If we’re making that comparison, absolutely. Both are in the ads business, but I get actual utility from one company’s products and the other company’s products make me feel worse at the end of the day.
I realize that many people love social media and derive happiness from FB, but it’s just not the case for me and the main reason I couldn’t work there.
> If we’re making that comparison, absolutely. Both are in the ads business, but I get actual utility from one company’s products and the other company’s products make me feel worse at the end of the day.
I wish I could know which company is which by your comment, but I can't, any could be in any place here.
It's pretty clear that Google is the one with useful and revolutionary products (Android, Maps, Earth, YouTube, Gmail, Google Pay) while Facebook is basically only useful for groups nowadays or for Instagram (is that really useful?) and WhatsApp (which they bought and introduced stories on. Wohoo. Innovative.)
It's not that clear for me. Out of your examples, only Gmail and Google Pay are actually created by Google (or by people working at Google at the time of creation), the rest are acquisitions.
And your use case for Facebook et al is obviously different than how many others see it. Being the first truly wordwide social network has to count for something, even though we're not sure it was a good idea in the first place. The world is big and people use/like different things, and it's all relative in the end.
Hence wfhbata's comment without any naming, can be seen from both perspectives.
I realize that many people love social media and derive happiness from FB, but it’s just not the case for me and the main reason I couldn’t work there.