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.
Can't do anythign until I have my google news of the day
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?
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
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.
its... SKYNet!!!
Whats wrong with my computer.. would I like to play a game? Global Themonuclear War?? No! Wait.. whats going on with...
~~~~^@^@@##$&@@@))^^^~~~ DISCONNECTED.
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....
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
pleasantly devoid of theories of Google taking over the world
Damn they have infiltrated Slashdot now. Google I am on to you.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
They don't need to reinvent the wheel.
Get your own free personal location tracker
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.
...pleasantly devoid of theories of Google taking over the world.
Theories? Oh, we're well past that...
I Want To Believe
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".
My quality social news site.com.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you want keep a secret you have to keep it secret that you have a secret to keep.
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.
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.
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.