Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Which Google Project Didn't Deserve To Die?

Nerval's Lobster writes "When Google announced the shutdown of Google Reader, its popular RSS reader, it sparked significant outrage across the Web. While one could argue that RSS readers have declined in popularity over the past few years (in fact, that was Google's stated reason for killing it), they remain a useful tool for many people who want to collect their Web content—articles, blog postings, and the like—in one convenient place. (Fortunately for them, there exist any number of alternative RSS readers, some of which offer even more features than Google Reader.) This wasn't the first time that Google announced a project's imminent demise, and it certainly won't be the last: Google Buzz, Google Health, Google Wave, Google Labs, and other software platforms all ended up in the dustbin of tech history. So here's the question: of all those projects, which didn't deserve the axe? If you had a choice, which would you bring back?"

265 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Google Weather API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How I miss thee...

  2. Google Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Alas, poor DejaNews, we knew ye well.

    1. Re:Google Groups by heypete · · Score: 4, Informative

      Second. While you can still search usenet using Google Groups, it's a massive pain compared to how it used to be.

    2. Re:Google Groups by Jhon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Agreed. Although, I wish I could "delete" some of my (embarrassing) posts from the early to mid 90's. I was young and I needed the money!

    3. Re:Google Groups by Hardness · · Score: 2

      *sigh* Miss Delaware will never learn...

    4. Re:Google Groups by Teckla · · Score: 1

      I miss Google Groups Digest Emails. :-(

      They just stopped coming one day . . . with no announcement, I didn't even feel a sense of closure. ;-)

    5. Re:Google Groups by ewoods · · Score: 2

      What got me away from Yahoo was IG - Interactive Google. I have a few widgets on my google.com/ig page and I use it as my home page. They're ditching IG and I am going back to Yahoo.

    6. Re:Google Groups by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      You are modded funny, but I seriously cringe when I think of some of my early 90's Usenet posts.

      As for "I needed the money", I seriously considered an offer from a potential employer at one point until I decided I just couldn't do it. The job? Post photos of declothed women to a Usenet group. Had I accepted the job, my career might have gone along a completely different path!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    7. Re:Google Groups by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Although, I wish I could "delete" some of my (embarrassing) posts from the early to mid 90's. I was young and I needed the money!

      You can do that by request.

    8. Re:Google Groups by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 1

      This is more of a Usenet dieing thing then a DejaNews.

    9. Re:Google Groups by bessie · · Score: 1

      Ah, one of my favorite search engines - you could be so specific and find exactly what you wanted so easily.

      What is stopping Google from doing that with their interface? They seem to just keep dumbing it down - even "Advanced Search" doesn't provide the abilities DejaNews used to (and why does searching on Google for "Google Advanced Search" always show me the Canadian variant of that site? Are they smarter in Canada?)

      Does Google have some kind of "premium" service you can buy that allows a richer search language? I haven't ever heard of one - do they just reserve that ability for themselves, then?

      - Tim

    10. Re:Google Groups by antdude · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I hate the new GUI on there. I stopped using it. Is there another free web-based newsgroup to use like the old DejaNews and old Google Groups?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    11. Re:Google Groups by Jhon · · Score: 2

      I've seen my early 90's usenet posts. I more than cringe. I make light of it now because I'm older/wiser and less prone to actually putting my PHONE NUMBER in my sig (ug) among other things.

  3. Lots of choices by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    This space for rent.
  4. Translate by rgriff59 · · Score: 1

    The translate API was axed because it was too popular.

  5. "Do no evil." by concealment · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My favorite Google project was the idea that a company built brand loyalty by refusing to do evil, manipulative and underhanded things.

    Ten years later, Google is doing those things. They're getting more aggressive with ads and invading personal information; they're cutting out useful projects that don't immediately monetize; they're trying to manipulate us into being better cash cows by signing up with our cell phones and handing over more ad-friendly information through Google+.

    I don't begrudge them the right to make a profit. They were doing that, and continue to do so, without any of these manipulative activities. I just want the "do no evil" project to come back because that was a Google, Inc. I could believe in.

    1. Re:"Do no evil." by MatrixCubed · · Score: 1

      TL;DR No

    2. Re:"Do no evil." by tokencode · · Score: 3, Funny

      The "Do No Evil" project was scrapped as soon as they started the "Publically Traded Company" project...

    3. Re:"Do no evil." by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

      Their old motto is better understood if you parse it as "Do? No, Evil!" with Evil taken to be a verb form meaning "to do evil". That makes more sense, doesn't it, of how they transformed from their benign P.R. (which is all it was even in the first place, Public Relations, not a real motto to be followed) into more insidious P.R. (Privacy Raping).

    4. Re:"Do no evil." by fermion · · Score: 1
      As I said before, doing no evil is a far cry from doing good. I think on the whole google actively minimizes the evil it does. For instance it collects data, but it does not collate the data and then uses it to extort favors from people, as far as we know.

      The Google projects are there for good, to test the limits of what can be done through a web or mobile based interfaces, but google is not a charity. It is not going to offer free products that do not support the core mission, to collect user data and sell it to advertisers. So google is going to do things that are not so good such as cut of services that is do not collect high quality data. It is going to deliver search results that support shady agents, because those shady agents are racking up the billable views. It is going to keep results non transparent because excessive transparency will allow advertisers to really know which campaign is working, and potentially cut earnings.

      When Google first came online it was an easier life. Alta Vista was being overwhelmed with bad results. Everyone was blocking 2o7 because there was not useful reason for the end user to allow the cookies. So Goole came in and combined the two and go users used to letting cookies be set because services were being provided. But life is harder now. Facebook provides what may be a more relevant service, and is getting good at tracking users, and it getting into mobile. MS has a credible search engine and a lot of user data.

      So Google is going to have to push the envelope of not-evil to keep profitable. Like any company reaching maturity, it is going to cut services, even if in the long run it going to hurt it. Cutting services to end users, who are not the customers, may seem better that cutting other expenses.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    5. Re:"Do no evil." by Barryke · · Score: 1

      This. And its why i am inclined to look into going to the next underdog. When i adopted Google, Gmail and Android, they where the underdogs. Right now, it seems Microsoft is my underdog ecosystem of choice. Its even actively campaigning against privacy intrusions, however they still do not practice what they preach.

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
    6. Re:"Do no evil." by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Why do Google detractors always quote wrong ? It is "don't be evil", not "do no evil".

    7. Re:"Do no evil." by Kingkaid · · Score: 1

      I think they've just forgotten why people cheered them on, when Yahoo and Lycos were the places to go to look for things. Yes, the results were better, but the major drive that got people excited was that the company did things that people just loved. This love is valuable, and since it lacks a way to have any $$$ associated with it, it is easy to be axed when they want to improve profitability.

    8. Re:"Do no evil." by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Why is seeing one's old usenet posts from the 1990's problematic, unless one thinks that they should no longer be accountable for the statements that they have made in the past, simply because they were so long ago?

      I've googled myself in the past and found usenet posts that go as far back as about 1991, when my email address included a '!' symbol. Personally, I find it interesting sometimes to look at some of my oldest remarks that I can find online and compare them to my views and values that I hold today.

    9. Re:"Do no evil." by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      they're cutting out useful projects that don't immediately monetize

      Those BASTARDS.
      You know, I hear that they also dont provide free lemonade and cookies to anyone who asks?

      Also, "immediately monetize" apparently means "for the 5+ years that most of their projects run before being shut down"...

    10. Re:"Do no evil." by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      They could monetise people by charging modest fees rather than being the US government's little bitch and expect everyone to give up all their privacy in return for something.

  6. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by tepples · · Score: 2

    most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing

    What do most people use for the use cases for which geeks use RSS?

  7. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nearly everyone I know used Reader.

    It's not an "obscure geeky thing". It's a great way to follow multiple websites. You don't need to be a geek to figure it out or benefit from it.

  8. iGoogle by swinferno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How I'm dreading November 1st when iGoogle will be retired...
    http://support.google.com/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2664197

    --
    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
    1. Re:iGoogle by anjrober · · Score: 1

      me too
      anyone have a good suggestion for a replacement
      i would love one that also supports iphone, ipad, etc.

    2. Re:iGoogle by adamchou · · Score: 1

      this is the one i'd vote for. i second that

    3. Re:iGoogle by jeffy210 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yup, that's the one I was going to post. It's been my homepage for years. It's a nice simple web based RSS aggregator that I could get to from anywhere.

      --
      ------
      "And may your days be long upon the earth."
    4. Re:iGoogle by sosume · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yup, that is the one, iGoogle. My default page for the last 5 years or so. Why they would retire that is beyond understanding, it attracts a ton of users at a relatively low cost. I am trying to do without the page at the moment, and find that I consume *much* less of Google's services as a consequence. I even started appreciating Bing and Live Maps as viable alternatives, who knows, my next phone may even be a WP8 device! (shrudders).

    5. Re:iGoogle by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2

      I've been using netvibes.com since the announcement of the 'retirement' of iGoogle. It does most of what iGoogle did as well or better. It's funny ever since the Reader 'retirement' was announced netvibes has frequently put up a message apologizing for slowness because of having to adjust to a huge influx of new users. I bet they're super happy that Reader is dead.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    6. Re:iGoogle by dlmarti · · Score: 1

      Agreed, I use this so many times per hour its ridiculous.

    7. Re:iGoogle by Tiger_Storms · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why they plan on removing/retiring it. It currently works I know lots of people who still use it. They claim it's because there are so many other options out there but that is such a cop out. Personally I love igoogle, and when they do retire it I'll go somewhere else.

      --
      This is a Mac, what you have there is an embarrassment to your fellow computer users.
    8. Re:iGoogle by misterooga · · Score: 1

      I second netvibes. It's replacing my Reader as well.

    9. Re:iGoogle by Puzzles · · Score: 1

      I too am dreading iGoogle going. We should make a petition for iGoogle as well. Though, sadly, I don't think it has the same level of usage as Reader.

      I didn't like Google Video being closed but it wasn't a biggy (thanks to Youtube and its Google integration).

      I used and saw application with Google Wave. I think Wave has the potential to be gradually (or slightly) integrated into Google Docs / Drive.

      --
      "So don't get programmed by anybody but yourself" --Bill S. Preston, Esquire
    10. Re:iGoogle by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I was always shocked when I saw people using iGoogle. It always looked and felt so clunky and limited and anachronistic.

    11. Re:iGoogle by rootchick · · Score: 1

      I second that.

    12. Re:iGoogle by Seizurebleak · · Score: 1

      Ugh, same. I used to think those stupid 'homepage' sites were useless for the longest time, now that I found a good one (iGoogle) it's going away, boo!

    13. Re:iGoogle by jitterman · · Score: 2

      I too have used iGoogle for as long as I can really recall, and agree that its retirement puzzles me greatly. NetVibes doesn't really do it for me; I'm trying igHome for now as the purpose of the project is to closely (not exactly) replicate iGoogle.

      As for WP8, I have a Lumia 920 (got it on release day) and enjoy it thoroughly - it's not just not bad, it's actually good (my opinion of course).

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    14. Re:iGoogle by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      Exactly this! I'm still using iGoogle, and I haven't decided on an alternative homepage, but when I do, it won't be from Google.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    15. Re:iGoogle by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      The main problem with Wave was it was a great distributed collaboration platform that lamentably was stuck on a few Google development servers. All the parts about federation to multiple nodes obviously acknowledged that it wasn't scalable centrally.. which is probably why it was killed. Google's vision depends on their machines doing the work, rather than your machines doing the work.

      This is the way that cloud fad is going to go though - as with the prior revolution of computing, where tasks you traditionally farmed off onto a mainframe now done on the local desktop, the cloud will spread out from the web farms of the major players onto the more local hardware nodes of users and their employers. This is the joy of service based computing, as opposed to application based computing ; if you're selling a service, unless it absolutely requires that the server aggregate everyone the service calls of everyone else (e.g. Twitter), someone will find a way of providing it more locally.

    16. Re:iGoogle by acw528 · · Score: 2

      I will miss iGoogle. What could replace it? I just want news, time, weather, and peak into my email. Maybe a pretty picture. None of the substitutes put all of this on one page. Any suggestions? Love iGoogle.

    17. Re:iGoogle by cyxxon · · Score: 1

      I do have set up Netvibes as well, but I still go back to iGoogle everyday. It just seems the layout is much better there, or at least the default layout is. Plus on iGoogle I can just have a widget for my Gmail that displays my last x mails, not the top x unread emails (which for me at least is useless)... /sigh That said, Netvibes does indeed look to be a very worthy "successor" to iGoole, and yeah, I can recommend it as well.

