"Rather than spending money on failed products (remember Google Plus?) or managers’ pet projects, Apple has to face the disciplining force of large investors."

"Rather than spending money on failed products (remember Google Plus?) or managers’ pet projects, Apple has to face the disciplining force of large investors." So how would a large company stay innovative without testing ideas with "pet projects"? One may suggest letting the startups do the experimenting and buy only the results, which is not a bad strategy but that limits your options, especially if you have ideas of your own. Google Plus was that kind of experiment that, after Facebook, had low chances of succeeding unless it was backed by a big name. Having being tried by Google directly, instead of by some inexperienced entrepreneur in a start-up or in some Google incubator, actually conferred it a higher chance of success. If that wasn't enough - too bad, but at least it was tried. And considering the stakes of succeeding in social networks, taking the risk of developing Google Plus was justified. Bashing now the Google founders for that decision is just mean.