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.

60 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. NOW I can have my coffee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can't do anythign until I have my google news of the day

    1. Re:NOW I can have my coffee by Ulric · · Score: 2, Funny

      And today's big news is that someone believes that Google are going to not do something.

    2. Re:NOW I can have my coffee by flumps · · Score: 3, Funny

      ... McScoogle? Sounds like some sort of Scottish clan

      --
      "So there he is, risen from the dead. Like that fella, E. T." - Father Ted Crilly
  2. Bandwidth? by bird603568 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They didn't hire Rob and Marc to work on giving you online spreadsheets.
    If they did this or an OS, which they wont as the article says wouldn't it cost them and the used massave amounts of bandwidth?

  3. sound like Google is very successful by coolcold · · Score: 5, Funny

    people started to spreading FUD as to how Google would dominate the world.

    I for one welcome our Google overlord

    --
    I am harvesting funny/good quotes. Please help by putting them in your sigs :)
  4. Definition of "Secret" by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Definition of "Secret" by nyri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you want keep a secret you have to keep it secret that you have a secret to keep.

    2. Re:Definition of "Secret" by micromoog · · Score: 2, Funny
      Furthermore, you have to keep it secret that you have to keep it secret that you have a secret to keep.

      -1, Obvious, had to be said

  5. Google's usefulness by episodic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Google's usefulness by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's a world of difference between designing a few good applications and designing a viable alternative to the OSes that we have today.

      Two words for you: driver support. Do you know how much effort is involved in getting just that relatively minor part of an OS right?

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    2. Re:Google's usefulness by Ciderx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But...

      Google Groups 2 = complete usenet archive, now horrifically crippled by terrible interface
      Google Desktop Search = the worst of all the desktop search apps
      Picasa 2 = The upgrade that feels like a downgrade
      Google Image Search = nigh on useless search engine that often points to images that don't really exist on the web page, or the web page itself even exists.

      Its not all good, y'know.

    3. Re:Google's usefulness by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 4, Interesting

      designing a viable alternative to the OSes that we have today.

      Two words for you: driver support.

      OK, I know this is all alleged, so this is all moot, but wasn't the idea behind a Google OS that it would be a hosted OS? In other words we access it remotely, and Google decide on the hardware? Why would a hosted OS need driver support (I'm assuming that Google already have drivers to support the hardware they currently have, etc)?

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    4. Re:Google's usefulness by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      agoogle constantly comes out with USEFUL and credible apps
      Google Groups = complete usenet archive


      I beg to differ. They have not 'come up' with it. They just bought the dejanews data. Also the new interface is worse then the old version they had. Dejanews was much, much easier to use fronm a Usenet point of view. The old google was not great, but it was OK. What they have now is, to me, completele crap. I rather use Outlook Express instead of Google and I say that as a slrn user.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:Google's usefulness by tdhillman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That of course is predicated on the idea that losing your internet connection is going to be a part of the picture as the technology grows.

      Given that as recently as fifteeen years ago no one knew what the internet was beyond a select few, it's not out of the question that the coming fifteen will give birth to a ubiquitous internet presence.

      Current technology will die and be replaced by another paradigm- it is just a matter of time. Heck, reasonably usefu GUIs are merely 20 something. There's a lot of change to come and many folks will argue that online app delivery will be the norm in the future- giving Apple and other companies a chance to reap the benefits.

      --
      befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
    6. Re:Google's usefulness by mr.newt · · Score: 2, Informative

      Driver support is not a "relatively minor part of an OS," driver support is the definition of OS. (OS stands for operating system, remember?)

      Consult: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

    7. Re:Google's usefulness by King+Babar · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So lose your internet connection and your PC becomes just a heavy paperweight? Gee, thanks but no thanks.

      And this is so much different than what happens if Google didn't host your files?

      More seriously, I think arguments about how screwed you are when you lose your internet connection sound a bit like arguments That Crazy Old Man used to make about electricity, and why those new-fangled electric gadgets were never going to catch on.