    18. Re:iGoogle by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      Agreed. iGoogle is my home page.

    19. Re:iGoogle by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Netvibes looks interesting.. just wishing they had an option between the free and the $499/month option... would feel a lot more comfortable with it.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    20. Re:iGoogle by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      I had my most common feeds on it, plus the reader panel.. it was my gateway to a few services... when I had more time, I used reader... iGoogle/Reader were my biggest reasons to use Google anything... now that's being diminished. Why would I use an Android tablet, or phone that no longer syncs up with my reader feeds? Which is most of my time on these things.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    21. Re:iGoogle by ChronoFish · · Score: 1

      My home page for what seems like "forever". Not sure what I'm going to replace it with.

      There are no ads on iGoogle and lots of linking to media outlets who have a hate/hate relationship with Google.

      I suspect that played a role in its demise at some level.

      -CF

    22. Re:iGoogle by Hidyman · · Score: 1

      This is the number one thing I use Google for.
      I see it first thing and last thing, every day.
      Why would Google want to lose that much of my ad-viewing time?
      I really hope someone steps up and replaces iGoogle.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me ...
    23. Re:iGoogle by mdpierocarey · · Score: 1

      Me too. I vote for iGoogle.

    24. Re:iGoogle by jim_deane · · Score: 1

      I'm glad I'm not the only one who laments the upcoming loss of iGoogle. It's been how I get my quick blog/news updates every day for years.

      When they announced the shutdown, I went through the process of exporting my feed information so I could import it in Google Reader. That seems to have been a wasted effort.

      I'm paying close attention to the alternatives people are mentioning here...hopefully something will fill the iGoogle gap.

    25. Re:iGoogle by Kismet · · Score: 1

      My replacement ended up being Google Reader. ;)

      I tried Protopage. It was OK, but not as good as iGoogle.

    26. Re:iGoogle by kermidge · · Score: 1

      I signed up for and used NetVibes many years ago, then started using iGoogle; the latter gave me everything on one page that I really wanted to see to start every day, and since I already had gmail, I wasn't in the position of having to give another party (NetVibes) my log in information. Now I use Opera's SpeedDial.

      Visiting the NetVibes site yesterday, I can see where some would like it, but believe I'll pass. Using the original site seemed a lot easier than what they have now. While it might serve my wonts, tracking down all the sites I'd like would be more annoying than I care to deal with compared to simply selecting them from the menus that iGoogle offered.

      I had a nice RSS page set up years back using Deepnet Explorer, but after a two-year hiatus with no computer (poverty), never got around to setting one back up.

      Goodbye, iGoogle, thanks for the convenience. I'll miss it.

    27. Re:iGoogle by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      To do what? The pay version is for, as I understand it, trend analytics. What does that have to do with being a feed reader and replacing Reader/iGoogle?

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  9. Google Code Search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RIP

    1. Re:Google Code Search by bmcage · · Score: 1

      Fully agree! Why is this thread not a poll?

  10. And now Google Drive is down... by mystikkman · · Score: 5, Informative

    In other news Google Drive is down. Most Chromebooks are rendered useless because of paltry local storage and reliance on the Google Cloud for storing important stuff.

    http://www.slashgear.com/google-investigating-google-drive-downtime-18274444/

    1. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is one of the many problems with relying on clouds.

    2. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by mtmra70 · · Score: 1

      And Google isn't addressing the for ALL Blackberry users.

      https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/maps/PDx5fW-SiFI/77dIbvuMR5sJ

    3. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      It's also worth noting that Chromebooks aren't actually useless without Drive... It'd be more accurate to say they're suffering from reduced functionality, or if you really want to go for sensationalism, say they're "crippled". It's also worth noting that the outage is affecting only some users. My account seems to be perfectly accessible from my office and my remote server, so I'm going to assume that "most Chromebooks" are functioning just fine for most purposes.

      A chromebook is a terminal to the Web. It's still useful for accessing most of the Web. There's just a popular service that's not available at the moment.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jbernardo · · Score: 1

      And the "devil's advocate" is at it again, and already moded informative! Strangely, if you read the comments, and not only the Chris Burn's story, you'd see that the only thing that isn't working is http/https access. But never let the facts get in the way of an anti-google rant, right?

      BTW, your posting story is really very interesting, only pro-ms and/or anti-google posts, mingled with some (moded insightful) rants on how the anti-ms camp is destroying slashdot.

      Going back to the issue at hand, for me google reader is the project that should at least be given an opportunity to live as a commercial/paid for service

    5. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by mystikkman · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, iOS devices lose their magical ability to sync when iCloud goes down, and Windows Azure loses its ability to do anything when it goes down. Google Drive being down (per Google) or showing "sluggishness" (per your article) isn't any different.

      Yes, but Apple and Microsoft are not pushing computers with 16GB total storage and 9GB of free space and then giving 100GB or 1TB of cloud storage(free only for a few years mind you) to placate that. Google is pretty much the only one that's heavily pushing users towards being slaves of their cloud. And yet the Linux crowd seem to cheer them on.
      For example see:

        http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/five-reasons-why-googles-linux-chromebook-is-a-windows-killer/8887

    6. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "That is one of the many problems with relying on clouds."

      Sadly, the main problem is the whole concept. While it might be a good idea, at some point in the future, that future is not yet here.

      What major online service, e.g. iCloud (based on MS Azure), Amazon AWS, etc. has not gone down for a significant period in each of the last few years? I am having trouble thinking of one.

      And before anybody says "Yes, but it's still more reliable than your own servers" I call bullshit. My own servers have not been down at all in the last few years.

    7. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      By the way: apparently Github was down, at least for a while, this morning.

    8. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by emag · · Score: 2

      It's not really down, it's just hungover from too much St Patrick's celebrating this weekend...

      --
      "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
    9. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      AWS has actually been pretty good if you actually do a proper deployment. I can only think of one time when they had multiple availability zones down at the same time. If you don't deploy across multiple availability zones, then it is just like any other hosted service. I often use it that way, too, it just isn't the magic fix-it-all system if you don't use it like it is intended.

    10. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Personally, I'm inclined to disagree. I think Apple should take their metric fuckton of cash and buy DropBox, then put the DropBox team in charge of iCloud.

      iCloud suffers from the same foibles as Internet Explorer and GNOME. It's not really smooth enough, but it's so tightly integrated into the core system so deeply that removing it is practically impossible. I'd rther see DropBox bring their reliability, ease, and compatibility into iOS, rather than rely on the community of app developers to voluntarily integrate tightly with a non-Apple service.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    11. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      I don't think Joyent has had a major outage yet... But then again, their infrastructure is a little less "engineered" so that it can handle things like that with minimal impact.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    12. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by mystikkman · · Score: 2

      Strangely, if you read the comments, and not only the Chris Burn's story, you'd see that the only thing that isn't working is http/https access. But never let the facts get in the way of an anti-google rant, right?

      I am glad to hear that Gopher service was not impacted.

    13. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      ...Apple and Microsoft are not pushing computers with 16GB total storage and 9GB of free space...

      Microsoft is pushing a tablet with 64GB of total storage, but only 23 GB of free space. Apple sells devices with 32 GB of storage, and only 24 GB free space.

      Google is pretty much the only one that's heavily pushing users towards being slaves of their cloud. And yet the Linux crowd seem to cheer them on.

      That's because we know that most folks should be slaves to some cloud. Tycho of Penny Arcade says it well:

      But what I like about this laptop is that it is not gregarious in any way. It barely exists; there are many, many things it can’t do, which is fucking great. If I was going to spend over a thousand dollars on some sliver of mobile computing, I would buy a generalist device: I’d get a MacBook Air, or emulate Gabriel’s example with a Surface Pro. That cover/keyboard thing is no joke. But those machines are much, much more than I want, let alone need. And what I need is very, very simple: a window that looks out onto the Cloud.

      Thus far, I’ve gotta say: I like the view.

      The Chromebooks fill a niche market for a device to just use the Web. Not to play video games, run heavy computations, or manage a company's network. They are a generic interface to everything on the Web, as the Web was designed to have.

      By the way, Google reports the Drive outage is fixed.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    14. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sxooter · · Score: 1

      My Chromebook is working just fine. Seeing as it runs Chrubuntu.

      --

      --- It is not the things we do which we regret the most, but the things which we don't do.
    15. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It was very clearly NOT intended to compete with Dropbox.

      Dropbox's primary use is to have a common online data store between multiple people, so they can share files. It's designed to look like a shared drive, both to users and to Apps.

      iCloud is specifically for keeping data synchronised between multiple Apple devices owned by a single person. It's designed to hide the implementation, such that only developers have to think about how it works.

      Some Apps are better off using Dropbox, and some are better off using iCloud. It depends entirely on what the purpose of putting the Apps data in the cloud is.

    16. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From a company point of view, cloud services are about as horrible as it can get because we're talking the loss of real money. Yet that ghost hovers over oh so many board rooms it just is not funny anymore. It usually comes with its buddy, Software-as-a-service. Normally encountered shortly after one of the tie racks comes back from lunch with one of the sales drones from such a provider.

      Sure, it looks nice at first glance. We store our stuff "somewhere" and someone else takes care of it, and the best part of it is that it's really dirt cheap. Plus we can fire all those techies, or if we already did and outsourced our storage, we can cut that noose we hang on and gain a lot of flexibility. And it's great until (not if, until) something goes wrong.

      Anyone here really had NO downtime in their company in the last, say, three years due to computer or network troubles? And if you think getting your stuff back in order is a hassle with your ISP, try the same with a cloud provider. What you saved in months of cloud services is lost in the few days your employees will sit around and do no meaningful work.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    17. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      That is one of the many problems with relying on Google.
      The quality of the cloud service is the quality of the contract you have with them.

      Google is offering a free service, and they could be canceled at any time. So you really shouldn't trust it. However if you go with a company who is offering you a contract with up-time and availability, and a data collection policy. Then you are better off.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    18. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Apple and Microsoft are not pushing computers with 16GB total storage and 9GB of free space and then giving 100GB or 1TB of cloud storage(free only for a few years mind you) to placate that. Google is pretty much the only one that's heavily pushing users towards being slaves of their cloud. And yet the Linux crowd seem to cheer them on. For example see:

      You've seen the Surface, right?

      I've not considered the smaller storage chromebooks to be a windows killer... I do see them as what the netbook market could/should have been. I think today's tablets serve that market better, however. I also think that for most people, it is enough, provided you have an internet connection, and the backend services are working. Most people's computer use altogether relies on those two things.

      Even internally in companies, most new application development for the past decade have been intranet/extranet web based applications. Web based applications offer a lot of advantages over desktop applications, portability, limited install/upgrade surface, fewer versions to support, streamlined infrastructure. Even if that weren't the case, eventually anything interconnecting multiple people has some singular point of failure for the bulk of someone's workflow. Sh*t happens.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    19. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is more reliable then your own servers generally, Not more always more reliable then your server personally.
      A lot of companies have their servers running on Desktop System under their desk plugged into the wall, with a single hard-drive. Or have their systems in a server room but there are the low priority servers that are not part of the main architecture, because what they do, do not justify the cost. So if you have a cloud system you get a cheap server, to do a low/mid priority task. Say running your website, or email. Something depending on your organization can afford to be offline for a period of time.

      So you personally may be a good administrator, or you may have been lucky that they didn't go down. It isn't that could is better any individual system for uptime, it is just better on the average.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    20. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      " I call bullshit. My own servers have not been down at all in the last few years."
      Yea it is always someone else's servers. or your ISP. Besides the hard drive failed years ago, we are just running off of active memory.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    21. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well a paid account where you actually negotiate the contract.

      You can just say yes to the contract they give them to you. Or you can read it and work with them to make a contract that they both can like. If they refuse get an other company to do it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    22. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by u38cg · · Score: 1

      My own servers have not been down at all in the last few years.

      Well, thanks for that entirely statistically irrelevant anecdote.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    23. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1, Informative

      "I can only think of one time when they had multiple availability zones down at the same time."

      Whether multiple zones are down at the same time hardly matters, if you are in the zone that is affected. But in fact multiple zones were down for a while in 2011 (ALL of them) and also in 2012.

      "I often use it that way, too, it just isn't the magic fix-it-all system if you don't use it like it is intended."

      "As intended?" You mean maintaining multiple zones manually (a pain in the ass), or paying more money for Cloudfront?

      Yes, it has been "pretty good". But my own servers have been better.

    24. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I know somebody who had a website (which I worked on for them a bit) on Amazon.

      Amazon sent them an email, saying that the server their S3 data was on was experiencing difficulties, and they had 2 days to copy their data off of the Amazon server before it was taken down for repair or replacement. (This despite Amazon's claim of "multiple redundancy" of users' data.)

