Slashdot Mirror
No Secret Plan at Google?
daltonlp writes "A number of smart folks have speculated that Google might leverage its computational resources to create some kind of massive online application delivery platform. Here's why they are probably wrong." One of more intelligent insights into Google, and it's pleasantly devoid of theories of Google taking over the world.
If there was a secret plan you wouldn't know about it anyway so saying "There is no secret plan" is nonsense.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
What amazes me is that google constantly comes out with USEFUL and credible apps.
Google Search = has long been the standard
Google Groups = complete usenet archive
Google Mail = arguably the best free email service now.
Google Local = returns excellent results even for my small town!
Google Maps = it is all I use to plan a trip now
Google Search = it is all I use to search my 1/2 terrabyte of storage.
Picasa = one heck of an image manipulation/retrieval program.
I for one welcome an innovative company that provides me with excellent apps. If they wanna design an OS - I'm yelling to GO FOR IT!
It will take someone with google's clout to do this.
Mods, this isn't flame bait but why the fuck is this news? This hasn't been posted numerous times. "A number of smart folks have speculated..." Which smart folks? Why the fuck can't you link to them? "..Here's why they are probably wrong.." One view of why they're wrong. Oh and from TFA "But this theory could be wrong." You know, I know I'm bitchin' and moaning, but I've been a long time reader of /. but this site is really going down hill.
We need to do something to make this site back on top again and it starts with appropriate articles, not loosely written blogger tripe.
I don't care what they do or how many sites they have that are trying to "control my online experience". Right now, I use their search engine and their email. Their maps look pretty, but it is still easier to use mapquest for me.
It's nice to read things like this article, because until Google is "selling" me something, and it comes preloaded (or pre-bookmarked) on my computer, I am not concerned in the least bit. Why do we have to hear about why or why not they have a consipracy to take over the world? They write good stuff for the web, and people use their stuff by choice. I've never heard someone outside of Slashdot say "Man, that company Google is taking over my life. I can't do anything online without being forced into using Google."
I do like the part at the end of the article about MS having to test their new browser against Gmail, Google Maps, and Google itself. It does add a bit of irony that finally MS and IE have to worry about being compatible instead of the other way around.
Google has no secret plan - posted March 17,2005
Hey look. Someone else is predicting that Google will user their super-mega-ultimate-supreme server farm to replace your PC's operating system.
That sounds familiar.
I do not buy it. Let's look at some of the arguments:
"Google has hired OS experts like Rob Pike and Marc Lucovsky! Clearly they are toiling away on the Manhattan project of OS research, which will culminate in some kind of...SOMETHING! Some kind of something which will sweep Microsoft from the face of the earth!"
A more likely scenario is that Google does indeed perform OS research, but not for you and I. For themselves. Their clusters use a custom filesystem. They run linux, but it's been modified from the original Red Hat. They need (and can attract) smart folks to build and extend these systems. But it's all for the benefit of storage and search. They didn't hire Rob and Marc to work on giving you online spreadsheets. Sorry.
"Google uses wowie-zowie javascript for Gmail and Google maps! Clearly this is the harbinger of their browser-based OS-like-thingy!"
I think they use javascript because it works well. It's one step beyond html. Like any other technology-driven company, they'll use the best tools they can, even if those tools aren't mainstream yet. I've looked at the source code for both Gmail and Google maps, and I believe they are two entirely different projects, run by two separate groups. The goal of one is to make a good web-based email service. The goal of the other is to make a good online map service. I find it difficult to fit those pieces together into a master strategy. I think they evolved independently.
"Google has invested in native clients like Picasa and Keyhole maps and Desktop Search! Clearly this is an aggressive move into the consumer application space!"
Well, that's partly true. But Google isn't primarily interested in selling consumer apps. I think Picasa and Keyhole were acquired because Google wants to own delivery channels (browsers) for data that doesn't currently have a good delivery channel. Html data is delivered by a web browser, and it's probably a bit late for Google to own that. But Geographic data (the real thing, not road maps) has no browser, except either a full-blown GIS system or a lightweight client like keyhole. Photos on your hard drive have no browser (unless you have a mac).
I think Google desktop search was kind of a fluke. Something they could do fairly easily (right?) with some market opportunity (because windows default search BLOOOOOOOOOOWS). A low-investment play that incidentally forced MS and Yahoo to play catch-up.
Let's talk about business strategy. It's fun to imagine that Google has some awesome master plan for controlling all computerdom. But I have a simpler theory that I think fits the evidence:
A) Google cares first and foremost about web search. Most of their architect-level employees will be working on making search better. I think one of Google's big shots said something similar right out loud. Search is what they do.