      --

      Babar

    8. Re:Google's usefulness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      OK, I know this is all alleged, so this is all moot, but wasn't the idea behind a Google OS that it would be a hosted OS? In other words we access it remotely, and Google decide on the hardware? Why would a hosted OS need driver support (I'm assuming that Google already have drivers to support the hardware they currently have, etc)?

      What you're describing isn't an OS.

    9. Re:Google's usefulness by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Two words for you: driver support. Do you know how much effort is involved in getting just that relatively minor part of an OS right?

      Then implement GoogleOS over the Linux kernel (or BSD kernel, or whatever). Let the kernel folks worry about drivers and the kernel itself. Let Google pick it up from init and take care of the rest. Perhaps work with the kernel people on adding kernel hooks that will allow to boost the userspace capabilities towards whatever Google wants to obtain.

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    10. Re:Google's usefulness by Wildclaw · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree with most of what you said. I just wanted to give you a small tips about how to get the old Google Groups interface. Since Gougle Groups 2 is still in beta the new interface hasn't been propagated to Google's country domains. This means that you can still use groups.google.ca etc. to get the old interface.

    11. Re:Google's usefulness by pebs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That argument is flawed. Crazy Old Men ranting about electricity is completely different. People rely on their computers, especially in this time=money world.

      People weren't commonly using electricity, so they had nothing to lose by trying it (or not trying it for that matter). But as other arguments are saying, that the internet will be as reliable as ever with very little down time, to remove this problem, then it seems like this remote OS could work; Of course this is ignoring the fact that if someone walked by and cut your cable you'd be screwed.


      both responses so far missed the point (or maybe got it, but argued against it still). You rely on electricity, right? Without electricity your computer wouldn't run (granted you can have batteries, but that runs out). No one (other than Crazy Old Men) sits around and says "don't rely on a computer because you might have a power failure". We just use our computers, and when the power fails, we wait until it comes back up.

      If people come to rely on their internet connections the way they do power, it'll be the same scenario. Like the way we have battery backup and generators, their will be a backup connections for those who really need 24/7 connections. Your fiber connection fails? Use cable/DSL/dial-up/cellular as backup. For example, my cable provider already provides dial-up in addition to cable which I can use if my cable goes down.

      --
      #!/
    12. Re:Google's usefulness by Headcase88 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Eventually, they'll be so many redundant cables that this won't be an issue. Losing the Internet will eventually be like losing your power, ie, a rare occurance.

      Heck, I'll take that a step further and say it'll be like losing your phone line, ie, a really rare occurance.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    13. Re:Google's usefulness by IDontAgreeWithYou · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What do you do when your power goes out? I have not had my cable internet connection go out in months and when it does it is rarely longer than a few minutes. The power goes out at least as often and I can't use my PC at all. Then again, you can't really build an emergency internet generator can you...?

      --
      Finding other idiots on /. that agree with your opinion doesn't make it any less stupid.
    14. Re:Google's usefulness by King+Babar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, first I'd like to clarify that I'm not that interested in a Google OS in the sense of: something you need to have to boot your machine. What I *am* interested in, however, is something like a remotely mounted Googlefs archive of all my files, lovingly backed up and redundantly kept available and, yes, google-searchable at will. And the irony here is this is *just* because:

      Also, as if this needs to be said, it's not exactly the most practical idea for notebook users, is it? Last time I checked, wi-fi wasn't universal.

      Actually, NOT having user files on one machine is *precisely* the most practical idea for notebook users. Right now, the biggest pain I go through on a daily basis is syncing everything up. Given my essentially casual nature and the fact that I use any of 4 different PCs and a notebook during the day, this becomes a hassle. Now, sure, some things are already remote mounts from the university, but not everything I have really belongs there, and they have a pretty tiny quota by default.