      The problem is that the email appeared in the client's inbox AFTER the 2 days had passed.

      Even though Amazon admitted that it was their hardware problem, and that the email problem was at their end, they refused to lift a single finger to try to help fix anything... unless the client bought a minimum $400 pay-as-you-go service plan. Which was too late anyway, of course.

    25. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      It probably helps that my current server is not Windows.

      I like your sig, by the way.

    26. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Yea it is always someone else's servers. or your ISP."

      It's simply the truth. No server of mine has gone down. It is true that my ISP did, for a few short periods. But that is a web service... that doesn't detract from my point, it reinforces it. The fact is that the Web is not yet mature enough for 99.99% reliability.

    27. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Well, thanks for that entirely statistically irrelevant anecdote."

      It's not irrelevant to ME, or to the point I was making.

      The fact is that if I want reliability, it isn't to be found in the cloud. Yet. Maybe some day.

    28. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Blaisun · · Score: 1

      yeah but it is ok when my server goes down... i am too busy trying to get it back up to need anything off of it right then...

    29. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Chromebooks are just for decoration while you sit in the coffee shop anyway so it's no big deal.

    30. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      I think someone is crying into his android phone. Maybe if you root it and make it remotely useful that will make you better.

    31. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And from a company point of view, I can also produce statistics on how many of our systems we ourselves screwed up with no help from the cloud. People screw up. Hardware fails.

      The difference with the cloud is that you've added two additional horribly complex systems (the network and the external servers) that can also be screwed up by people or fail for various reasons. You've also added the latency required to access the remote service. On top of that you've added multiple entry and exit points for data coming into and leaving your network, with extra key exchanges needed, and a different security environment to either be audited or blindly trusted.

      In exchange, you get to avoid the up front costs of installing a few servers, and the ongoing costs of managing them. Instead, you simply pay someone else on an ongoing basis to buy and maintain their own hardware with your money. And if they raise their rates, or go out of business, or buy cheap servers, or hire stupid people, or smart lawyers, guess what? You're only a lot worse off than you were before.

      It's a pretty cloud when it's way up in the blue sky. But it's nothing but fog when it's in your face.

      --
      John
    32. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Cute, but no. My cell phone's an old Nokia, running some form of Symbian that does nearly nothing. My wife's phone, on the other hand, is a Samsung smartphone... whose phone app routinely crashes.

      Call me old-fashioned if you will, but I think people's opinions shouldn't be bought, and I think that telephones should function as telephones, and I think that lawns should be nice and green and free from those young hooligans.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    33. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      While I see your point, I'm not entirely sure my computers have been trouble free for that length of time either.

      That said, while Amazon's cloud may be as reliable as my PC, my Internet connection certainly isn't.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    34. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by nametaken · · Score: 1

      And often cheaper. And certainly fewer maintenance headaches. And no barrier to entry for people that wouldn't know how to maintain their own server, like... almost everyone.

    35. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Teckla · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the main problem is the whole concept. While it might be a good idea, at some point in the future, that future is not yet here.

      I respectfully disagree. The cloud is the right solution for a lot of people. Those people that are not technical and don't want to be technical, because they have non-technical jobs, interests, and hobbies. They want their technology to Just Work. The cloud gives them a pleasant, no hassles experience.

      What major online service, e.g. iCloud (based on MS Azure), Amazon AWS, etc. has not gone down for a significant period in each of the last few years? I am having trouble thinking of one.

      Sure, there's occasional downtime, but . . . so what? For many people, it's just a temporary annoyance, whereas trying to keep their computers updated, their application updated, stay safe from viruses, etc. is a never ending annoying battle.

      And before anybody says "Yes, but it's still more reliable than your own servers" I call bullshit. My own servers have not been down at all in the last few years.

      You know as well as I do that this is just anecdotal. Also, you're obviously technical in nature. For your Average Joe, having someone else maintain the servers he uses is a much better.

    36. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Teckla · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Apple and Microsoft are not pushing computers with 16GB total storage and 9GB of free space and then giving 100GB or 1TB of cloud storage(free only for a few years mind you) to placate that. Google is pretty much the only one that's heavily pushing users towards being slaves of their cloud.

      There is no doubt that local storage offers advantages, but you're dismissing the advantages of devices like Chromebooks.

      My father called yesterday because his Windows computer got a virus. It'll cost him a few hundred bucks plus, most likely, days and days of angst and worry that some of his accounts (such as bank accounts) may have been compromised.

      Let's see, a few hours of downtime a year because "the cloud" is wonky vs. constant vigilance, fear, and annoyance at keeping a Windows or OS X system running . . . you know, I think it's perfectly reasonable for some people to trade stress and complexity for something like a Chromebook, even if the Chromebook will likely involve a little downtime. Big deal.

    37. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Actually, the probability of success is multiplied, which lowers it. Your "statistically accurate" statement implies that adding dependencies to a system lowers its failure probability..."

      No, the statement is still correct, even if the math requires you to use division. The probability of failure is still actually multiplied. In the example shown, 1.3% probability of failure is 13 times the 0.1% probability it had before adding the dependencies.

      But I concede that I could have worded it better.

    38. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by khayman80 · · Score: 1

      My point here was that the result is found by MULTIPLYING the numbers. Whether you are multiplying the figures as they are, or their inverses, is irrelevant: the result is still a product, as opposed to a sum.

      The result is found by multiplying success probabilities. Which aren't inverses of the failure probabilities.

      Your income could be multiplied by 0.01. You might not like that, but it would still be multiplication.

      That's exactly why your claim that the failure probability is multiplied is a meaningless tautology.

    39. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      ...Apple and Microsoft are not pushing computers with 16GB total storage and 9GB of free space...

      Microsoft is pushing a tablet with 64GB of total storage, but only 23 GB of free space. Apple sells devices with 32 GB of storage, and only 24 GB free space.

      A new iOS device have only 2-3Gb used by the OS and the built in apps. Those estimates that put it at 7 Gb or more are pulled from someone's ass.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    40. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      I got that figure from my own iPad 2, which has few apps and basically no media on it. It's a 32 GB model, and says it has 24 GB of space available and 4.5 GB used. I'm not really sure how to interpret that, so I figured the 24 was the maximum I could have, and I had used 4 of that.

      I didn't feel like wasting my time verifying the figure to suit the whims of a shill.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    41. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, but there is a big difference between having a tech department where you can go down to and breathe down the neck of your techs 'til it works, or even having a local service provider where you can put quite a bit of leverage on if you happen to be more than a three-person hodgepodge company, and having your stuff hangong on someone whose primary thoughts when you call is "Hmm... costs X to make our techs work overtime, costs Y to lose that customer... and X outmatches Y by some league... guess it's gonna be done when it's gonna be done, there's plenty more where those guys come from".

      I've been in charge for a pretty big company's security for a while now, and there's one thing I learned: "Do as we want you to" only works with trade partners where they cannot afford losing you. Amazon for sure can afford it. Even if you were IBM.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    42. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by ynp7 · · Score: 1

      You never have Internet outages? Comcast craps out on me at least once a year for a few hours to a day. It's certainly caused more downtime for my Chromebook than any problems on Google's end.

    43. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by plover · · Score: 1

      For many service providers, keeping their systems available and fixing problems are their number 1 and number 2 priorities. They know that they're only an outage away from being cut loose by many of their customers. Any company willing to switch service providers once is willing to do it again, if only to save a few nickels.

      Not only is it their bread and butter, service response and uptime are written in their contracts. They have to take their services very seriously.

      And I completely agree that if you're talking about an Amazon or a Microsoft, of course they aren't going to dance like trained monkeys just because your $19.95 VM is hung. But if you were a Fortune 500 company renting corporate email services from Microsoft, you could bet that they'd jump on your problems right away.

      --
      John
    44. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      I think we fell for an obvious troll. But when we mix Google, Microsoft or Apple sanity goes out the window on Slashdot.

      Best Regards.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    45. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      "The Cloud" or redundant virtualized commodity online with APIs have a place in big business IMHO. The fallacy is that the same is correct for desktop computing.

    46. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      By itself very true, but you may rest assured that those contractual penalties are peanuts compared to the real damage you usually suffer when they cannot perform. It's mostly an "incentive" for your business partner to not ignore the problem, but that's pretty much it. It certainly isn't a reason to kick back and relax because they have to pay for the days they cannot deliver anyway.

      I have had months when my provider paid me instead of me paying him. They were by some margin the most horrible ones, both in terms of work and in terms of cash flow. Their number one priority, as in all companies, is to make money, or to minimize the loss. That CAN mean that they fix your problem asap. Unless you're one of the Fortune 500, chances are, though, that there's someone further up the ladder who takes their numero uno "fix now" slot, and that they will keep you entertained until that premium customer gets back up and running.

      My preferred business partners are medium sized companies. Big enough that I don't suddenly sit here with their assets to manage 'cause they go bankrupt if they actually have to pay me damages and I get some of their junk in compensation, but small enough that they don't consider my business important enough that they want to keep it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    47. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      You are nitpicking to an extraordinary degree.

      My initial statement is that the probability of error is multiplied. And it is. But I did NOT state that the result is found by multiplying the failure probabilities together. That is nothing more than a misreading of my statement.

      I admit that "inverse" was the incorrect word to use, but I stick by my initial statement. Are you disputing the result shown in the example, or not?

    48. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by khayman80 · · Score: 1

      Are you disputing the result shown in the example, or not?

      That result can only be obtained by multiplying success probabilities.

    49. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by khayman80 · · Score: 1

      My initial statement is that the probability of error is multiplied. And it is.

      As I've repeatedly pointed out, your bizarre claim that the probability of error is multiplied would be true if it became larger (x13) or smaller (x0.01) or the same (x1.0). It's a meaningless tautology that has nothing to do with statistics, because multiplying probabilities of error only yields the probability of all subsystems failing simultaneously, which is irrelevant nonsense.

    50. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Repeat: I did NOT claim that the probability of error was found by multiplying the individual probabilities together. That is a mis-reading of my statement, and I even expanded on that later. (However, the end probability *IS* the result of a product, not a sum. And yes, that is statistics.) So why do you continue to insist I was in error?

      Repeat: do you refute the calculations I gave in the example?

      Repeat: you are nitpicking about semantics to a ridiculous degree.

      Repeat: Why do you insist on so consistently being such a gaping asshole? Repeat: That is why I want nothing to do with you.

    51. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by khayman80 · · Score: 1

      Repeat: I did NOT claim that the probability of error was found by multiplying the individual probabilities together. That is a mis-reading of my statement, and I even expanded on that later. (However, the end probability *IS* the result of a product, not a sum. And yes, that is statistics.) So why do you continue to insist I was in error? [Jane Q. Public]

      It would've been easy for you to say "Instead of 'probability of failure is multiplied', I meant that the 'probability of success is multiplied'" or even that the "probability of failure increases". Instead, you keep insisting that your original statement was 'statistically accurate' when I've shown that, at best, it's a meaningless tautology.

      Learning is easier if you can recognize and learn from your mistakes, rather than compulsively doubling down on them. Here's another example...

    52. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by khayman80 · · Score: 1

      You really are an intolerant bunch, when it comes to matters of faith - any deviation from extreme alarmism is unacceptable. Here I was thinking Lomborg was one of you. ... [Eric Worrall, 2013-01-26]

      Contrarians often use Lomborg to support their misinformation, possibly because he's getting better at pretending to accept the science. When brucmack described Lomborg as more pragmatic than skeptic, I replied that "I've never heard of Lomborg before today, but your summary makes him sound like someone I could agree with."

      But when I actually read his claims, it became clear that Lomborg is repeatedly misrepresenting science. Like many contrarians, Lomborg also misrepresents his own position by claiming to accept the science while simultaneously misrepresenting that science. Lomborg's books are often used to support accusations like these:

      ... Last time the Eugenics catastrophists, confident in their scientific consensus that genetic pollution would return us to the stone age, killed 7 million Jews to improve the race. Now poor people are dying because only rich people can afford the self inflicted expense of trying to appease the Carbon God. ... How many poor Africans and Asians will die because of the great global warming swindle, before their pseudo scientific bluff is finally called? ... [Eric Worrall, 2008-02-05]

      ... Mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would be the kiss of death. The U.S. is about to undergo this madness in the form of a deluge of Environmental Protection Agency carbon dioxide regulations that will strangle the economy and kill jobs. Unless the Congress can eliminate them via legislation, it will constitute a form of national suicide. ... If successful, the U.N. will lead the world back to a new Dark Ages. [Alan Caruba (Heartland Institute), 2012-12-10]

      Consider a group of academics who claim the world faces an imminent catastrophe unless drastic steps are taken. Am I talking about Eugenics NAZIs or Climate alarmists? [Eric Worrall, 2012-12-18]

      Its not my fault if you guys are pushing for the implementation of harmful policies on the basis of pseudoscientific predictions of imminent catastrophe - just like the NAZIs did. [Eric Worrall, 2012-12-29]

      Given your gross advantage in economic and political muscle, its a wonder we've managed so far to hold off your new dark age. ... [Eric Wor

  11. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by SpaceMonkies · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't understand this whole obsession people have that companies who offer free products have some sort of moral right to abuse us. The fact is that Google makes money hand over fist, and just like all other companies isn't afraid to cancel a product that people depend on, if they think its in their one best interest. Well screw them, it doesn't mean we have to like it or accept it. If being an asshole is a right, then I can be an asshole straight back at them and expect them to stand behind the products they try so hard to get me to use.

