Slashdot Mirror
Google's Rasmussen on Google Maps
jbp1337 writes "During a presentation at Sydney University last week, the lead engineer behind Google Maps, Lars Rasmussen offered an interesting insight into how it all came together. Rasmussen is working on a number of AJAX applications that provide a rich desktop-like interface to the end-user from within the Web browser. Other interesting things include a Linux port of Google Earth, the company is opening a new engineering center in Sydney, and Google's design philosophy is based on end-user loyalty - not money. On the rumor of a Web-based office suite from Google, Rasmussen said he is unaware of one 'but there are 3000 people that work for Google'."
XUL is a user-interface description language created by Mozilla. XAML is a user-interface description language created by Microsoft. AJAX is a method of using Javascript to asynchronously update parts of page content without refreshing the entire page.
I mod down pathetic posts.
Does anyone else feel that the released Google Maps is worse than the beta? Interstate names are missing, printing via the print button doesn't work right, the list of streets to choose form is on the left which is awkward. The first page take 5 seconds to load often, which is not very Googlish. If you have half of your street info typed in and the page finally finishes loading, it erased your typing so far...
I also have trouble using is from Mozilla 1.7.x but it may be because of adblock or flashblock. But this has been going on in the beta too.
Does it cost you to do a google search? Does gmail cost? My "opinion" is that that "opinion" is fairly factual. Google uses free services to instill loyalty and keep people coming back... and clicking on their ads.
Hmm, I can't really think of any free MS services off the top of my head. Definitely not any that don't tie in with their OS or something.
Google's design philosophy is based on end-user loyalty - not money.
When you sell ad space alongside your applications, end-user loyalty is money.
Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
and clicking on their ads
Which makes them money. Google is "all about" making money, just like every other for-profit company on Earth. They choose to do so by creating loyalty in the users of their products, which drives ad sales. In the case of Google, much like television networks, their "customers" are the advertisers, not the actual end users of their products.
Obviously Mr. Rasmussen needs to spend more time on Slashdot and he would know that he has in fact preparing to release an office suite.....
Like CSS. :D
Gmail is another AJAX application, and it has immense possibilities. I wrote this comment using Gmail, checked my spelling with its spellchecker, saved it in Draft, and it is stored on Google's server, which is safer than my own hard drive.
Web-based applications are here to stay, and if they are from reputable companies like Google and Yahoo, you know your files stored on their servers will remain there for a long time, if not forever.
Sun and Fun
Google have the one thing almost no other advertiser have. User loyalty and brand identity. Who the hell *loves* ClearChannel? No one. I bet even most people that use their services would say they loved them. People never stop saying how much they love Google.
*Everything* Google do is a way to make people look at more adverts. Providing services for users just makes more users look at them. Perhaps this is why they are the largest advertising agency in the world?
End user loyalty isn't charity at all. It's a long term profit tactic.
-Derick
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-general&m=1121 98633625636&w=2
This explains it very simply and easily. Basically you have the backend deliver content on-demand, and the frontend is a single HTML page powered by JavaScript which queries the backend for the necessary data. Just like a desktop application.
What about ethicists? How many of the people at Google are in charge of considering the impact of what they do, or do they all just assume the spread of knowledge is unconditionally good? (It hasn't necessarily worked out that way in atomic energy, for example. And even less auspicious technological advances like reverse-indexing the phone book have had mixed results sociologically. Not to mention search engines themselves, which haven't been 100% positive in their privacy impact.)
Knowledge is not Wisdom. The Ability to do something is not the Right to do it. Were it so, terrorism would be utterly defensible because it pretty uniformly involves the use of knowledge and ability to take some action that serves the selfish or thoughtless need of the person doing it. What stands between terrorism and righteous/respected power is not ability but ethics--not the knowledge of how to do something, but the wisdom to know when not to do something.
Note that I have not called the Google folks terrorists nor said they shouldn't do what they do. I'm just tired of seeing stories about what Google can do, and I'm interested in seeing more stories about how Google itself decides what is good and bad for it to actually do. Is it really mere lack of engineers that is holding them back from doing arbitrary things? Or do they factor in issues of privacy, security, morality, etc. into their basic design. I'd love to see some stories about that because in stories like this one here, it always seems to be a lacking element. Is profit motive and national law all that the world needs to adjust in order to assure that our collective sensibilities are not violated? If something is not illegal, is that an invitation for Google to do it (ready supply of engineers permitting, of course)?
I don't think they only need engineers. I think they also need ethicists. What I don't know is whether they think that.
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
Too bad the only thing going for Google maps is that it is pretty (antialiased graphics, map can be as large as you want) and lets you pan. That's really the ONLY thing that is innovative about it- not even the "use google maps for displaying stuff from your site" is innovative; Yahoo and Mapquest have been doing this for years.
Funny thing, but MS Streets has NONE of these problems- it's not perfect, but it is FAR superior to Google Maps in useability and features people need; it has a nice way of compressing the map into a page, it's high resolution, saves addresses, does a near PERFECT job of finding "what's within the radius circle I draw", and it uses both route numbers and the uncommon road names. Nothing sets Google Maps apart from its web-based cousins, either- except for the basic map display. It certainly hasn't revolutionized online maps.
Please help metamoderate.
Why can't I find a particular business listing in Google Local?
Where does Google Local get its information?
Aside from the ms remark (can't comment on that), the rest of your points are quite valid. So everything that google touches doesn't turn to gold, what a relief.
When was the last time a non-geek friend of yours made a backup of his personal hard drive?
Thought so.
D
Hey, I live in (Alaska|Greenland|Russia) you insensitive clod!!! (Actually Russia, but I used to live in Alaska). The Mercator Projection really stretches out the Northern and Southern areas of the world quite badly.
Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
And don't forget XENU, the galactic ruler who, 75 million years ago, brought billions of people to Earth, stacked them around volcanoes and blew them up with hydrogen bombs.
Believe with me, my saplings.
I was actually at the talk Rasmussen gave at the University of Sydney. He gave quite a good explanation of how it all works. I wrote about it here: http://freespace.atomicscript.com/. Note, however, that I'm not a web developer or particularly good with javascript, so my interpretation of what he said could well have errors.