

Google - A company in mid Life Crises... really? - akarambir
http://nainomics.blogspot.com/2011/11/google-company-in-mid-life-crises.html

======
iptoc
I am quite amazed at this PLAGIARISM that you are doing on your blog. Why is
it so hard to simply give us (here on HN) a link to the original article which
is actually: [http://www.slideshare.net/beingpractical/google-in-its-
midli...](http://www.slideshare.net/beingpractical/google-in-its-midlife-
crisis) ?

Why do you have to copy the entire article on your blog word for word and then
give us a link to your blog? Adsense-greedy?

I asked you the same question in a different thread:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3283447> but you simply deleted your
thread instead of giving a proper response and attribution to the proper
article.

~~~
akarambir
I have given Link to the original post in the first line itself. Read the
first line which says- "PJ posted last friday"

Moreover I was trying to put my counter point on that article.

~~~
iptoc
Fair enough. I took this post in bad faith as well after you went ahead and
deleted your thread in <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3283447> instead
of replying to my comment.

Yes, this post does have attribution but I still doubt whether you have the
permission from the original author to copy entire content word for word in
your blog. You usually need a license from the original author to do that kind
of a thing.

A better way to do this could be to quote only some interesting parts or only
those parts from the original post against which you want to present a
counterpoint. That might be reasonable as per "fair use".

~~~
akarambir
ok, i get the point. Will always keep in mind. Thanks Susam sir

------
harigov
I think, Google has been playing rather well. For so long, it was more of a
loosely connected free services rather than a single ecosystem that seamlessly
work together. There was nothing, for the most parts, preventing any person
from moving to a different third-party service [of all the services that
Google offers] rather than using Google's services. I don't think Google
bothered for so long because it had no reason to. Whether people use Google's
services or any other services, Google will make money either way using
adsense and adwords. Now the situation is changing, and changing very fast.

Google+ is not just about another social network, I believe it will be the
soul of all the services that Google offers. Most of the services that Google
offers worked pretty much independently. Except the Google logo at some corner
of the site, there was n't much of a similarity in any of those services. The
result is a mess. Google+ unifies all these services like never before. Social
networking comes much later, I believe. Google is at an advantage over other
companies, if it plays well. Facebook/twitter can let users share with their
friends. Google can let users share, work and collaborate with their friends.
Sharing in every form conceivable - sms, voice, image, blog, book, document,
presentation, video, music, app, you-name-it.

Now for the problems that it faces, the biggest problem was with the platform
that they were betting on. For long, Google's motto was - anything good for
internet is good for google. That's no longer the case, and it won't be going
forward. They were pretty successful for the most parts because they bet on
open platform, and the reason for present crisis also seems to be because of
the same. Google is no longer the internet [they never were but don't take it
literally], and not everything that happens on internet benefits google.
Facebook has an advantage here given all the businesses that they have signed
up to use FB OpenGraph. However, they still have their own issues. If Google
acts smart, Google+ has pretty good chance of being successful.

------
kingkawn
I have a cousin who is 12, him and his friends have been kept off of facebook
by virtue of their parents being there. Every single person in his age group
is on Google+. Are there any demographic breakdowns of the g+ users anywhere?
I am interested to know if this anecdote is just that, or if it represents a
larger trend.

~~~
guard-of-terra
If there would be one then it would be affected by observing since Google will
close those profiles of 12 years olds. Thus snatching defeat from the jaws of
victory.

------
leoc
> Over years, Google is struggling with innovation.