  12. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Support for the open document standard (.odf etc.) in Google Docs should never have been removed

    How so? I can still download documents as ODT. I might be missing something since I don't use google docs all that much.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  13. Google Health by DarrenBaker · · Score: 2

    This needs to happen again, before it gets owned by some shady proprietor.

    Speaking of which, where's Google Vote?

    1. Re:Google Health by tokencode · · Score: 1

      Ohh yea... I really want ads based on my current health records.... We notice you have high blood pressure, your provider suggests you eat tofu, Tofu is on sale at shoprite today. Even if google SAID they wouldn't use the data for that purpose, do you really believe that at this point?

    2. Re:Google Health by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      We notice you have high blood pressure, your provider suggests you eat tofu, Tofu is on sale at shoprite today. Even if google SAID they wouldn't use the data for that purpose, do you really believe that at this point?

      Assuming they do that using the same rules they currently use for GMail ads (e.g. scanning by machine only, not by humans), I don't see a problem with that. If tofu is a product that would help you, why not ads for tofu?

      It sounds like you're saying that it's okay for Google to know you have high blood pressure, but only as long as they pretend they don't know.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  14. Nexus Q by mystikkman · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know why they killed the Nexus Q.
    http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/the-google-nexus-q-is-baffling/

    If you’re having friends over, and they, too, have Android phones, and they, too, have bought songs from Google’s music store, then they can add their own songs to your Q’s queue.

    Sounds interesting in theory. In practice, there’s a lot of spontaneity-killing setup. You have to go into Settings to turn on the feature. Then you have to invite your friend to participate by — get this — sending an e-mail message. Then your friend has to download the Nexus Q app.

    If you or the friend then taps the name of a song in your online Google account, it starts playing immediately, rather than being added to the queue as you’d expect. A Google rep explained to me that you’re not supposed to tap a song to add it to the playlist; you have to use a tiny pop-up menu to add it. More bafflement.

    Sounds like a great party addon!

    1. Re:Nexus Q by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

      > I don't know why they killed the Nexus Q.

      Because it cost 3x as much as other devices that did a WHOLE lot more? And, as described in the bit you quoted, it was badly-designed? Seriously -- it was a $250 one-trick pony. ALL it did was let friends play music, and IF and ONLY IF they were using the exact right combination of things: Android phones, music in your account, etc. The only product deserving of a swifter death was the Microsoft Kin.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    2. Re:Nexus Q by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it also plays video. But that's not the purpose, either. The intent is to say you don't need yet another computing device with apps, what you really want is the ability to use all of the devices you already own, you know, the ones with a screen that you already interact with, and stream them to your TV. Was it complete? Not by a long shot. But the idea was sound and a much more realistic experiment than Google or Apple TV where a single account needs to support an entire family and App UIs need to change between the 10' couch model and the handheld touch model.

      Why was it killed? My only hope is that Miracast support on both displays and devices is what killed it. Screw the integrated amplifier and stripped down Android OS - just give me a standards-based way to throw content from my phone/tablet to the TV and I'd be much happier. The reality is Google's explanation of how things work is pretty poor and people kept comparing it to Google TV against which it most assuredly did not compete.

    3. Re:Nexus Q by Junta · · Score: 1

      The problem is that for the specific niche you describe, a glorified wireless receiver for phone content to splat onto screens and speakers, $250 is a lot of money. It incurred a high cost in part due to the baked in amplifier that would almost certainly be redundant with either a better or cheaper amplifier already connected to your setup (hypothetically you could've bought bookshelf speakers without a system to connect to the beast, but why?)'. If all they intended to do was what you explained, they very badly overengineered it. Frankly, even though a few fans find it an enticing concept, I'd daresay the vast majority of people would shrug and plug in a headphone jack or MHL if Bluetooth or miracast was not present and still not see the point of such a device even if relatively cheap.

      Google had to explain things in a way to highlight ability to host apps and content analagous to apple tv or google tv or roku, or else no one could've found it applicable at all. When they did describe it, people rightfully noted that all the competing devices were between a third to a sixth of the price.

      So in the way it resembles competitors, it did less for more money. It the way it was unique, it was solving a problem most people don't have at a price way beyond the value people would get for it.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    4. Re:Nexus Q by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      echo everything said, however you have to admit the design was pretty cool. and products such as this: http://www.griffintechnology.com/twenty show that there's a demand for wireless products with integrated amps.

    5. Re:Nexus Q by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Personally, I don't know why they killed the Google Sarcasm Assistant.

  15. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by hawks5999 · · Score: 1
    "most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing"

    Seriously, only "geeks" read blogs.

    smh

  16. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're like the person in old story who had a rich man come to the front door with $1,000 every month. the person was happy and said "thank you" each time. One day the rich man went to the person's neighbor instead of his house, and gave the neighbor $1,000. The person was angry, and yelled "Hey, where is my money!!??" Do you see the issue now? *You* are the one being an asshole and an ingrate. You were given something good free of charge for years, and now can only bitch.

  17. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by bimozx · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think there is some validity to what he said. From how I see it, people don't even know they are using RSS when they use Google Reader. All they know is there are feeds that you can subscribe to, so that you can get any new updates from a certain website. Take it with a grain of salt though, since I don't have any prove of the fact, it's just what I got from watching the reaction of people from this whole Google Reader thing.

  18. the original google search engine and clean page by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    Maybe it never really existed, that so-called "Do No Evil" phase of google, and it's all just a post-hoc remythologizing of what google used to be...
    ....
    but why couldn't they bring back the clean page search engine (they could keep the new search algorithms for pagerank, or revert back) that they used to be before they became the ad-sense and ad-word selling advertising behemoth? An actual search engine rather than a categorizer and tracker of all of our searches, and web-site travels, and telephone calls (sent or received), and emails (sent or received, even if you're not a gmail user, someone you send to may be a gmail user and bingo you're being tracked), and purchases, and travels and gps locations (hey all you andoid-phone users, that would pertain to you!), and soon-to-be everything-you-see-through your google glasses.
    :>p
    No thanks, I don't need an ever-present surveillance-corporation or an ever-present surveillance state.

  19. I liked iGoogle by Notlupus · · Score: 2

    as my homepage. It's still around but it will be gone in a few months. Better start looking for alternatives.

    1. Re:I liked iGoogle by SunTzuWarmaster · · Score: 1

      iGoogle is a fantastic product. One of the best software services that I use daily.

  20. Difficult choice by StripedCow · · Score: 1

    I'm still in doubt between "Google Flying car" and "Google Holodeck".

    Oh wait... it seems we can only choose from a list of boring office applications.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    1. Re:Difficult choice by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Well, when Google Driverless Cars go haywire, they may end up being flying cars for a short duration. Google Pinto?

  21. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by heypete · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Support for the open document standard (.odf etc.) in Google Docs should never have been removed.

    Say what? I can import and export OpenDocument files in Google Docs just fine.

  22. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Fallingcow · · Score: 2

    Nothing.

  23. There Seems to Be a Disconnect Here by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The translate API was axed because it was too popular.

    I think there's a serious fiscal-minded disconnect between Google and Google fans/consumers. Google appeared to give several services for free to users. The first being search. And when they monetized big time on ads by selling users' eyeballs, only the businessmen and engineers seemed to realize that.

    Now, when they find they cannot monetize on an decent implementation of a news reader or an API of translation tools (surprise, surprise) they do a cost benefit analysis and decide that they are losing money and -- like any business -- pull the plug. People bitch and moan (myself at the front of the line) but you have to realize that what's good for the consumer isn't always good for the business. If Starbucks offers free 12 oz coffee day or 7 Eleven does a free 32 oz slurpee day, you can't go back the next day and scream in outrage that they have baited you in and now switched it on you and discontinued your favorite product (that was conveniently free) ... likewise you can say how great something was for the end user all you want. It doesn't mean it's going to survive. There is an old notion that good products survive because they sell and while that still applies to physical products, people are having a hard time transitioning that notion to software. Because it's not true when you think about it like Google's cash cows.

    I found the Google Reader petition particularly amusing ... where, in the petition, was the promise to pay a nominal yearly fee to use Reader? Or are we stupid enough to petition for publicly traded businesses to lose money? Where is the petition to have banks hand out $1 each time you visit them?

    Of course there's this weird notion on Slashdot that ad based revenue on the internet is a very bad thing and that the internet was better before it and there's some mythical better revenue model. And here we are on Slashdot, a site that (as far as I can tell) makes its money/breaks even on ads ...

    I think this question should be "What acceptable revenue model would have saved these services or turned them into cash cows?" Keep in mind that if tracking your users is part of maximizing your profit to offer these services then you're facing pitchforks and torches -- I mean look at the stupid "scroogled" Microsoft mud slinging ads.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:There Seems to Be a Disconnect Here by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      While I agree with some of the sentiment.. I would be happy to pay a few dollars a month for iGoogle/Reader ... I don't think most people are. Beyond this, I don't think that most people on Slashdot hate ads as a premise... I personally don't mind them... What I don't like is when the ads on a page outnumber, or intrude on content. I work for a company where this is a constant struggle... Personally, I would love to get rid of all but 2-3 ads per page.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    2. Re:There Seems to Be a Disconnect Here by rgriff59 · · Score: 1

      In the case of the translate API, I fully understand their reasons and can fully support their need, even responsibility to pull the plug on a cash drain. What I find disturbing is the shortsightedness in pushing such things into the wild without any plan for how to make it last. Loosing reader doesn't represent me loosing a substantial investment. Pulling the plug on the wildly popular translate wasted vast, uncounted investments. It broke things that then needed to be fixed. Because they waited until it was popular before they asked "How are we going to make money off of this," they cost others lots of time. Lots of time, which translates to lots of money. They shut it down not with the 3 year notice they had established in their own agreement, but invoked an emergency clause to accelerate it. One small meeting before releasing it would have cost them a few man hours, and prevented the whole situation. Instead, they suffered "substantial economic burden." They also thrust a substantial economic burden on the community by wasting huge numbers of man hours in development time. While, as previously stated, I understand the need, I maintain that the irresponsibility they displayed in this case is nothing short of evil. For the record, I don't block ads. I do stop visiting sites when the ads become too intrusive. I disable Flash as a rule, but not javascript. I don't mind ads too much, and once in a while, I actually follow up on one. I don't expect entitlement, but I do expect corporate responsibility. I pay for services all the time. Do the math, set a fair price up front, you might find me a valued customer. Act like Google did in this case, and I'll defend people's right to be pissed for a long time to come.

    3. Re:There Seems to Be a Disconnect Here by Chalnoth · · Score: 1

      Nah, there are a lot of things that Google could have done to monetize Reader. The main problem wasn't lack of monetization, it was a lack of attention. Reader hasn't been actively developed since 2010. Certainly some people at Google could have come up with a good way to make money out of the service, and to expand the user base by integrating the product better with its other services.

      The real problem is that nobody at Google who was in charge of money cared enough about the product to continue it forward.

  24. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    how else would they make money but by advertising? you voluntarily use google and they make you part of advertisers market. simple as that. don't like it, don't play. but they owe you nothing, cutting off a free service doesn't constitute being evil, just sensible.

  25. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by briancox2 · · Score: 1

    Damn. Just used up my mod points. +1 Insightful to you sir.

    --
    We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
  26. Hey We Get It But... by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Listen, I understand that Google's services are free and they are a business and need to do what they feel is necessary to make money; however, I am not sure why some of these went away.

    Let's take for instance the fact that Google has killed off their RSS discovery plugin. I was a die hard Google Reader person and made the move to Feedly when Google Reader was killed. Killing Google Reader may have made sense to them; after all, they were supporting traffic and crawling feeds, and doing all those things that take money, time, engineering resources, and bandwidth. No worries there. But killing off the RSS plugin? I just can't fathom how that matters.

