Sh*t flows downhill. When you have management (or one particular top dog) who no longer understands the vision of the company, then you get employees who no longer care to either. It's the single most effective way to ruin a company. As usual, it always goes right back to money and power.
No surprise here! Google can't do anything on its own. Made Google videos, but it couldn't compete with YouTube, so it bought YouTube. Got mad because AAPL makes the best consumer products (by far), so it copied the iPhone and iPad. Now it's mad because Facebook is better for advertising, so it's copying that, too.
No wonder why Google and Samsung get along so well; neither one of them EVER does anything original without stealing it from AAPL or someone else, first!
Agreed, the "old" Google is gone. The new Google, well.... it scares me and I would never touch Google+.
I get the same feeling I had when Steve Jobs took over Apple (again) in '97. Bad vibes. Apple had 10% market share and had just started turning a profit after years of horrible loses, then "he" came back and turned Apple Computer into "The iPod company"... Same bad mojo here.
No offense, but your article adds very little of anything to the original open letter. It doesn't even add much brevity. What it adds is a hint of sarcasm in the metaphors you use, which is hard to justify considering you don't give any actual opinion. Poor effort.
Google needs not to make facebook or twitter but better, google needs something totally different. 3D avatars exploring the web in a shared experience, or even going for a walk google earth from within the browser (or with a separate viewer not depending on directx), that could do it. MS has tried to do it in the game version, but not as successful as they dreamed. This is a still an unfilled land that could use more companies playing in.
[citation][nom]PRIUSAAPL[/nom]No surprise here! Google can't do anything on its own. Made Google videos, but it couldn't compete with YouTube, so it bought YouTube. Got mad because AAPL makes the best consumer products (by far), so it copied the iPhone and iPad. Now it's mad because Facebook is better for advertising, so it's copying that, too.No wonder why Google and Samsung get along so well; neither one of them EVER does anything original without stealing it from AAPL or someone else, first![/citation]
Fucking amazing that you can turn something that doesn't even mention Apple into something about Apple. No wonder everybody hates Apple fan-girls, go troll an article that's actually about Apple.
As much as people are willing to dismiss this story as a fabrication, I say there must be some truth behind this. As mentioned in his entry, Google pulling its free APIs was not a smart move, as it just got many people and developers upset. That kind of negative publicity is cannot work well for a company that depends on its users to make a profit.
If a company is open and allows people to vent constructively or give input on any given topic they tend to grow but when that becomes taboo for fear of termination or being written up the company loose the edge that got them where they are.
I miss the days of Google coming out with something cool every other month and then scaring the crap out of everyone they compete with. Siri still isnt as good as google voice rec and Siri is just a software that to get it they bought out the company that made it. Although I like the premise of Siri to allow natural speech more. I know there is an engineer some where at apple saying "I told them its not ready but no one wants to hear that".
Im tired of companies getting so big they just stop putting quality control into products its all about hitting the product cycle or your doomed. I hope google gets their heads on straight because MS is jealous of Google Search. Apple Jealous of Google Maps and Mail and now Google is Jealous of Facebook. Its a vicious circle to compete with an entrenched product that they really dont directly compete with. Im not going to stop using google search because of Facebook thats just rediculous. Microsoft needed to go into search engines for what reason ?
The same as every other to big corporation " if someone else is making money on something else, then we are missing out" then they call it a loss.
i dont understand...
a company that needs to make a profit shouldn't seek to make the most they can?
i never understood why google video didnt take off, as it was far better at video than youtube, but than again, you tube has a social element to it...
google+ i would use it if friends did... but as it stands i just dont care...
what google should do, and this would be genius, intergrate social aspects into every area of the internet. lets say there is a small menu to the left, you click on it, and out pops chatrooms, voice, video and just text, and all of the users are all on the same site. like toms, right now to the left would be a chat menu for everyone on the same site. if google allowed for semi anonymity, like you can use a fake screen name for sites of questionable content and such, they would win in the social aspect. or a browse the internet with friends kind of deal.
what they need to do is make a must have product, and people will follow.
Not sure why this is even 'news', this happens to pretty much every company here in silicon valley. Small company / start up has a good work atmosphere, you feel like you are part of the process and can make a difference, then once the company hits a certain size or is bought. The employee becomes a number, lost in the corporate politics of people climbing the ladder not trying to improve the product or company.
in other reality based news, the sun rose today and there is a chance of rain
I have to admit that this confirms some of the things I figured were happening inside google.
As far as the dude jumping ship to join Microsoft, frankly at this point I dont think any one can really say they aren't innovating. They are just doing it the new Microsoft way..
Windows Phone 7 is a great piece of engineering, and they are getting it together with their cloud offerings and bing is acceptable as a search engine.
Google has gone down hill, really starting with the creation of android, especially from an engineering perspective. Android is nothing more than a collection of already developed technologies, put together in a method that will work on a phone... using the JVM for all applications was in my opinion a mistake, given the inherent performance penalty. But it was a quick way to get a product to market, and that they did, now a serious player in the field. But it was not in my opinion innovative, but rather it was a best effort to not get left behind in a key area, the ultimately despite my opinion is a huge success.
As to "beginning of a downfall or growing pain" I'd have to say its likely a growing pain.
Google has some very good services to offer via google apps, tight integration between desktop/phone and all that, and with a solid foot hold on what is driving the market today, and in to the future. Even if they are slowing on innovation, and becoming that which they in the beginning hated, the train has far too much momentum at this point to be stopped. Google will be a contender from now until probably the next 30 years, but as far as first place goes, those days may soon be over for them, IMO.
Microsoft I am betting is going to regain traction, but hey, opinions are like bung holes right?
I believe the reason that Google's employees never pushed it into the social network space is because that way of thinking is antithetical to the "do no evil" concept. Nevermind what the higher-ups believe, the development efforts at Google were done by the entry-level developers and engineers, who still drank the cool-aid and still believed in the do-no-evil concept. Problem is, social networking in its current facebook form is evil. It's all about getting people to give FB their private info, and to agree to allow FB to sell it to third parties. Its achieved through temporal separation of the agreement and the information, psychological obfuscation of the intended goal, and clever marketing. What "do no evil" entry-level Google engineer is going to try to build that? So the concept has to be pushed down from above, rather than cultivated from below. And all along the way a significant proportion of the engineers are going to be averse because it goes against what they personally believe in.
Frankly, they'd be so much better off if they got lucky and uncovered the "next big thing". But unfortunately, copying FB isn't it.