Why doesn't google.com validate?

better idear how about thay check the sponsered link more often it used to have a link to a pedophil site

google will probably change its mind before long, because logic says that w3c-validation is an indicator of accessibility, and accessibility is in the interest of web users, so there should naturally be a preference for valid pages, even if only slight, it's certainly one to add to the 200-long list.

If you check any of the big companies...many have 150+ errors. Perhaps it means that W3C is just a big joke on us that follow it to the bone.

Boo! Excuses, excuses. Google needs to be a leader in standards and accessibility, like Yahoo! is doing. Not make excuses on how they can save money (bandwidth) and other B.S.

Thank you!

Wow... I'm kinda surprised at how casually this issue was addressed. Is it really that hard for Google to see the benefits of a standards based internet? I wonder if they would see things differently if they would have been the ones to set the standard for HTML?

I wonder why the Google channel doesn't allow comments on any of their videos or channel. How do you know what the people like or dislike, or want from Google if Google doesn't recieve responses?

I guess we're supposed to walk up to their front desk ;).

Basically the google spokes loser said that they don't validate because 20 extra characters might cost their company a .03% increase in operating fees for delivering their website. Then he started blaming everyone else for google being lazy and then had the audacity to state that they will only do it, if someone else can do it for them for free.

Well, Validation is best thing for a web developer mostly. And sometimes, it is useful to believe that the webpage will be looking good in all OS and browsers and gadgets.