    Leave the damn tool out there for people to use. It really doesn't harm anyone if it's something that works and can continue to work client side.

    But I digress. Yes, Feedly (or any of the tools that will ultimately replace Reader) could make their own but killing it off in some misguided attempt at pushing users to use G+ (what I assume is their reasoning for it all) is just going to drive people farther away from Google's tools.

    No, G+ (or any social network for that matter) does not operate in the same way Reader (or any RSS reader) did. I don't give a fuck what other people find interesting for the most part; I want to be able to pick and choose and provide that content back out to people on those networks, not the other way around.

    Make your money in the way you see fit but I hope they're not surprised when there is a backlash against those changes. Oh and open source the damn RSS app and even Reader so people can continue on w/o Google's backing. That would fit the "do no evil" mantra.

    1. Re:Hey We Get It But... by neminem · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Except, giving out personal information doesn't actually *cost* me anything, so to me, it *is* free. If I give a dollar to Google, I can't give that dollar to someone else, or keep it in my wallet. But if I give out "here are all the blogs I read" to Google, and another site is willing to give me something else in exchange for the list of blogs I read, I can get both, and still have the list of blogs I read for my own use, too. So why should I care that Google has that list? (The only pieces of personal information I would be at *all* tentative about giving out to literally anyone who asks, are pieces of information that could either be easily used to trick a bank into giving someone who isn't me my cash (credit card number, debit pin number), or that could be used to specifically harass me (phone number, address)).

    2. Re:Hey We Get It But... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Tell me, how exactly does google profit off of my use of Google Code?

    3. Re:Hey We Get It But... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Except, giving out personal information doesn't actually *cost* me anything, so to me, it *is* free.

      Bullshit; It costs you your privacy. Try to keep in mind, the term "cost" does not necessarily equate to fiscal transactions.

      The fact that you're OK with losing your privacy in exchange for services does not make it any less of a cost to you.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Hey We Get It But... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Tell me, how exactly does google profit off of my use of Google Code?

      They profit off the sale of the private information you agreed to provide them with in exchange for your use of the service. You know this, so why pretend that you don't?

      People seem to be having difficulty understanding the meaning of the word free nowadays;

      Free means NSA (no strings attached); when I hop over to distrowatch and download the latest Crunchbang release, it is free, because there is nothing I have to give them in order to access the information. If you have to give up anything in exchange for access, be it money, information, or what have you, then the access is by definition not free.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    5. Re:Hey We Get It But... by neminem · · Score: 1

      I agree that cost doesn't necessarily equate to fiscal transactions - I'm just saying that for me, and for many other people, the coin google works in is on which has value to google, but not to the consumer of the services. If you consider that a particular currency has no value, then a service that requires you to pay with that currency *is* free to you. (Yes, technically you could argue that google's service *technically* still aren't free: they cost bandwidth, electricity, your time to use them, etc. But that's just silly.)

    6. Re:Hey We Get It But... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I agree that cost doesn't necessarily equate to fiscal transactions - I'm just saying that for me, and for many other people, the coin google works in is on which has value to google, but not to the consumer of the services

      So, you don't value your privacy. That's a personal choice, and it's yours to make.

      If you consider that a particular currency has no value, then a service that requires you to pay with that currency *is* free to you.

      Your personal opinion (which is subjective) as to whether or not something has value does not change the absolute (objective) fact that the services provided by Google are done so in exchange for payment.

      FYI, you may not find any fiscal value in your own private information, but Google sure as hell does, to the tune of several billion dollars a year.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    7. Re:Hey We Get It But... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      1) There is no advertising on Google Code project pages

      2) If there were, Google Code is generally used by "hg push" from a commandline, followed by comfirmation that my code has been synced; theres not really a place for advertising to appear

      3) if Im using Google Code, I probably am already aware of Google, or I wouldnt be using it-- id be using one of the other free code repos.

  27. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    I reached a point where they didn't support one of the features I came to love in search syntax, and I switched to duckduckgo. I give it a B- on searching, but an A+ on features and privacy.

  28. The one they didn't kill by leptechie · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Surprisingly, Google Apps.

    It's not dead, but it's no longer free. I work with three volunteer organisations - they're not charities but social groups geared towards helping expats get settled in my city. Membership management, event planning and budgeting, publications and flyers. All were easy to collaborate on with Google Apps, but even the (seemingly) small subscription fees are a burden when we're explicitly non-profit and loosely organised. We could have two active users one month, ten the next, so no single pricing plan option is appropriate without serious overhead and/or possible overspend.
    Very unfortunate.

    1. Re:The one they didn't kill by heypete · · Score: 1

      This.

      I registered for Google Apps shortly after it came out. I have my own domain, so having Google handle mail for my domain was fantastic. My needs are pretty basic (one user, a few aliases, really good spam filtering, IMAP, good webmail) and I've been with them for years.

      I recommended Apps to anyone who had their domain and wanted to use Gmail with it.

      Charge for business users? Sure. The price is quite reasonable. Offer a discount for non-profits or universities? Great. Still, it'd be great if they still allowed individuals or small groups (say, less than 10 users) to register for free. They already provide free mail service for Gmail accounts and Google Apps is, in essence, Gmail with an extra database entry saying that it's associated with a particular domain. I doubt they'd be losing money on such users. Even if they didn't offer Apps for free, it'd be great if you could link your domain with a personal Gmail account.

      Yes, I know I'm grandfathered into their free plan and intend to stick with it, but it's still a bit annoying.

    2. Re:The one they didn't kill by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I mostly love how Google Apps costs money, but works worse and costs more and feels clunkier than their free option.

    3. Re:The one they didn't kill by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Google Apps For Business allows you to pay $5 per month for each account or pay $50 per user per year. I think that's a great price that lets you ramp up for down depending on your needs. If you're a nonprofit, you can get Google Apps For Nonprofits.

      I don't want to be patronizing but it's five dollars a month. If you can't/don't want to pay that fee, you can just have all of your users use their personal Gmail accounts for free.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    4. Re:The one they didn't kill by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Assuming you're a 501(c)(3) (and if not, why not?) you can use Google Apps for Nonprofits for free.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  29. Better search by adamchou · · Score: 1

    Search worked so much better when they had Google Pigeons doing the search instead of all these servers.

  30. Don't be, not don't do by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Correction: it was "don't *be* evil" (emphasis added). There is a subtle semantic distinction between doing some evil and actually being evil. Such hair-splitting is probably what lets Google managers sleep at night.

    More from the link:

    Our commitment to the highest standards helps us hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal users. Trust and mutual respect among employees and users are the foundation of our success, and they are something we need to earn every day.

    Nice words they've got there.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Don't be, not don't do by dunkelfalke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, there isn't. Evil is as evil does.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  31. Google Public Data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IMO, google public data is a prime candidate to get the axe. we rely on it for our visualizations here at work. i vehemently argued against using this service because google can axe it at any time. it provides no discernable income for google (no ads appear anywhere), it has virtually no support whatsoever so it seems to function basically as a loss leader for google.

    i argued for using a product such as tableau which may cost some upfront cash but is also less likely to dissapear than a free google product, since it has the backing of a large public company whose livelihood relies on producing and maintaining said product.

    well, only time will tell if my prediction is right or wrong.,,

  32. None by Cyphax · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't bring any of them back. The only services from Google that I really use are Gmail, Maps and the search engine (includes image search).

    The thing is: Google is a bit too large imho. Them killing off a product that lots of people used just creates more room on that market, or perhaps it creates a new one altogether. Now, Google Reader competitors don't have to compete with Google Reader anymore, only among each other. Now, other people may be succesful. This idea sounds good to me.

    I don't hope that Google ditches all these projects so much, don't get me wrong. I just think there's a nice upside to all of this. :)

    1. Re:None by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't bring any of them back. The only services from Google that I really use are Gmail, Maps and the search engine (includes image search).

      The thing is: Google is a bit too large imho. Them killing off a product that lots of people used just creates more room on that market, or perhaps it creates a new one altogether. Now, Google Reader competitors don't have to compete with Google Reader anymore, only among each other. Now, other people may be succesful. This idea sounds good to me.

      I don't hope that Google ditches all these projects so much, don't get me wrong. I just think there's a nice upside to all of this. :)

      This is it right here. If Google decides to leave a market it just removes what was probably a lousy de-facto standard (like Reader, come on, there are a dozen better ways to do RSS now) and forces people to go find the good stuff.

    2. Re:None by Seumas · · Score: 2

      Don't forget Google Earth, Picasa, G+, Google Drive/Docs, Google Sites, Google Contacts, Google Calendar, GTalk, Google Mars, Google Moon, Google Sky, Google Books, Google Alerts, Blogger, Custom Search, Google Finance, Google Groups (their attempt to convince people that usenet is a Google service only), Google News, Google Shopping, Orkut, Patent Search, Scholar, Schemer, News Archive, Hotpot, Image Search, Web History, Google Video, Google Voice, Gmail, AdSense, AdWords, DoubleClick, Meebo, Google Web Optimizer, Google Plus, Goo.gl url shortner, Google Profile, Google Sites, Google Web Fonts, Youtube, App Engine, Dark, GO, OpenSocial, Google Code, Analytics, Public Data Explorer, Trends and Zeitgeist, Chrome, Google Toolbar, Latitude, Google Music, Google Play Store, Google Sync, Translate, turnkey enterprise search systems, Nexus cell phones, Google Glasses, Google Crisis Response, Google Fiber, Public DNS servers, Google Wallet, Google self-driving cars, Zagat/Places/etc.

      . . . . and whatever else I've forgotten.

      As we can see, Google is a very slim and trim company with limited but refined services. They just don't want to offer everything to everyone. Just three or four products that they do really well. :D

  33. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually a lot of people pay for Google these days. My work account and my ISP account are both by Google and are advertisement free.

    Also - plenty of people listen to podcasts, which are mostly compiled via RSS. As a matter of fact that was my primary use of Google Reader - I used it to listen to podcasts and whatever computer I happened to be sitting down to without having to worry about syncing anything. All the ones I listed to were in the list and ready to go.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  34. Latitude next? by mtmra70 · · Score: 1

    Seeing how Google is taking their sweet time to fix Latitude for Blackberry users, is it the next product to be axed?

    https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/maps/PDx5fW-SiFI/77dIbvuMR5sJ

    1. Re:Latitude next? by bernywork · · Score: 1

      Ha. No. Where do you think they get their traffic data from for Google maps?

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
  35. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    dude, this is not sensibility we're talking about here. It's not even that google has asked people what they should bring back. This is a fucking slashdot article about what people would like to see back at google. It's just a wishlist!!! So there's no need to bring sensibility or rationality or complaining about what a free service really needs to provide us!!! No need to be on a high horse; my post is completely on topic as to "what google project didn't deserve to die?". It's your comment that is "off-topic" and not useful.

  36. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Informative

    Essentially. They just have bookmarks/favorites and visit sites every day/hour using precious time/bandwidth because they don't know what a 'feed' is.

    Granted I didn't really use RSS much either until iGoogle (another killed service, hooray) because I wanted an interface that was customizable and dense. I have since moved to netvibes because it's as good or better than iGoogle (and 100x better than Reader) at tons of dense feeds visible at once.

    Really I don't know why reader is being lamented so much. It had a stupid, wasteful interface and wasn't very customizable. I've tried a couple times to make something useful of it but it's always been inferior.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  37. Gizmo5 by weave · · Score: 2

    They forgot all of the companies they've bought and closed down, like Gizmo5

  38. consolidation into google plus? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I was under the impression that much of this "closed down" functionality was going to migrate to the walled garden of Google Plus. The would mirror facebook's methodology and compete with them.

  39. Google Answers by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Spawned a million clones, all of which suck.

    1. Re:Google Answers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Mod Parent UP. Google answers provided as simple forum for leveraging experts to research information on complex topics. Users would pay from $2 to $200 based on the complexity of the research. The researchers were independent contractors that would provide a thorugh analysis of the given topic. I was impressed with the quality of work and I'd often look at the threads and topics that were generated to learn about a particular topic that I was interested in. There is a site available that the google answers experts created on their own but the community fell a part with out google's backing.

    2. Re:Google Answers by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The lack of Google branding hurt UClue for sure, but it was also held back by their self-interest: only former Google Answers researchers were allowed to become paid UClue researchers. The rest of the answers sites are generally crappy free wiki-type things, with little oversight and relatively small communities of contributors. The demand for a high quality research-oriented community with bounties is there, still unsatisfied, when Google had the product in the palm of their hand over ten years ago. Apparently, it was discontinued for no reason other than it was niche. Well, why the hell didn't you expand it?! For starters, you could have embraced the wiki revolution and recruited lots more paid researchers, offered resources for amateurs wanting to go pro. And it's not like it was an expensive thing to maintain. The people running it were commission-based contractors, not employees... and google got some of that commission too, on top of whatever they were making with ads.

