4 ms·

Because Google has never genuinely competed on quality, except for search results, and that was only for a blessed golden period. (And not counting Gmail, which

Because Google has never genuinely competed on quality, except for search results, and that was only for a blessed golden period. (And not counting Gmail, which was a 20% project, and is only considered high quality because the rest of the state of web-based email interfaces is horrible, open source shit.) Google doesn't need finesse: They strongarm, using brute force & sheer volume. That's what they do. Ergo, they don't need to finesse the SDK or truly court developers. (The best way to court developers is to ensure apps sell - and the Android marketplace numbers are dismal.) They think they will win anyway.

troystribling 16y ago
Google has not acceled at anything outside the expertise of the founders, search and building datacenters.
megablast 16y ago
<i>, and is only considered high quality because the rest of the state of web-based email interfaces is horrible, open source shit.)</i> I take issue with this. Google is also better than non-web based email clients as well, including outlook, thunderbird and Apple mail. It searches quicker as well, which is completely unbelievable. Sure, some things these clients do better, but for most tasks, gmail is much better. Outlook 2010, just released last week, has just started linking email conversations.
- aristoxenus 16y ago
  Getting further OT: I used to agree wholeheartedly with this, but have you noticed how slow Gmail is getting? I recently switched back to Apple mail, after insisting on Gmail as my frontend for years. Can't beat Google on search speed, but Apple does a fine job of that, and every other function is considerably faster.
wallflower 16y ago
I never really thought about Google before like that. Thanks. I guess they will stick to their core competencies, and I wonder how much of Google's operational philosophy is due to individuals like Marissa Mayer. Or is it The Borg.
stcredzero 16y ago
And not counting Gmail, which was a 20% project, and is only considered high quality because the rest of the state of web-based email interfaces is horrible, open source shit. What's so bad about Squirrelmail? It seemed pretty snappy when I tried it.

troystribling 16y ago

Google has not acceled at anything outside the expertise of the founders, search and building datacenters.

megablast 16y ago

<i>, and is only considered high quality because the rest of the state of web-based email interfaces is horrible, open source shit.)</i> I take issue with this. Google is also better than non-web based email clients as well, including outlook, thunderbird and Apple mail. It searches quicker as well, which is completely unbelievable. Sure, some things these clients do better, but for most tasks, gmail is much better. Outlook 2010, just released last week, has just started linking email conversations.

aristoxenus 16y ago
Getting further OT: I used to agree wholeheartedly with this, but have you noticed how slow Gmail is getting? I recently switched back to Apple mail, after insisting on Gmail as my frontend for years. Can't beat Google on search speed, but Apple does a fine job of that, and every other function is considerably faster.

wallflower 16y ago

I never really thought about Google before like that. Thanks. I guess they will stick to their core competencies, and I wonder how much of Google's operational philosophy is due to individuals like Marissa Mayer. Or is it The Borg.

stcredzero 16y ago

And not counting Gmail, which was a 20% project, and is only considered high quality because the rest of the state of web-based email interfaces is horrible, open source shit. What's so bad about Squirrelmail? It seemed pretty snappy when I tried it.