They're having problems with execution, too. The Google Talk/Google Voice
rollout/rollback/merger/turfwar/clusterf*ck is a classic display of big-
company ineptitude. It's like something you'd expect from the online services
of a Japanese consumer-electronics giant.

~~~
csmt
You are forgetting Google Buzz/Wave/Knoll, services that are shut down after
launching with a lot of fanfare. Now days every time Google launches a new
service I am not sure whether that service will be around for another year or
so.

Except search I have lost faith in Google to solve my problems with new
services. Google's main aim seems to be to serve ads. All the services they
have launched for free is to serve more ads. They copy popular services to
serve more ads, make it free, and kill competition.

------
iFire
I believe that Google is politely asking for permission through Google+ to
share what it already knows with external entities.

What do you think of the Google+ strategy?

------
harigov
Related to platforms, I think Google still lacks the clear vision that Apple
seems to have. Within next few years, one can watch movies, listen to music,
browse internet, read books, play games, respond to mails, be in touch with
friends, work on docs, spreadsheets, etc., using either iPhone, iPad, iPod,
Apple TV [if anything new gets released], MacBook, and Mac Desktop. Most of
these are already possible, but what I am talking about is complete
interoperability, while still having the same experience of using the specific
device. I believe, Apple will work closely with the app developers to make
their applications even more portable across the various devices that Apple
builds. With Microsoft gearing up for Windows 8, they also seem to have
similar future in mind. I did n't come across any such plans from Google. I
believe, Google would be at a disadvantage if they don't have a similar full
encompassing ecosystem. And I don't see ChromeBook getting significant market
share anytime soon [if at all].

------
dlevine
The reason why Google is already facing mid-life crises is that the pace of
innovation has sped up so much. It used to be that a company could build
something like Google and sit on its laurels for 20 years. IBM was the
undisputed king for at least 50 years, and Microsoft was king for about 20.

The problem is not other search engines, but disruptive innovation that makes
search engines obsolete. And this disruptive innovation seems to decrease its
cycle time by about 50% each generation. So after Google has been the leader
for <10 years, they are already worried about something new coming along and
knocking them off their perch. And I think that fear is justified.

~~~
Deestan
> The problem is not other search engines, but disruptive innovation that
> makes search engines obsolete.

Can you elaborate on what these innovations are? I cannot think of any. Or are
you talking about a theoretical future problem?

~~~
enjo
When I've heard this argument, most people talk about Siri.

------
ennovates
recently there was an article about this comparing between email service and
social media. Does anyone has that link?

~~~
winter_blue
s/their/there ??

~~~
ennovates
my apologies. thanks for pointing out. I'm not so good at english.

------
stevedekorte
Sounds about right - average lifespan of an S&P 500 company is now ~15 years.

------
dextorious
Wow, this is one of the most detailed and well written articles I've ever read
on the topic.

------
ditojim
you make some good points, but most of this is just uninformed opinions on
various google products.

~~~
akarambir
Uninformed opinions on various google products.

Can you give an example?

~~~
jackarleth
You seem to have a strong opinion on Google+, yet you don't understand the
'grand' concept of Google+.

What Google is trying to do with Google+ is take hold of the information
market that resides within social media and use this information in
combination with adwords. Google wants to integrate Google+ into all of it's
products, starting with Youtube and give all the Google products a uniform
experience. I'm flabbergasted that you have a problem with this since this is
the main goal for Apple. (I assume that you have Apple products, since you
talk in such lengths and positive manner of Siri) Google+ is also not about a
social graph, it's about doing social media the right, natural way.

You also don't understand how Adwords works when you talk about Siri. A
'click' is a hit to the page, be it a click, enter, wget, or voice search of
Siri. So searches in Google with Siri will earn Google money. Also iOS uses
Google Maps as it's map application so Siri uses Google Maps, you just don't
see it.

A last inaccuracy: “Don’t try to do something in everything. Rather focus on
doing everything in something.” This would be exactly why Google has been
stopping so many of it's products.

Next to these points there is a whole lot of stuff that you are simply wrong
about.

Edit: changed positivism to a correct use of words

~~~
dextorious
"""What Google is trying to do with Google+ is take hold of the information
market that resides within social media and use this information in
combination with adwords. Google wants to integrate Google+ into all of it's
products, starting with Youtube and give all the Google products a uniform
experience."""

Which part of the article gives you the impression that the author doesn't
understand that? He _specifically_ calls this integration, and his problem is
that it is done badly.

"""I'm flabbergasted that you have a problem with this since this is the main
goal for Apple."""

Wait what? Apple goal is to "take hold of the information market that resides
within social media and use this information in combination with adwords."????

Even if you replace adwords with something else, like iAds, this doesn't make
sense.

"""(I assume that you have Apple products, since you talk in such lengths and
positivism of Siri) Google+ is also not about a social graph, it's about doing
social media the right, natural way."""

In what way is Google+ more "natural" than Facebook?

Also, "positivism": you keep using that word. I don't think it means what you
think it means.

"""You also don't understand how Adwords works when you talk about Siri. A
'click' is a hit to the page, be it a click, enter, wget, or voice search of
Siri. So searches in Google with Siri will earn Google money."""

No, they wont. This doesn't even make sense. For one, Siri could bypass Google
altogether --the user is using primarily Siri, not Google, so the results
could come from anywhere.

Second, even if Google is queried, Siri hides the Google results page and just
returns the appropriate result as a spoken list. Do you really believe people
would pay if their ads are now shown to the end user?

"""Also iOS uses Google Maps as it's map application so Siri uses Google Maps,
you just don't see it."""