  40. SageTV by queequeg1 · · Score: 2

    I'm still pissed that they bought up SageTV and appear to have done absolutely nothing with the technology. One of the better comprehensive PC-based DVR/media streaming systems destroyed. Even with zero updates and little support for 2 years, I still use it. The HD300 is still an excellent media streaming box.

    1. Re:SageTV by GrumpyOldMan · · Score: 1

      SageTV was bought for the Google Fiber project. If you look at the videos of Google Fibre TV, it running SageTV v8.

      Now, I just wish I lived in Kansas City, so that I could get Google Fiber TV. I really wish they'd have kept on selling SageTV.

  41. Re:Google 411 by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

    Considering how shitty their automated transcripts in GoogleVoice are, they didn't run it long enough.

    But yeah, Google 411 was awesome, I used it frequently. There is a Bing 411 (believe it or not) which works similarly, though I haven't used it much and couldn't say whether it still exists.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  42. Google Shill? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    Noting that Google Drive is down and as such it tends to cripple the Chrome Books (and anyone else who makes significant use of Google Drive) makes the parent a Microsoft Shill? That kind of sweeping statement makes YOU sound like a Google Shill.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Google Shill? by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      The statement is just sensational. The quick run through their comment history makes them a shill.

      In the interest of full disclosure, I'm not a shill. I'm just a sell-out.

      I want to be able to do whatever I want whenever I want however I want, and I understand that I might just have to pay something for that privilege, but I'd rather not. I see it as a good thing that I can get free services, and I'll speak well of things that work well for me. It's ancillary that the ads will better match what I might actually be interested in buying, and as long as they're unobtrusive, I don't mind seeing them... ...but Turing help them if they play sound.

      I'm not even particularly loyal. I'm currently writing this comment using Chrome on a Windows VM on a Linux laptop. I do use Google Drive for synchronizing files, and a goodly amount of my data is hosted on Google's services, but that's only because they seem to best fit my needs. I also use DropBox and SpiceWorks extensively (mostly due to their excellent support for my iPad), and host most of my personal projects (especially ones I don't want Google snooping through) on a server run by my university.

      If my comments ever end up being 95% about how great Google's products are over Microsoft or Apple, please assume my account has been hacked, and mod me into oblivion.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    2. Re:Google Shill? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Point of fact, the person never mentions Microsoft. Or Apple. Or any other of the standard Slashdot Targets - except Google, and since the story is ABOUT Google, that is to be expected.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:Google Shill? by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      Point of fact: The ancestor comment does not mention Microsoft, but the person does, many many times.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:Google Shill? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Which is relevent to the comment how? Because you use Linux, I suppose that you should disclose your status as a "Linux Shill" in each and every post here?

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    5. Re:Google Shill? by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      It's relevant because it discloses the bias behind the off-topic disparaging comment.

      If my comments ever end up being 95% about how great Google's products are over Microsoft or Apple, please assume my account has been hacked, and mod me into oblivion.

      Note that includes both me promoting Google excessively or disparaging Apple or Microsoft excessively, as determined by looking through my comment history.

      I expect the same judgement I pass on others. Mystikkman's comment history shows a nearly-exclusive track record of promoting Microsoft and insulting its competitors, so I call him a shill. Your comment history shows a wide variety of opinions and affiliations, and generally appears to be genuine, so I will not even call you a troll, despite some suspicious comments.

      It is not the use of products that marks a shill, nor even spreading a horror story about a competitor. It's the intentional manipulation of public opinion that is more the hallmark of a marketing agent than a satisfied customer.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    6. Re:Google Shill? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      It's relevant because it discloses the bias behind the off-topic disparaging comment.

      So, in a story about Google Projects, mentioning that a certain Google Project is currently unreliable is... "off Topic" and "disparaging"?

      I think you are stretching "fanboyism" to the limits...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    7. Re:Google Shill? by Sarten-X · · Score: 1
      As the ignored AC asked:

      And how is Drive being down related to Google deprecating services?

      It's like commenting how Bill Gates is evil in a story about MS releasing an update to Windows Phone - Completely offtopic.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  43. Google Labs and Google Sets by gr8_phk · · Score: 2

    Withing the old Google labs was a search called Google Sets. It was rarely used, but when you needed that capability it was the only place on the net you could do it. Why it or "labs" had to go away I don't understand.

    For the uninitiated, Sets allowed to you enter 2 or 3 things of some type and it would return a list (15) of other things of that type. The example they used was to enter the titles of a few Tom Cruise movies and it would return a bunch more. In real world usage you could use it to identify alternative makers of various products, or alternatives to any number of things (programming languages for example) or even things where you don't know how the terminology that describes how they are related.

    1. Re: Google Labs and Google Sets by pne · · Score: 1

      Withing the old Google labs was a search called Google Sets. It was rarely used, but when you needed that capability it was the only place on the net you could do it. Why it or "labs" had to go away I don't understand.

      For the uninitiated, Sets allowed to you enter 2 or 3 things of some type and it would return a list (15) of other things of that type. The example they used was to enter the titles of a few Tom Cruise movies and it would return a bunch more. In real world usage you could use it to identify alternative makers of various products, or alternatives to any number of things (programming languages for example) or even things where you don't know how the terminology that describes how they are related.

      The functionality of Google Sets is still there as a part of Google Drive spreadsheets: enter some terms underneath each other in a column, select the cells, then ctrl-click the little square in the bottom right-hand corner and drag it downwards to however many cells you want to fill with Sets suggestions.

      --
      Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
  44. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by MadChicken · · Score: 1

    Sync.

    They killed every other option for syncing feeds/read status because they were free and very good. Now we need to scramble to create new options and get platform support.

    Your interface comments are your perspective only. I loved it, it was extremely efficient.

    --
    SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
  45. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're like the person in old story who had a rich man come to the front door with $1,000 every month. the person was happy and said "thank you" each time. One day the rich man went to the person's neighbor instead of his house, and gave the neighbor $1,000. The person was angry, and yelled "Hey, where is my money!!??" Do you see the issue now? *You* are the one being an asshole and an ingrate. You were given something good free of charge for years, and now can only bitch.

    Wrong; it was a covenant: They got my personal data so they could sell me to advertisers as a precisely targeted demographic, and in return I got a useful tool. In addition, they got a certain amount of exclusivity in the marketplace, because anyone else trying to build this type of useful tool would have a hard time beating "free". They broke their end of the bargain; now I'm on the lookout for better tools that beat "free" by a long margin, by selling me a service rather than selling me to advertisers. Gmail, for example, is right out as of the immediate now. I would prefer an email address I can be reasonable sure will stay the same for the next decade at least.

  46. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing

    and i suppose you will also say that most people no longer use or need the shift key either...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  47. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    google users are the *product* for google's advertising revenue. google doesn't owe anyone free service, it does owe its customers (advertisers) market large enough to be viable.

    That usage of personal information in exchange for providing services? Yea, that kinda makes it not a "free service."

    But I do agree that no one really has a "right" to access somebody else's equipment... so long as part of the loss of said access also entails the prohibition of said equipment owner from using the personal information given in exchange for the "free service." I.e., if Google wants to shut Gmail down they're welcome to, but then they aren't allowed to use my Gmail info to profit from.

    Fair exchange.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  48. Desktop Search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    is still the best option I have tried. very unobtrusiveness and does the basic job without the rest of nonsense.

  49. I'm just wondering when they're killing search. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    After all, search is *so* nineties. Social is where it's at now, init?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  50. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    You're like the person in old story who had a rich man come to the front door with $1,000 every month. the person was happy and said "thank you" each time. One day the rich man went to the person's neighbor instead of his house, and gave the neighbor $1,000. The person was angry, and yelled "Hey, where is my money!!??" Do you see the issue now? *You* are the one being an asshole and an ingrate. You were given something good free of charge for years, and now can only bitch.

    The problem with your anecdote is, in the story the rich man drops off $1000 and leaves with nothing. In this case, Google is the rich man, and he's not leaving empty-handed.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  51. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, there is something off about that rich man. He is being an asshole. Over the years, he managed to INVENT and CREATEa particular relationship and expectation, and then he breaks it on a whim. It's like shipping aid to a hungry country for a decade, thus undercutting and destroying its indigenous farming industry, and then abruptly ceasing that aid leaving people to starve.

    It makes me think of the Little Prince... http://home.pacific.net.hk/~rebylee/text/prince/21.html

    "What must I do, to tame you?" asked the little prince.

    "You must be very patient," replied the fox. "First you will sit down at a little distance from me-- like that-- in the grass. I shall look at you out of the corner of my eye, and you will say nothing. Words are the source of misunderstandings. But you will sit a little closer to me, every day..."

    The next day the little prince came back.

    "It would have been better to come back at the same hour," said the fox. "If, for example, you come at four o'clock in the afternoon, then at three o'clock I shall begin to be happy. I shall feel happier and happier as the hour advances. At four o'clock, I shall already be worrying and jumping about. I shall show you how happy I am! But if you come at just any time, I shall never know at what hour my heart is to be ready to greet you... One must observe the proper rites..."

    "What is a rite?" asked the little prince.

    "Those also are actions too often neglected," said the fox. "They are what make one day different from other days, one hour from other hours. There is a rite, for example, among my hunters. Every Thursday they dance with the village girls. So Thursday is a wonderful day for me! I can take a walk as far as the vineyards. But if the hunters danced at just any time, every day would be like every other day, and I should never have any vacation at all."

    So the little prince tamed the fox. And when the hour of his departure drew near--

    "Ah," said the fox, "I shall cry."

    "It is your own fault," said the little prince. "I never wished you any sort of harm; but you wanted me to tame you..."

  52. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    "most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing"

    Seriously, only "geeks" read blogs.

    Right.

    Everybody else uses them as source citation, but never actually reads them.

    Oh, how I wish I were kidding...

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  53. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He's right. Most people don't use RSS. The same way most people don't visit web pages other than Facebook and Twitter. It's hardly a justification for dismissing a protocol. RSS is a primary functionality of the web, now. It's offered on almost every website. It's the backbone of almost every podcast program.

    The tech media and self-promoting personalities would tell us that they've long since replaced RSS with Twitter and Facebook and that's where they get all their links and news. I call bullshit on that. They seriously log into a website 24x7 and sift through all the trivial garbage their friends post for the few pieces of signal among the noise? Most of the people I know who use facebook have nothing to do with the news or industries I'm in or care about and seeing my stream full of their posts about NASCAR, network television shows, and Kim Kardashian amidsts the occasional ignorant political rant would serve me in absolutely no way.

    RSS is my window to the world. I choose what sites I care about and I get their content delivered directly to me, quickly, stripped of any extraneous bullshit from their site. It's the kind of service that simply won't likely ever be replaced, because it is so simple and fulfills an important role.

    As for Google Reader. Whatever. I used it for years and it was the best way they had to keep me associated with their services. Perhaps even more than my gmail account. However, I don't care that they got rid of it. Google is worth like half a trillion dollars. Just because they don't see a future in it, financially, for themselves -- that doesn't mean it isn't worth it for everyone else. Look at all the little guys out there. They don't need half a billion users for their RSS clients and infrastructures to be a success. They only need a tiny fraction of that. Google's choice to ax this is fantastic. It would be like Blizzard axing World of Warcraft -- an act that would breath fresh life into a genre that it is sucking the air out of. It would encourage others to step in and take their place and compete and innovate.

    Already, we see plenty of these guys competing and offering new services and ways of interfacing with RSS. Syncing, different clients, magazine interfaces, clean stripped down interfaces. All sorts of stuff. And, hey, I bet some of them won't be utterly fucking broken the way Google was (where it would just not let you ever delete some entries in your feed, even after several years) -- and if they are, they'll probably have some form of god damn customer service so you can actually talk to a human about how their shit is broken.

    PS: This move isn't going to get me to use G+ any more, either, Google. The only thing I need social networking for is work and that's what LinkedIN is for. I use G+ in the same way I use Facebook -- as a placeholder for my name so someone else can't take it and nothing more.

  54. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Seumas · · Score: 1

    I complain about "free" stuff all the time, because it's usually not free. Google is charging me both my eyeballs and my personal data. Other "free" stuff online is charging me for my eyeballs and my personal data. Further, telling me "you don't have a right to complain -- or even to complain about your personal data being tracked or ads being shoved in your face, because it's free!" is bullshit, because I'd often gladly pay a buck to not be subjected to those things, if they'd give me a fucking chance. Not giving me an option and then saying "shut the fuck up, bitch, it's free", is bullshit.

