4 ms·

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * S

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * Search * GMail * Youtube * Android * Chrome * Maps * Docs Its just that Google is unable to monetize many of them. However, Facebook has only Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. 1) Instagram _is_ what Facebook was 10 years ago. Its not a new product. They just bought it because Instagram was becoming _The Social Network_. 2) Instagram and Whatsapp were bought acquired. What I'm trying to say is that Google is unable to monetize many of its products. And if online advertisement gets doomed, it would have to look for other business models. But it _does_ have a very diverse set of products that people love. What does Facebook have? and when was the last time they created something people loved?

sjg007 10y ago
People spend a ton of time on Facebook.
ohashi 10y ago
They also neglect intent. When I search for something, I want it, at that moment. When I see an ad on my facebook page, it's trying to guess what I want at that moment, but I'm actually doing something else and the ad is simply trying to distract me and convince me I need something at that moment.
- AznHisoka 10y ago
  Yep. Facebook has just as many visitors as Google and makes much less. Sure they know what age I am, that I'm college educated, live in NY, like anime and startups. But would they know I'm suffering from hemorrhoids and need help? That I'm considering an abortion and need a clinic recommendation? I sure as heck ain't broadcasting that in my timeline.
  - j1vms 10y ago
    Shit. Hope you get that stuff sorted out, probably deal with the hemorrhoids first. (aside since I assume that was an example! :) [Edit: and in case you aren't, hope you do get that sorted out] Google has better potential for growth, but it still needs to prove it can heavily monetize anything outside of search. That is, find a new business that is competitive with their search revenue, until it's too late. Facebook's first success was monetizing mobile (which Google should have been able to do better than it currently does). Its potential to find new sources of revenue is good but not as great as Google's. Only time will tell if either or both will succeed next. Since potential isn't as good as realized potential of course.
yomly 10y ago
From that comparison, it is quite apparent that while Facebook may have a stronghold on your hours per day, and have richer personal data on the individual, Google has access to a far more diverse dataset from its users. For example, there have been talk about how search has shown promise in early cancer diagnosis [0]. So as you say, while Google are currently only monetizing their ad platform at the moment, they are far better positioned than Facebook to quickly find new revenue streams, should they need to. Additionally, if you should believe that AI is going to be a huge area for monetization in the near future, then Google are very much well positioned to be a leader there - it is no coincidence that a "search" company is able to make self-driving cars or Alpha Go... [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/technology/online-searches-can-identify-cancer-victims-study-finds.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/technology/online-searches...
amelius 10y ago
Of those products you name, GMail, Youtube, Chrome, Maps and Docs are near-commodity products. These are just basic services for which open-source versions exist, and every engineering team of about 50 people could easily recreate them given today's state of technology. This also holds for Facebook. The real struggle lies not in the technology, but in the network-effect and branding.
- Jabbles 10y ago
  What do you think the thousands of engineers that work on these products are doing? You realise that there's a lot more to these products than the web interface?
  - amelius 10y ago
    They work on making it scale. But that is an activity that pays for itself.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >What do you think the thousands of engineers that work on these products are doing? Not much. Usually worsening them...
  - mercer 10y ago
    Indeed. I use gmail, gmaps, and gdocs because they're good tools. If not for my still-free Google Apps account, I'd pay for just gmail and docs even if there are free alternatives.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
eulji 10y ago
Market leaders ? not really. They beat the competition with the oldest trick. They offered a good enough product for the cheapest price (ehm ehm for free). I do not think these products should be free or offered at the expense of my privacy. Sadly most of the people do not feel that way. Google is in many ways a cancer on the market (anyways most of the big companies that do it the same are like that).

sjg007 10y ago

People spend a ton of time on Facebook.

ohashi 10y ago

They also neglect intent. When I search for something, I want it, at that moment. When I see an ad on my facebook page, it's trying to guess what I want at that moment, but I'm actually doing something else and the ad is simply trying to distract me and convince me I need something at that moment.

AznHisoka 10y ago
Yep. Facebook has just as many visitors as Google and makes much less. Sure they know what age I am, that I'm college educated, live in NY, like anime and startups. But would they know I'm suffering from hemorrhoids and need help? That I'm considering an abortion and need a clinic recommendation? I sure as heck ain't broadcasting that in my timeline.
- j1vms 10y ago
  Shit. Hope you get that stuff sorted out, probably deal with the hemorrhoids first. (aside since I assume that was an example! :) [Edit: and in case you aren't, hope you do get that sorted out] Google has better potential for growth, but it still needs to prove it can heavily monetize anything outside of search. That is, find a new business that is competitive with their search revenue, until it's too late. Facebook's first success was monetizing mobile (which Google should have been able to do better than it currently does). Its potential to find new sources of revenue is good but not as great as Google's. Only time will tell if either or both will succeed next. Since potential isn't as good as realized potential of course.

yomly 10y ago

From that comparison, it is quite apparent that while Facebook may have a stronghold on your hours per day, and have richer personal data on the individual, Google has access to a far more diverse dataset from its users. For example, there have been talk about how search has shown promise in early cancer diagnosis [0]. So as you say, while Google are currently only monetizing their ad platform at the moment, they are far better positioned than Facebook to quickly find new revenue streams, should they need to. Additionally, if you should believe that AI is going to be a huge area for monetization in the near future, then Google are very much well positioned to be a leader there - it is no coincidence that a "search" company is able to make self-driving cars or Alpha Go... [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/technology/online-searches-can-identify-cancer-victims-study-finds.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/technology/online-searches...

amelius 10y ago

Of those products you name, GMail, Youtube, Chrome, Maps and Docs are near-commodity products. These are just basic services for which open-source versions exist, and every engineering team of about 50 people could easily recreate them given today's state of technology. This also holds for Facebook. The real struggle lies not in the technology, but in the network-effect and branding.

Jabbles 10y ago
What do you think the thousands of engineers that work on these products are doing? You realise that there's a lot more to these products than the web interface?
- amelius 10y ago
  They work on making it scale. But that is an activity that pays for itself.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >What do you think the thousands of engineers that work on these products are doing? Not much. Usually worsening them...
- mercer 10y ago
  Indeed. I use gmail, gmaps, and gdocs because they're good tools. If not for my still-free Google Apps account, I'd pay for just gmail and docs even if there are free alternatives.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

eulji 10y ago

Market leaders ? not really. They beat the competition with the oldest trick. They offered a good enough product for the cheapest price (ehm ehm for free). I do not think these products should be free or offered at the expense of my privacy. Sadly most of the people do not feel that way. Google is in many ways a cancer on the market (anyways most of the big companies that do it the same are like that).