      And as far as wifi not being universal, maybe it's not in some backwater locations, but here in central Missouri it's as good as universal. We have wireless in every building I work in, on campus generally, in every restaurant/coffeeshop I go to regularly, at home (of course). Also at every airport I've been to recently, at the conference site for the last 8 consecutive meetings I've been to, at 7 out of the last 8 hotels I've been to for said conferences... No, it's not completely seemless. Yes, quality has varied. But wireless connectivity in my life really is getting up to complete.

      Or I can put it another way: inside of 3 years, you'll be able to buy a notebook computer that will have *no hard disk at all*; it will have 20 gigs of flash, firewire and USB ports, and maybe just maybe a DVD/CD (but I doubt it). Disklessness is where I want to be, and if Google can make it so, I'll pay them actual money for that blessed state.

      --

      Babar

  6. No.. its can't be.. its... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    its... SKYNet!!!
    Whats wrong with my computer.. would I like to play a game? Global Themonuclear War?? No! Wait.. whats going on with...

    ~~~~^@^@@##$&@@@))^^^~~~ DISCONNECTED.

  7. How many open source projects by eric76 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of their developers spending 20% of their time on pet projects, I wonder how many of those are open source projects of various kinds.

    1. Re:How many open source projects by mikkom · · Score: 3, Informative
      I wonder how many of those are open source projects of various kinds.
      I don't think the employees can decide that, I think (at least that's what I've read on most sources that discuss about this matter) that your "pet projects" that are developed on worktime are owned by google.

      This is for example how orkut got born. "In affiliation" with google at the end of the page means in real world "This is google property".
    2. Re:How many open source projects by oliverthered · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The first programming company I worked for done something similar, it was understood that pet projects could be used without license for any purpose by the company, they didn't however say that I couldn't also use project.
      Because we were working small contracts about 10-20% of our time was filled with pet projects.

      I developed an application called 'shite to basic', that performed a number of tasks,
      like formating code, spell checking comments, checking tab order on forms, looking for poorly names variables, looking for complex or messy code, and dependency tracking.

      The dependency tracking bit was used for some y2k testing, it was easy to track the dependencies of all functions that use dates, or used functions that used dates etc...

      hacess also started out at work at a pet project, but ended up being used to recover some lost data in an access database for a client.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  8. A little at a time by hugesmile · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Successes are built in small increments: Add 5% functionality here. Grow 10% there. Expand by 15% in this market.

    Failures (and business declines) often happen in big chunks: Lawsuit settlement of tens of millions of dollars. Major market shift away from your technology.

    This is just smart business. Google will continue to move and enhance and grow in manageable increments. If they try to take over the world, it will be suicidal.

    Anyone remember the dot-bomb era? The survivors are those that performed managed growth and bit off pieces that could be chewed. The failures tried to take over the world, and translate eyeballs into unrealistic company valuations. Works for a while, then you get an unemployment check....

  9. Bah! Taking over the world. by FooGoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are taking over the world. They plan on taking over the world by not taking over the world. "Hey, Google is nice....they aren't taking over the world" Then before you know it you page ranking what to eat, who your friends are, what car to buy, where to live, where to work.

    Then whammo you can't live without Google telling you what to do in nice little browser friendly bites.

    Wait nevermind...I already do that.

    Lets welcome our Page Ranking pverlords.

    --
    People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
  10. Google taking over the world by FecesFlingingRhesus · · Score: 4, Funny



    pleasantly devoid of theories of Google taking over the world

    Damn they have infiltrated Slashdot now. Google I am on to you.

  11. Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google Groups = complete usenet archive

    This was acquired, not created by Google. And arguably, the old Deja capabilities were better (wild card searching) than what Google currently offers (mainly cosmetic changes and no wildcards). Personally that is what brought me over to Google, not the search engine itself. I was quite happy using Yahoo for targeted categorized searches and metacrawler for more extensive stuff. Google just had that cult of personality thing going and they've been riding the wave ever since. After all, just what makes gmail all that great anyway? I think the ad's are an abomination and I use hushmail.