    Unless it's an actual free service, where they are not charging money, eyeballs (ads), or personal data.

  55. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by jader3rd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What do most people use for the use cases for which geeks use RSS?

    Email notifications.
    I'm astounded at how people want to get emailed anytime anyone on their Facebook friends list does anything. Their email inbox is effectively their RSS reader.

  56. AppInventor by davidannis · · Score: 1

    It was a beginner friendly way to code android apps. I used it with my kids, who loved it.

  57. Google Knols by Hugh+Pickens+writes · · Score: 2

    Knol was a Google project that aimed to include user-written articles on a range of topics. The project was led by Udi Manber of Google, announced December 13, 2007, and was opened in beta to the public on July 23, 2008 with a few hundred articles mostly in the health and medical field. Some Knol pages were opinion papers of one or more authors, and others described products for sale. Some articles were how-to articles or explained product use. Other people could post comments below an article, such as to refute opinions or reject product claims.

    In November 2011 Google announced that Knol would be phased out. Content could be exported by owners to the WordPress-based Annotum. Knol was closed on April 30, 2012, and all content was deleted by October 1, 2012. Between these dates the content was not viewable, but was downloadable and exportable

  58. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by Hatta · · Score: 1

    I'd really like to get back to a time where if you searched for a keyword in quotes, it was guaranteed to exist in the text of that page. I often find myself on pages that not only lack the exact query, but Google's cache lacks the query too, so you can't blame it on pages changing during inbetween updates.

    No Google, I don't care if you think I misspelled it, that's what the quotes are for. No, I don't care if it's in the meta tags either. Give me my exact query in the text of the page, or nothing.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  59. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    But I gaves da man my address and phone number !!! He owes me man!

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  60. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by wiedzmin · · Score: 1

    [quote]Really I don't know why reader is being lamented so much. It had a stupid, wasteful interface and wasn't very customizable. I've tried a couple times to make something useful of it but it's always been inferior.[/quote]

    Cross platform support. I can sync the same read/unread items between 6 different devices I use, many using third-party client applications developed using their API. No other RSS reader platform offers this.

    --
    Bow before me, for I am root.
  61. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by eyrieowl · · Score: 2

    Thank you. i thought it was insulting to see columnists touting Twitter or Google+ as some answer/way forward for consuming information. They don't even begin to remotely serve the purpose that Google Reader did. And even if I could create a Twitter which managed to show me every article I was interested in from my current RSS collection, none of those other social sites do the tracking of what you've read, and what you haven't, so that you can make sure you don't miss things from sources you want to closely follow. How dumb to tech writers think we are that we'd see any sort of equivalence between those different platforms?

  62. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by wiedzmin · · Score: 1

    Way to stand for your opinion AC.

    --
    Bow before me, for I am root.
  63. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by wiedzmin · · Score: 1

    Let them charge me. I will pay for Google Reader service.

    --
    Bow before me, for I am root.
  64. What about my.yahoo.com? by cshay · · Score: 2

    I have been a long time my.yahoo user. When iGoogle came out, I tried it, but liked my.yahoo.com better.

    I haven't heard people mentioning them here as a replacement for iGoogle. Why is that?

  65. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    You can't view them IN Google Docs, but you can import/export .odf files.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  66. Google Health was so useful, MS Healthfault not by timoreilly · · Score: 1

    While I understand why Google killed Health, I am personally so disappointed in losing it. It was so easy to sync up with my lab results and prescriptions to keep track of that stuff. When they said you could export to Microsoft HealthVault, I thought "no big deal, it will have more or less the same functionality." Boy was I wrong. I remember setting up the connection between my lab and GH as being a matter of moments. Trying to do the same for Microsoft HealthVault, I spent 15 minutes trying to find a link to do that. Finally, it pointed me to an app I had to download, which then told me it was incompatible with my device. Oh well! Meanwhile, though, it's clear to me that health is so important as a business area that I'm certain Google will be back.

  67. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Already posting a similar thing in this thread, but give duck duck go a try. They support +keyword syntax that really does assure the keyword appears in the results. And their exact quotes work too.

  68. What happens to employees? by uneek · · Score: 1

    I would like to know if Google employees are let go every time a project is cancelled.

    1. Re:What happens to employees? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No. Google employees are rarely on the same project for extremely long periods of time anyway. They move people around internally as a matter or practice so no one gets entrenched in one spot and ideas about how things can work better together can flow more naturally. If all the teams actually have had their hands in everything at one point or another they are far more informed on how to help and benefit from each others.

      These employees will simply go elsewhere and be absorbed into other projects.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:What happens to employees? by swillden · · Score: 1

      I would like to know if Google employees are let go every time a project is cancelled.

      I think it's not uncommon that the employees have already drifted to other projects and are maintaining it as a 20% project even before a project is cancelled. But if they haven't they'll certainly simply find another team after the cancellation. Finding a different team in Google is very easy... in fact it's a rare presentation at the weekly company-wide meetings that doesn't end with the presenting team saying "BTW, we're hiring". In general, Google has a hard time finding enough people to staff all of its projects and most teams are always looking.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  69. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    whoops, shoulda paid more attention to the preview. this is the real url

  70. Google Reader by lusiads · · Score: 1

    Buzz was a Twitter clone, but it was too little too late. Anything you can do with Buzz, you can do with Google+.
    Wave was an attempt to replace traditional email, but it only outperformed email under some circumstances, say, if you were collaborating on a group or something. There is a gap between Wave and Gmail but using Gmail saves the hassle of learning the whole new concept of communication. And for a communication tool, if it fails to archive mainstream adoption, it fails. You can't learn a cool new language while everyone's talking in legacy English.
    For Reader, it's quite a different thing actually. Google does not provide a decent alternative. Some of you might say social networking sites can be used to get news, I think it's rarely the case for everybody, especially for international users outside of US/UK. I live in a country where every big sites support RSS but very few support social networks. All I can get from social networking sites is funny pictures and inspirational quotes, sometime unconfirmed rumors. Few to none news websites/journalists can be found on social networks, if there is, news is not reliable enough.
    Once upon a time, Google was cool and they cared about making cool products before they even figured out how to make money with it. That day has now long gone.

  71. CalDAV by Njovich · · Score: 2

    And suddenly Google Calendar turned useless to me...

  72. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by mark-t · · Score: 1

    What part about using Google reader requires that a person know what RSS is or understand that they are accessing the web in that format?

  73. Re:google notebook by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Seem that it will be doing a comeback, integrated with Google Drive.

    Maybe Reader will reappear in a new shape/name, there is still time till July. After all, A LOT of what is shared in g+ are links to things that come originally from some rss.

  74. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    They use social networks where geeks that use RSS share links to the interesting content there.

  75. Federated Protocols by snadrus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    RSS, Federated XMPP, and Google Wave are all federated protocols that Google's not working with anymore. We need better federated protocols to catch-on (by being well supported) now that email is looking ancient.

    Everyone has an email address because anyone can run an email server, not because a handful of mega-tech companies elected to work together. Email has no central point of censorship or ad-scanning. The same isn't true for any discussion page, twitter, social media, etc.

    HTTP is mostly decentralized (except DNS & SSL) and is the basis of today's Internet. Decentralized protocols make the world grow. Axing them kills progress.

    --
    Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
    1. Re:Federated Protocols by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      All the benefits of email are exactly why they refuse to support those things. Google isn't actually that good at releasing quality software despite all their "geniuses" so if they use a protocol that anyone else can compete on then they'll lose.

  76. Google Voice by Bo'Bob'O · · Score: 2

    It might not be officially dead, but it may as well be. I would have paid money for it, but it's been unreliable, flaky with getting texts to other carriers, and hasn't been updated in years now. I can't even make IP voice calls from voice.google.com, I have to go to gmail.com to make a call from my Google voice number. There is no way that I would use my google voice number as my main number with it's issues, and it doesn't look like that is ever going to change now. It's a shame, it was the product for me, and I would be recommending it to all my friends and coworkers who travel internationally.

  77. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    That was less the reason for the axe, more was that it's kinda hard to make money with it.

    One of the main reasons why I rely on RSS is that I want to get the info without the junk. It's pretty much anathema for a company that relies on delivering you that junk mostly.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  78. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    It is an obscure geeky thing.

    Most people don't 'follow' websites, with the exception of twitter or Facebook.

    Like most obscure geeky things, you don't actually need to be a geek to figure it out or benefit, but geeks do tend to benefit more since they tend to 'follow' more websites.

    Nearly everyone you know is a geek, you just aren't aware of the world around you enough to realize they are.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  79. Re:The working search engine. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Well, mostly 'cause the crap paid for it...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  80. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Uh, no, you're being obtuse. This is for EXACT words. So you search "fast car" you'll get articles for tuning a car for speed on duckduckgo(along with an infobox about a few things named "fast car") +fast +car changes the search to emphasize the words themselves rather than their meaning, and you get a lyric page for the song "fast car" which has "fast car" repeated often.

    Both represent searches you might want to make, but google has decided the latter isn't important to anyone anymore. The GP was complaining about the lack of concern for the words themselves.

  81. Knol by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    Google could have kept the content created by tens of thousands of volunteers, as static pages. OK, so no more updates to Knol, no more content editing or adding, but Google could have kept it as static content for nearly no cost. Maybe add some adlinks to make it marginally profitable.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  82. Google Real Estate Search by davecotter · · Score: 1

    I know google doesn't have much of a choice in this, but when they had real estate search it was the tip of the awesome iceberg. I wish they were allowed to "compete" in that space.

    1. Re:Google Real Estate Search by Idbar · · Score: 1

      While I'm currently sad about Reader, and somewhat afraid of the future of Google voice. I came here to check this.

      For the short time it worked, the real estate search was the best service I found. A large comprehensive easy to use, easy to search system to find places for sale and for rent. I agree with you, it's a shame there weren't allowed to compete with the realtor mafia.

  83. There are no free services by Comboman · · Score: 1

    Would you complain if the fire department eliminated their free service of protecting your home? There are no free services. Some are paid for directly by the users of the service, some are paid for collectively by taxes or insurance premiums, some are paid for by handing over personal information or viewing advertising. The method used to pay for a service shouldn't affect your ability to complain when the service is removed.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  84. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by TheLink · · Score: 1

    Try that with a bird feeder or similar sometime especially in winter. It's not always as clear-cut as you make it out to be.

    More so if you present your service as something that people can depend on. Not saying Google does that, but they really seem to have grown a reputation for building and killing projects on a whim. Given that they are trying to charge for some of their services I think they should rethink their approach a bit.

    Does Google really want us to treat their services as if they can't be depended on for the longterm? I'm fine with that since I don't depend that much on any of them, it'll be annoying if Google Search went belly-up but nowadays it's not working so well anyway (they seem to allow many sites to present info to Google search that's different to what users can actually access- that used to be a no-no - BMW Germany got smacked down for doing that).

    I won't be surprised if that's one of the reasons why Google App Engine has far fewer users than it would have. With Google's reputation how many will invest many man-months or years to build something that's so locked in to a Google service?

    Google Compute Engine might be more successful - since if you do things not too badly you can probably migrate to EC2 or similar with just a bit of pain.

    --
  85. Google Desktop by beacher · · Score: 1

    http://googledesktop.blogspot.com/ - I know you can still find it and install, but still, I wish that it was still living on......

    "As of September 14 (2011), Google Desktop will no longer be available for download, and existing installations will not be updated to include new features or fixes.

    Thanks again to all of our users. It’s been a fun journey.

    Posted by the Google Desktop Team"

  86. Re:the original google search engine and clean pag by Wookact · · Score: 1

    Exactly, or the fact that you used to be able to use boolean. I want this word to be in the page so I tack on +searchterm, which was very useful. Now they want you to use that to search google plus. They tell you to use quotes now, but that doesn't even work right.

  87. Why trust them with your stuff? by mrmeval · · Score: 1

    They've proven they're not trust worthy or a long term solution to your storage or other than trivial tech needs.

    I will never trust Google the perverted clowd clown for any non-trivial tech need.

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  88. The alternatives suck by mark-t · · Score: 1

    At least 3 of the 4 alternatives listed are all client-side applications, instead of a browser-based reader you can access anywhere.

    The remaining alternative, newsblur, I haven't been able to successfully evaluate yet because it keeps crapping out with 502 errors.

