OT: if Google thinks you have an account (based on a cookie I guess) it requires you to login to access this document. So you either need to login or delete the cookie or enable incognito/private mode to access the document.
Why doesn't google treat non-logged in users the same as those w/o an account?
> Why doesn't google treat non-logged in users the same as those w/o an account?
I wager what they actually want to do is treat those without an account the same as those who are not logged in, but realize they can't get away with that quite yet. (That is to say, I suspect that they would like to turn away all users without accounts.)
I'd assume (and I have no insider knowledge) that it's because Google assumes if you have a Google account that you probably want to be logged into it when using Google products. Otherwise it would suck if you tried to do something that requires an account and were told "log in" and then had to refresh the page, potentially losing state. The up-front login avoids some usability issues there. (Of course there are many ways to approach this, this is merely my hypothesis.)
With some insider knowledge: Because this document is commentable for (some) Googlers, though you don't see the comments on the /pub version that is accessible externally. Docs would rather force you to verify your state (Logged in or anonymous) than having some things 'not work' because you're expecting permissions from login cookies you don't have.
No it doesn't. Visit it in an Incognito window if you don't believe me.
It's asking for your password because you apparently do have a Google account and it wants to verify your identity before it lets you access things that are tied to your account.
Why doesn't google treat non-logged in users the same as those w/o an account?