes _This is a departure from the process outlined in OpenID
1.0._ This is because Google is following the OpenID 2.0 protocol which does
contain the _discovery_ request and the XRDS document process.

[http://openid.net/specs/openid-
authentication-2_0.html#disco...](http://openid.net/specs/openid-
authentication-2_0.html#discovery)

This is not a fork from OpenID. They are simply using the newer protocol.

~~~
pierrefar
According to The Next Web (see this post: <http://cli.gs/MM0aab> ), "Dick
Hardt, an important OpenID supporter, also confirms that Google is NOT
compatible with OpenID". They link to his comment on TC.

------
sanj
From what I can tell, the goal is to make the experience easier on the user by
doing the email domain to URL transparent.

The reality is that users don't know URLs as identification mechanisms. They
_do_ know email addresses.

~~~
Jasber
This was always my biggest complaint with OpenID. I'm glad Google did
something about it. Perhaps others will follow suit.

Users are comfortable using an e-mail address as an identity. _Everyone_ has
an e-mail address. This makes sense to end-users.

E-mail addresses are unique and they accurately identify who someone is. I
have no idea why this wasn't the standard in the first place.

~~~
lux
For sure. This is a slight change, but a big change for the better. Nobody
wants to remember a URL when they already remember their email. This makes
perfect sense, and solves the biggest issue with OpenID in a way that looks
like it puts it on par with the ease of use for end users of Facebook Connect,
for example.

If every service simply required an email address, and the standard provided
for a way to find out the access point from the OpenID provider, then we'd be
all set and everyone would be able to implement this change.

------
randrews
This article closes with a meme I'm getting pretty annoyed with.

"Don't be evil" is not the same as "don't do anything that the author
disagrees with".

~~~
spydez
Well this is pretty much the same thing Microsoft does with standards that
everyone yells, "Embrace, extend, extinguish!" at...

~~~
sanj
Not really.

Google's telling you pretty much exactly how to do it yourself. They appear
more interested in improving the standard for everyone.

------
markbao
With respect to authentication, this is like Facebook Connect, but with a
larger audience.

And it's like OpenID, but without 'send data' and 'server/delegates.'

I really like this.

------
sh1mmer
The implication of division is also a really false one. Last week we had a
summit about OpenID usability and Google as well as all the other major
players in this space were there. People really want to find a good solution
for users. This is not about division at all. People really want to find the
same good solution for users to use everywhere.

I find the implication that tech companies are constantly at each other's
throats and back stabbing each other like a bunch of Hollywood hussies
tiresome. Google have talked about "federated login" for a while and this is
them taking it out into the wild.

The exact implementation of Open ID that ends up being used by everyone is
going to change over time as we learn what works for users and what doesn't.

------
trevorturk
I think this is going to be great for OpenID in the long run. Email addresses
just make a lot more sense than URLs for logging into sites.

~~~
adrianwaj
I'd also like to see a credit card (or even PayPal account) attached to an
OpenID account so one can also use it to pay for things online with an email
address. An email confirmation would occur after each purchase. Thus OpenID
becomes a substitute for a CC's number and its other details, which are lodged
with the OpenID provider. At present, one can't even sign for an online
purchase or show a confirming ID or enter a PIN.