    1. Re:The alternatives suck by Techman83 · · Score: 1

      They seem to be suffering from a massive influx of users. It seems to be getting better stability wise since I first started using it. It also has an original view, which is awesome for sites that annoyingly just put a link to the content, rather than the content on the feed.Three Months to Scale NewsBlur

      It's also OSS if you wish to host it yourself, you can find it here.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i cat
      Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
  89. iGoogle! by MindPhlux · · Score: 1

    iGoogle! I'm really upset they're shutting it down. Mostly, I don't understand why they'd shut it down. iGoogle has been my homepage for the past 4-5 years, and it's done exactly what I want a homepage to do.

    I have started using other search engines over time to supplement Google for various reasons, but I honestly think the removal of iGoogle will have me using google search a lot less frequently. fwiw.

    1. Re:iGoogle! by MindPhlux · · Score: 1

      hell, I just realized the only reason I'm here is that this news story popped up on my slashdot iGoogle feed. =/

  90. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by IANAAC · · Score: 1

    ... most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing

    Yes, that's why pretty much every major news outlet around the globe has RSS feeds. Solely for geeks.

  91. Clearly by Venotar · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Clearly by kbrannen · · Score: 1

      Agreed, I liked the idea that was Notebook. Worse, they wouldn't release the source as a good-will gesture when they killed it. If they aren't going to do anything with it, why not release it into the wild?

  92. Real Estate by A+well+known+coward · · Score: 1

    I still miss the Real Estate function in Google Maps. When I was looking for a new place to live some years ago, it really helped me out. But now that I'm considering moving again, I have to search a dozen different sites from different brokers in order to find something in my area.

  93. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Seumas · · Score: 1

    The funny thing is that since I don't give a shit about Twitter, either (I barely follow anyone and I never post), instead of using twitter for my news feed and site updates like everyone is claiming is "the new thing you're supposed to do now that RSS is dead", I actually have always used RSS feeds for twitter accounts to dump updates from the few Twitter posters I give a damn about into my RSS setup. :)

    I saw something this morning about Google rolling out an Evernote competitor built on Google Drive. They're going to have a hard time pushing these types of things, I think. On top of all the other concerns with such services (what do you do when they're buggy and broken?, why are the interfaces always so different across the whole suite of Google products?, etc). -- now they have to contend with the "why should I use your service when it might not be here in 12-18 months?". One big selling point of a service from a company like Google is "hey, they're massive and never going anywhere". That's a benefit they offer over "here's this little startup that may fail and you'll have to find a new start somewhere else for all your data and tools in six months". If that's no longer a certainty, then you would just go for the coolest/neatest/most useful service out there and take your chances on longevity (and Google is rarely the most useful, neatest, or coolest of the lot).

  94. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Seumas · · Score: 1

    That can't possibly be true.

    According to the tech journalists over the last three years:

    * Nobody under 50 uses websites anymore (they just click shit from their social networking feeds).
    * Nobody under 50 uses email anymore.
    * Nobody under 50 uses IM anymore.
    * Nobody under 30 uses Facebook anymore.
    * Nobody under 30 uses text messaging anymore.
    * Nobody under 20 uses twitter anymore.

  95. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    Something is definitely broken with Google Doc's support of Open Document file formats: I just tried to upload an .odt file to Google Drive, and the fucker insists on converting the file instead of leaving well alone.

    This becomes hugely annoying if your .odt file is larger than 2 MB, because then Google Docs refuses to upload it, since it "cannot" convert a file larger than 2 MB. FTFS!

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  96. Random Signatures in Google Mail by Rick+Richardson · · Score: 1

    Random Signatures in Google Mail.  It was a Google Labs offering...

  97. Old habits and all that by Krakadoom · · Score: 1

    I wish they wouldn't shut down iGoogle. I have been using this as my default browser page ever since it was introduced (I think), and I'm really happy with it. It lets me put everything I use most often and some handy newsfeeds that keep me informed during the work day all in one place. I really dont understand why they'd nix it, especially since it doesn't seem like it's a big ressource draw.

  98. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by kiwimate · · Score: 1

    This move isn't going to get me to use G+ any more, either, Google.

    Are you sure about that?.

    I suppose the moral of this story is it doesn't really matter if you use G+ or not; Google, through some sneaky machinations, still are doing everything they can to artificially inflate the number of "users".

  99. Highlights the need for your own software... by gatzke · · Score: 1

    You need to control your data! Now more than ever.

    We hate Microsoft, but at least you have some control there. They sell you bad software, but at least you sorta have it in your possession (until they sunset the license / activation servers).

    Luckily, I learned a few lessons early on with the loss of Yahoo Photos. I now have nicely named folders of the selected good family photos for relatively quick online upload (again) if I have to move services. Or I can roll my own web server if I had to, just for photos.

    You need to be prepared to download your documents and switch your email if needed.

    I was about to start up full-force with g+, but after this reader nonsense I went and make an account at joindiaspora.com and tried out Diaspora. It looks pretty solid now and they are trying to do it the way God intended for the internet, open standards and software so you can roll your own. I only use g+ now to bitch and moan about google...

  100. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  101. The search APIs by Animats · · Score: 1

    Google used to offer search through a SOAP API. With no ads. They discontinued that. Then they offered search through a "Web Search API", again with no ads. That's deprecated, rate limited, and going away, although it still works if you have an old API key for it. ("Google Custom Search" does not support general web searches, and costs $5 per 1000 queries.)

  102. What Is The Closest Alternative To GoogleReader? by assertation · · Score: 1

    I liked Google Reader because it was simple, organized and didn't throw a lot of glitz in your face.

    Which alternative RSS reader is the closest to that?

  103. Google wave by drolli · · Score: 1

    I am not sure why goolge wave was killed. My suspicion is that they did not find an unintrusive way of placing advertisements.

    IMHO google wave was what i expect of collaboration. Many emlais, revisions sendind forward and backwards document formats designed to fit on a 3.5 inch floppy disk could be avoided.....

    1. Re:Google Wave by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Second this!
      It was a marvellous time, with much optimism, bafflement and confusion!

      I had around thirty semi-live discussions on how great this was and how there was not a single use case for this interesting tool.

      I feel like I was participating in a huge gamble on tulips.

  104. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by houghi · · Score: 2

    You forgot one detail. The rich guy told me he would be giving me money for the rest of my life, so I could give up my job. That I have done and now he says it wasn't a real deal, because he crossed his fingers behind his back.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  105. Google Home Page by renfrow · · Score: 1

    I'm going to really miss that, I've got mine chock full of little gadgets. Lots of magazines, movies, weather, gmail, wikipedia, etc. I'll just have to see if saving it as a "Web Page, complete" will work... (Nope :()

  106. Google Wave by AAWood · · Score: 1

    I was really interested in Google Wave. Got in the Beta, posted in some random thread... and that was it. No-one I knew signed up. Because no-one they knew was signing up. So I couldn't actually make use of it, at all. It was also really tricky explaining to people what exactly it was; I just couldn't come up with a nice, understandable metaphor to describe it, and I'm not sure Google could either.

  107. RSS vs twitter / facebook ... caldav by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

    I agree with your general sentiment that those who have replaced RSS with twitter/facebook are deluded in thinking that this is the answer for everyone.

    On the other hand, RSS is not the be all/end all either.

    I think the realization to be made is that a twitter account's stream and an RSS feed are really not that different.

    You mention having to sift through people's personal tweets to find the ones that you actually find interesting. That's a good point - but mostly one that should be answered by "follow a different person" - somebody who has separate accounts for their professional work vs their personal affairs, for example. After all, if I 'subscribe' to Slashdot's frontpage RSS, the bulk of the articles that get thrown my way are still not really of interest - so perhaps I should subscribe to the RSS of a tech news site that is more focused on what I want to read about.

    The (marginal) advantage to RSS (aside from technical*) is that RSS usually have at least a title and a summary with a link to content, whereas tweets are almost effectively title and summary in one.. and then no link to content if the tweet doesn't happen to link to whatever they're talking about.

    * RSS's real power is that it is ubquitous, easy to write and to parse, and almost universally understood. If I wanted to make an RSS feed with all the latest products from my company, I could easily do so. If I then wanted to check out that RSS feed, there's dozens of programs, websites, mobile apps, etc. that will happily accept a link to the feed and display it in any number of forms.

    Twitter, on the other hand, you can technically only read through twitter.com, embeds at other sites, and a scarce few officially sanctioned applications (the developer of which needs an API key and authentication to even be allowed to fetch the results, etc.)

    But there are twitter-to-RSS solutions that largely break down this difference. I don't see them as opposites or mutually exclusive.. they can be complementary.

    That's all as an aside to Google Reader, though - which was as much an aggregator as a client, to many. Yes, there's plenty of alternatives and no, developers probably shouldn't have relied on their users using Google Reader and not support other solutions - but just as with the 'weather API' on Android, it's a highly unpopular move for something that only costs them a pittance to (keep) supported.

    Just to be on-topic for the story itself... I would guess that the 'google project' that didn't deserve to die would be open CalDAV API access, forcing developers to use the Google Calendar API instead (after telling those using MS EAS to use CalDAV instead) - unless you manage to get whitelisted.

  108. Labs was more than that by Azure+Flash · · Score: 2

    The removal of Google Labs was more than just another product being retired. It was a sign of a massive shift of mentality from Google. This is when they started doing their own thing and not giving a damn what users think. Since then, it's becoming clearer and clearer that Google is not particularly worried about doing evil or not, and much less about what benefits the users. This is worrying for users, but investors and COs are probably thrilled.

  109. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    I have been procrastinating my exodus from iGoogle (before they lock me out :( ), I Google'd "iGoogle alternatives" but the few I tried sucked. Netvibes was not one of them, I just spent the past 10 minutes setting it up the way I like it & now (while I think it's silly to ax something people are using), I won't even notice them shutting it down.

    Thanks for the recommendation. The only feature I miss (might just not have found it yet) was being able to expand the headlines to read the summary before leaving my homepage.

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  110. Re:The working search engine. by Caesar+Tjalbo · · Score: 1

    and last month's image search.

    --
    "I'm not much interested in interoperability. I want substitutability. I want to be able to throw your software out."
  111. Re:the original google search engine... by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    exactamundo. I agree with you completely. And no fair getting rid of the boolean search capabilities on the main page, either. Don't make us go into the "advanced search" options capability to do it. Be a search engine, which is what you claim to be!!!! Khaaaann!!!! (shouting google into a spiraling ascending camera doesn't feel as good, since there are two syllables... :>) why is it that way?)

  112. Google Voice Issues by Guppy · · Score: 1

    I would have paid money for it

    I did pay money for it. $20 following integration with my Sprint cellular service (to keep my Google number as a permanent secondary contact), then another $10 for international dialing credit; the modest price has proved to be excellent value for the money.

    hasn't been updated in years

    I have the same complaint as you, though -- bugs and feature deficiencies which go unfixed for years, with no response from Google. For instance, while you can pay to change your Google Voice number, after integration with Sprint, my secondary contact number apparently cannot be deleted, un-linked, turned off, or changed, ever -- the option to do so disappears. As far as I can tell the only workaround to disentangle myself from it, is to de-integrate from Sprint and start over from a fresh Google account (and pray that the de-integration process doesn't gum up something in the process, as it has many other subscribers).

    It's hard to say how much is Google's fault, and how much is Sprint's. In either case, I've heard Google is planning to roll out full Voice integration with additional mobile providers. For everyone's sake, I hope someone has learned some lessons, and the launch will be smoother for them, than it has been for us.

  113. Reader by jamessnell · · Score: 1

    I use Google Reader OFTEN. Multiple times per day. I used it to bring me to this article. I also used Google Notebook heavily. When they retired it, it wasn't so bad, because they'd then started Google Docs (AKA Google Drive). However, Reader isn't being replaced, it's just being stabbed in the face and thrown in the dead-pile. I don't overly blame Google, as it probably doesn't pay for itself nor would I be willing to pay for it if they asked me to, I'd just spool up my own private web app, which I'm in the process of doing, btw. Still, I'm saddened by this attitude of optimizing margins and catering to the biggest level of user literacy. At least we still have Open Source software and the like.

  114. iGoogle! by Zilch · · Score: 1

    iGoogle has been my homepage/portal for years! And it included RSS feed widgets! It just needed a few tweaks to make it great. Good one Google.

    It won't do any good, but sign here anyway.

  115. Google Reader by ynp7 · · Score: 1

    How is there even a question here? Google Reader.

  116. What's the ROI? by utkonos · · Score: 1

    Google made a business decision for each of these projects. Their return on investment was too low to justify the project. They will probably not disclose any of the criteria or metric that they used to reach this decision, but I guarantee that each of these projects deserved the axe. Google is not there to provide free services to you. Google's business is to allow access to services that give their main business (advertisements) an advantage. If the money spent to keep the project going outweighs the number of users brought in, with some other metrics probably in there too, it gets the axe, and deservedly so.