    1. Re:Correction by Herbst · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I really dislike the downplaying of what Google did with the Usenet archives. Yes, they acquired older archives (Google is not around as long as Usenet is...duh). They located and assembeled various pre-Deja archives (1981-1995), they acquired Deja archives (1995-2000 - Deja never hosted anything from before 95) and since the end of 2000 they are the only ones who archive/index/host a fairly complete (text-only) Usenet feed. The addition of the pre-Deja archives was a Big Thing. Nobody managed to assemble such a complete Usenet archive ever before. Many people thought that most of these archives were lost in time, but now we have to ability to browse back to the Stone Age of the internet(!) I find this archive truly fascinating.

      Info about the timeline of this archive here and its composition here.

      Anyways, comparing UI/feature set of Deja (well, before they sold out at least) to Google Groups (as it was) and to the new Google Groups Beta (which I don't like that much either) is a different topic. I'd choose the considerably improved relevance of Google Groups searches (phrase-search, anyone?), over Deja's wildcards anytime.

  12. Time travel by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Funny

    In anticipation of the day when Google does become evil and takes over the world and we all wish that we had a time machine so that we could go back to 2005 and stop Google while we still had the chance, I've been doing some searching for plans to build such a contraption.

    It seems those Google bastards have anticipated even this!

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Time travel by outofpaper · · Score: 3, Funny

      Any one see the ebay ad on the side of that googel search

      "Time Machine For Sale
      Low Priced Time Machine
      Huge Selection! (aff)
      ebay.ca"

      Damit while google might not want to help you with your time traveling mission ebay boody will.

  13. Why is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  14. Until Google charges me... by jmcmunn · · Score: 5, Insightful


    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.

    1. Re:Until Google charges me... by Apathetic1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bit about Microsoft having to test IE7 against Gmail and Google Maps was an entertaining thought but I'd say it's more likely that Microsoft will do what Microsoft does best. IE's not done until Gmail won't run.

      The difference I can see with Google is that because their applications are web based (and thus fairly quickly repaired), the cost of another antitrust suit might outweigh the potential benefits of breaking Google's applications.

      --

      My username does not make me Apathetic. It's irony, get it?

    2. Re:Until Google charges me... by jmcmunn · · Score: 2, Insightful


      No, they are not selling me anything. They are selling advertisers the right to show me links. Which, I might add are less annoying than the flashing picture ads on every other site.

      But regardless, they are not selling me anything. They are advertising TO ME, but I ignore them.

  15. Contents (Site Appears to Be Slashdotted) by Lemurmania · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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

  16. Redirects from Googledot, I assume... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn, I think we're getting re-directs from Googledot.org. Yikes.

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
  17. Anything could be possible by millwall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The article highlights that Google developers are allowed to spend 20% of their time on what daltonlp calls "lab projects, personal projects, forever-in-beta projects, whatever".

    Google constantly produces revolutionary innovations that noone can foretell. (How many of you thought you would have 1gb of email space for free?)

    Conclusion is, I don't quite buy daltonlp's arguments for why it would be impossible that one of these lab projects is to develop browser based os/applications.

  18. 20% of company time to goof off (productively) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    From TFA:
    That 20% is also key for attracting talent. Working at Google has a lot of perks (so I hear), but for a developer, the ability to work on personal projects is magic. To my knowledge, no other company offers this.
    3M Does. Just thought I'd mention that.
  19. Mirror by Broke+Mirror · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    In case of Slashdotting, break mirror.
  20. If... by caluml · · Score: 4, Insightful
    But this theory could be wrong. If Google creates some kind of OS of the gods, I'll happily admit my error :)

    They don't need to reinvent the wheel.

  21. World domination? Nah. by mr_Spook · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Despite that Google isn't out to take over the world their impact on the net is quite amazing.

    Google's long standing tech demo that is their search engine has become pretty important. In fact, for the most part, if it doesn't come up on a google search, it doesn't exist.