B) Google cares secondly about new kinds of search. Book search. Place search. Image search. Discussion group search. Product search. Email search. Because they have an advertising model that can be targeted to most any type of search. (Google also cares about new kinds of search because web ads may not work forever.)
C) Google cares thirdly about interesting new things. These come from employees. Depending on which source you believe, Google employees spend either 10% or 20% of their time working on personal projects. (Update: It looks like 20% is the correct number) The really successful projects get publicized via Google labs. Google maps started as one of these. I bet Gmail did too.
I'm especially interested in (C). 20% is a lot of time. Would your company willingly slash 20% from its developer-hours? Why is this important?
For one thing, it's the world's best marketing department. Those Google labs pro
They don't need to reinvent the wheel.
Get your own free personal location tracker
She predicts a world where all the apps are central and we simply connect to them in a server/client mode. This way- things are portable to us. Our PC at home and our PCs are world no longer become unsynched- they are one. Goto your neighbors house- and it is just like your home environment cause it is portable.
Well- right now many of us carry memory stick key fobs on our keychains. I current carry a gig USB stick. How long time someone puts a bluetooth device inside it? How long until they can add a processor die and some RAM? In ten year- you may be carrying your entire PC on your keychain. Put your keys into your monitor at work- and there is your environment- no network needed. No fees to pay to a central server. If you could carry your PC as you would a keyfob- would you care about having a centralized server?
The guy who wrote the link submitted the article. Way to go for self-promotion.
Come on get real google has the largest looming threat of it's corporate life on the horizon one from which they will not survive unless they take serious action right now. When MS releases longhorn and their new browser I fully expect that MSN search is gonna be wound into everything they can put it in. This will have the same exact effect that it had on netscape certain death. The only way to avoid this and have any chance to compete is to push firefox like mad, push firefox specific features, xul etc... In effect they have
to push their own version of firefox as a platform if they are to survive.... But it may already be too late..
I love FF and Google but they are about to fall into the same mistake as others before them by not responding to the threat.
Got Code?
Hey Google people, try this for a personal project...
Take the same Linux you run in house, customize it so it can boot on a regular PC. It launches into Firefox. There are icons with colorful links to Gmail (for your mail), OpenOffice (for your word processing) and Picassa (for photos). Call it GoogleOS.
The real reason not to have a plan is that if you have a plan, you risk feeling obligated to follow it even when conditions change and the plan no longer makes sense.
By being adaptable, and taking advantage of opportunities when they appear, you can take over the world without a "plan".
Of course, you still need to have done all the preparation so you can sieze the opportunities when they appear, but since you can't know ahead of time what or when, let your people work on their own stuff 20% of the time. By the laws of chance, some of them will be doing what you will need.
Profit!!
There is not nearly enough love in the world, but there is far too much trust.
Thinking that Google is going to enter the OS business or that if they did, they would have a chance is not the sign of a sound, rational mind. It's like taking candy from babies. And dealing with that conspiracy theory doesn't address the other conspiracy theories.
Third, he ignores that Google is highly overvalued for a "search" company. Google's market cap is $49 billion. If they are really just a "search" company, then maybe their P/E should be more in line with high growth companies at around 40 instead of 124. Yes, that means dropping the value of the company by a factor of three. I base this on that their search advertising looks relatively saturated to me. I don't see where the huge growth in value is going to come from.
Fourth, he ignores that this looks exactly like a dotcom moment. Google is making a sizeable profit (which is vastly better than all but a handful of dotcoms past or present), but they aren't exhibiting the kind of growth potential (IMHO, of course) that justifies 124 times P/E.
Finally, he places way too much emphasis on getting Microsoft to play good doggie. Being able to force Microsoft to make their sites compatible with yours isn't that interesting. The New York Times or Amazon gets that as well. And after all, Microsoft has by far the largest army of programmers in the world. It's not going to have a measurable impact.
The Unknown
As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.
--Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing
Direct away from face when opening.
>I think Picasa and Keyhole were acquired...for data that doesn't currently have a good delivery channel.
The other interesting thing that Picasa does is make Google's job easier.
Images are a pain to search for, because Google has to get likely information about their content from alt tags (that no one uses) or context.
My undrestanding is Picasa writes the users' comments and information to the EXIF tags of their images. This allows Google to read that information without having to guess context from the content of the webpage. This is an enormous benefit, for what was probably a relatively minimal investment.