I'd guess the author is well aware of this. Are you aware that Apple has bough
a mapping company and is looking to integrate its own maps in a future iOS
release?

~~~
jackarleth
I tried writing my remarks as short as possible, it seems that it caused some
problems. I'll try to correct them in a lengthier way =P

"Which part of the article gives you the impression that the author doesn't
understand that?" The writer does not see any advantages of the integration of
the Google search engine in Google+. I'm sadly forced to understand that he
fails to get the idea behind it. Searching in shared posts in Google+ is one
of the key features that Google+ has over Facebook and other social networks
since it will let you simply search for "that interesting site my friend
shared with me last month" instead of going through his posts manually.

My second point was cleared up by true_religion, thanks for that.

Google+ is more natural because of it's Circle system. You don't broadcast all
your interesting findings to everyone you know, you tell it to the select
group of people who might be interested, just like in real-life. Next to that,
as said before, you can search the posts and shares in Google+. You can also
see your profile in the point of view of others on the web, in your circles.
This makes setting up your profile a lot more natural and easy.

I have to admit that "positivism" is indeed the wrong word. I stand corrected
and I'll change it.

"No, they wont. This doesn't even make sense. For one, Siri could bypass
Google altogether" Then where will Siri get the results? Siri can't pull them
out of thin air, they have to come out of a search engine and if Apple values
the "magical" experience of it's users then they should use Google. The user
is using Siri as a GUI that takes the Google results and speaks them out. But
the results need to come from somewhere.

"I'd guess the author is well aware of this. Are you aware that Apple has
bough a mapping company and is looking to integrate its own maps in a future
iOS release?" I'm aware of the "3D"gimmick (it's nice to have 3D, but I would
prefer to look where I'm driving/walking/cycling) that they bought and the
mapping company they bought. But I think that is a bad move, since Apple would
then be inventing the wheel again, only to disconnect themselves from Google
maps. If Apple is willing to pump so much money into collecting data of roads
and buildings all over the world, then they would have set up their own
carrier. Since the cost of starting your own carrier is peanuts compared to
photographing the entire world.

I hope this made things a bit more clear.

~~~
dextorious
"""I hope this made things a bit more clear."""

Yeah, much clearer. Here are my remarks:

"""Searching in shared posts in Google+ is one of the key features that
Google+ has over Facebook and other social networks since it will let you
simply search for "that interesting site my friend shared with me last month"
instead of going through his posts manually."""

Maybe, but that would be trivial for Facebook to add. It's not like full-text
search is rocket technology. And in this domain, PageRank is not even needed.

"""Google+ is more natural because of it's Circle system. You don't broadcast
all your interesting findings to everyone you know, you tell it to the select
group of people who might be interested, just like in real-life. """

Yeah, that's nice. But does it bother people using Facebook? I don't see it.
Also Facebook added some similar features lately.

"""Then where will Siri get the results? Siri can't pull them out of thin air,
they have to come out of a search engine and if Apple values the "magical"
experience of it's users then they should use Google."""

Not necessarily. There are better sources than Google for a lot of stuff Siri
caters for. For example, Siri already uses Wolfram Alpha for math, stock,
general information related searches. Apple could provide its own dictionary
searches, wikipedia searches, it's own map data for location searches, use the
iTunes DB for music and lyrics searches, IMDB for movie times and movie/actor
info, Amazon et al for shopping, travelocity of something for airplane
tickets, etc covering a lot of ground query-wise. And they could also switch
to Bing in a heartbeat. You get the idea.

"""But I think that is a bad move, since Apple would then be inventing the
wheel again, only to disconnect themselves from Google maps."""

No, they won't invent the wheel, they bought a company that has already
invented and made one. And it only makes sense to disconnected from Google
Maps, a service by a competitor mobile OS vendor, that could even cut them off
of it altogether when he wishes.

------
gavaletz
It really bothers me when people post their opinions as facts -- citations
needed.

~~~
dextorious
It really bothers me when people

a) fail to see the "rants" in the byline of the article blog

b) fail to read the "Below are my views on what I believe are the 10 biggest
challenges Google is facing" part on the article intro

c) confuse an blog post (and a fine one at that) with some research paper or
encyclopedia article and ask for citations

d) cannot differentiate between (well presented) _arguments_ (such as those in
the article) and _opinions_.

------
troopstar
Me: ... You: Seriously? Really? Seriously? Seriously? Really? Really? Me: ...
You: ... Really? Seriously? Seriously?

Are you this stupid? Jersey Shore fans, please stop.