    There have been so many memes spawned from google as well... Google-whacking, google fights, google bombing, etc.

    Let's not forget the chaos that ensued when GMail opened up either.

    They don't need to take over anything, really, everyone's eating out of the palm of their hand.

  22. Theories? by filmmaker · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...pleasantly devoid of theories of Google taking over the world.

    Theories? Oh, we're well past that...

  23. Google... by wpiman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I read the article by Molly Wood- and I think she may be a little off as well.

    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?

    1. Re:Google... by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think it's about horses for courses.

      A 1GB USB stick may suit you because it's portable. It carries all your data. You can go to someone else's PC and retrieve your data.

      Now, what about the programs? What about security? What about sharing of data?

      Centralised systems sometimes make a lot more sense.

  24. Parent is right and look who submitted article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The guy who wrote the link submitted the article. Way to go for self-promotion.

  25. On it's way maybe by Nijika · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Somebody put me on to this;

    Gumstix

    With platforms like THIS, what you're thinking can't be too far off. A keychain computer. Wouldn't have to be too powerful, it'd just need a small, projectable display and a virtual keyboard.

    --
    Luck favors the prepared, darling.
  26. If they are not they will perish by codepunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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?
  27. Suggested 20% project by hey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  28. Argh! No you idiots! by bigberk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Geez why would they go the route of a costly infrastructure setup when they already have what they need?

    I'll tell you what they're doing, they are using knowledge of what everyone around the whole world is searching for to tap into all kinds of consumer trend and demand opportunities. You know all those shoppers club cards that track your purchases, and credit cards which track all your spending habits? That data is awfully valuable. And Google has the best knowledge in the world. All they have to do is perfect the way the data is organized and packaged to marketing buyers.

    For a quick glimpse of the possibilities, let's say you play the stock market. Wouldn't it be brilliant to know what potential investors are really interested in this week, what they have been researching online... well Google knows! I'll be they realize this, and are working on a way to capitalize on it.

  29. Google's browser! by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 4, Funny

    According to one of the comments on that blog, which I read before it finally crumbled under the weight of slashdot, commenter 'Rick' claims that Google Deskbar uses Google's own fab, internally written browser.
    This internally written browser is apparently 'fast and incredibly compatible'.

    Sounds great! Problem is, the browser component in Google Deskbar == Internet Explorer.

    I chuckled.

  30. The real reason.. by jimbro2k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  31. our Page Ranking pverlords? by game+kid · · Score: 2, Funny

    In that case, Google must have already pwned us.

    They are taking over the world. They plan on taking over the world by not taking over the world. "Hey, Google is nice....they aren't taking over the world" Then before you know it you page ranking what to eat, who your friends are, what car to buy, where to live, where to work.

    Yeah, they're much like one of those nice girls in high school. They're friendly, and mean to do good, but you end up obsessing over them 'cause they're so blatantly hot. They take over your mind with their curves intelligence and self-confidence...and of course that keeps a man from ever getting some real (for lack of a better term) knowledge.

    Google is the hot, slimmed-down, super-smart chick of the Internet; if it was a girl, it'd be that rare case of someone who wouldn't spoon-feed you with gossip unless you want her to, would be there for you the moment you need her, would help you with research, and would even get the mail for you. She'd even let you see others. Sounds like a supermodel to me.

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  32. questionable insight by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Here's the problems I have with this article. First, the guy who wrote the article and notified slashdot, wasn't able to keep his site up. What insight can he possibly have when he apparently lacked that kind of obvious foresight? Second, he's beating up on the weak. I have less respect for people who can't chose difficult targets.

    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.

  33. Re:Google = Echelon? by Urger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Use Scroogle then if your afraid of Google's cookies.

  34. Re:Parent is right and look who submitted article. by daltonlp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes. The next Roland Piquepaille, that's me! Self-promotion is awesome. Despite what your parents may have told you, it does not lead to blindness or hairy palms.

  35. The defense department has a poem about this by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.