Adam, It is quite difficult to be "innovative enough" with Search API, such that it does not compete with your own paid for service for site indexing and searching.
However, why did you ever even bother with Translate API ? For example, I was hoping to use it for translation of content that is created within an ethnic community site. While it would have been great to be able to translate all content that users would get to see, I would have settled for being able to translate just the content that is created by community members. In this case, it would have been more than good enough to do the translations only once and then forever to serve cached translations. However, you have contributed to the overall misery by insisting that such caching could not exceed more than 15 days. Would you care to give us some examples of how you would have hoped we would have used the Translate API if not for simple uses cases of translating user created articles, blogs or even chats ? I am sorry to say it Adam, but you have FAILED US MISERABLY - likely not just you personally but both you and your GOOG colleagues who are incapable of ensuring that you had in place decent business models for all of the fantastic things that your techies were able to cook up. I am sorry, but I have staked too much on what used to be GOOG's solid name and reputation. Being an independent pre-funded developer, it does not take much. BUT - NEVER AGAIN WILL I MAKE THAT MISTAKE !!! Regards, Zdravko On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Adam Feldman <adam.feld...@google.com> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > When we created the Search APIs many years ago, we hoped that they would > help developers create innovative websites and applications that provide > value to end users. Unfortunately, we've found that most requests to these > APIs involve scraping, data mining, or other usage that doesn't improve the > end users' experience. Because we've failed in this respect, we've decided > to deprecate them. I understand that not everyone was misusing them in > these ways - and certainly don't mean to imply otherwise! I feel for those > who are doing great things here, but there simply aren't enough of you to > allow us to continue supporting these APIs. > > Thanks for your understanding, > Adam > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Mark Essel (@victusfate) <mes...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Anyone understand why this is being deprecated? Read the official post >> and specifics but no details. >> >> Well used Apis become infrastructure, the removal of apis sends a >> clear signal for the future. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google AJAX APIs" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> google-ajax-search-api@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> google-ajax-search-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-ajax-search-api?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google AJAX APIs" group. > To post to this group, send email to > google-ajax-search-api@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-ajax-search-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-ajax-search-api?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google AJAX APIs" group. To post to this group, send email to google-ajax-search-api@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-ajax-search-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-ajax-search-api?hl=en.
