5 ms·

While I'm sure this is useful to the right people, unfortunately my reaction when I see a new Google service announced is "Nobody should use this, it'll be aban

While I'm sure this is useful to the right people, unfortunately my reaction when I see a new Google service announced is "Nobody should use this, it'll be abandoned in six months and shut down in twelve." I hope Google realises this is a viscous cycle where people avoid signing up for their services, causing low usage, causing them to abandon it, causing lower usage, causing them to shut it down, causing people to avoid signing up for their services...

s17n 9y ago
Is Google actually more likely to shut down a given service than any other company?
- pishpash 9y ago
  Yes. Google's model is "user has zero say." On the one side of it is forced auto-update, and on the other side is forced deprecation.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  Seems so, especially that most of the time we're talking about companies for which a given service is their only product. Personally, I've learned to treat SaaS products as throwaway by default. That is, if I can benefit from it short-term, like in 3 to 6 weeks, I may sign up. But I don't expect it to exist in 3 to 6 years, so I'm not going to invest much into using it.
  - TAForObvReasons 9y ago
    I don't specifically blame Google when they acquire a startup and shut down the service. We don't know the financial condition of the company before the acquisition. Would you rather Google wait for the startup to officially fold and then scoop up the assets in bankruptcy? Their numbers definitely are adversely affected by these "acquisitions"
  - s17n 9y ago
    Companies with only one product are very likely to shut that product down when they go out of business or are acquired.
- megous 9y ago
  Perhaps yes, because almost none are core businesses of Google.
  - ReverseCold 9y ago
    This one looks like core business (analytics/data collection).
  - s17n 9y ago
    Any new product is either: - A startup, which will likely fail - Not the core business of the company which created it
    - megous 9y ago
      But it's much easier to drop without endangering the company. And the question is specifically about Google.
- stevenjohns 9y ago
  Established services... maybe? Although the list on Wikipedia[0] doesn't make it seem as dramatic. I know of at least one website[1] dedicated to track whether or not Google had shut down products yet. I think the thing that started this meme was when Google shut down Reader[2]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Discontinued_Google_services https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Discontinued_Google_s... [1] https://didgoogleshutdown.com/ https://didgoogleshutdown.com/ [2] https://www.google.com/reader/about/ https://www.google.com/reader/about/
alt3red 9y ago
This!
manigandham 9y ago
Where does this rumor even come from? I don't see any evidence for it but there's always a HN comment about it. In fact, I've never had a Google service shutdown but a dozen smaller companies have disappeared in the meantime. Also, this is a B2B product which is treated much more seriously than their standard consumer products.
- devonbleak 9y ago
  We were using StackDriver for our AWS monitoring which they bought and killed. B2B definitely isn't safe. They've earned this reputation IMO.
  - manigandham 9y ago
    StackDriver is still available and can still monitor AWS: https://cloud.google.com/monitoring/quickstart-aws https://cloud.google.com/monitoring/quickstart-aws Even if it no longer works for your usecase, it's not a Google originated service but another startup that was shutdown/acquired/sold which is what I was referring to.
    - TAForObvReasons 9y ago
      Should we hold it against google when they acquire a startup and shut it down? Or is it preferable for them to wait for the startup to wind down the service first and then swoop in?
      - manigandham 9y ago
        I don't know, I'm assuming users just care that the product or service continues to exist and get better. If an acquisition helps then great, otherwise... sure, we can blame whatever decisions led to the demise, although it's rarely as simple as "stupid big company wasted a bunch of money and made people sad".
      - sitepodmatt 9y ago
        I think it's important to distinguish between consumer services, especially beta and one via acquisition, and core parts of their cloud / big-data ecosystem. Do you worry about Azure services because Microsoft killed WMP or WM10 or FoxPro?

s17n 9y ago

Is Google actually more likely to shut down a given service than any other company?

pishpash 9y ago
Yes. Google's model is "user has zero say." On the one side of it is forced auto-update, and on the other side is forced deprecation.
TeMPOraL 9y ago
Seems so, especially that most of the time we're talking about companies for which a given service is their only product. Personally, I've learned to treat SaaS products as throwaway by default. That is, if I can benefit from it short-term, like in 3 to 6 weeks, I may sign up. But I don't expect it to exist in 3 to 6 years, so I'm not going to invest much into using it.
- TAForObvReasons 9y ago
  I don't specifically blame Google when they acquire a startup and shut down the service. We don't know the financial condition of the company before the acquisition. Would you rather Google wait for the startup to officially fold and then scoop up the assets in bankruptcy? Their numbers definitely are adversely affected by these "acquisitions"
- s17n 9y ago
  Companies with only one product are very likely to shut that product down when they go out of business or are acquired.
megous 9y ago
Perhaps yes, because almost none are core businesses of Google.
- ReverseCold 9y ago
  This one looks like core business (analytics/data collection).
- s17n 9y ago
  Any new product is either: - A startup, which will likely fail - Not the core business of the company which created it
  - megous 9y ago
    But it's much easier to drop without endangering the company. And the question is specifically about Google.
stevenjohns 9y ago
Established services... maybe? Although the list on Wikipedia[0] doesn't make it seem as dramatic. I know of at least one website[1] dedicated to track whether or not Google had shut down products yet. I think the thing that started this meme was when Google shut down Reader[2]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Discontinued_Google_services https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Discontinued_Google_s... [1] https://didgoogleshutdown.com/ https://didgoogleshutdown.com/ [2] https://www.google.com/reader/about/ https://www.google.com/reader/about/

alt3red 9y ago

This!

manigandham 9y ago

Where does this rumor even come from? I don't see any evidence for it but there's always a HN comment about it. In fact, I've never had a Google service shutdown but a dozen smaller companies have disappeared in the meantime. Also, this is a B2B product which is treated much more seriously than their standard consumer products.

devonbleak 9y ago
We were using StackDriver for our AWS monitoring which they bought and killed. B2B definitely isn't safe. They've earned this reputation IMO.
- manigandham 9y ago
  StackDriver is still available and can still monitor AWS: https://cloud.google.com/monitoring/quickstart-aws https://cloud.google.com/monitoring/quickstart-aws Even if it no longer works for your usecase, it's not a Google originated service but another startup that was shutdown/acquired/sold which is what I was referring to.
  - TAForObvReasons 9y ago
    Should we hold it against google when they acquire a startup and shut it down? Or is it preferable for them to wait for the startup to wind down the service first and then swoop in?
    - manigandham 9y ago
      I don't know, I'm assuming users just care that the product or service continues to exist and get better. If an acquisition helps then great, otherwise... sure, we can blame whatever decisions led to the demise, although it's rarely as simple as "stupid big company wasted a bunch of money and made people sad".
    - sitepodmatt 9y ago
      I think it's important to distinguish between consumer services, especially beta and one via acquisition, and core parts of their cloud / big-data ecosystem. Do you worry about Azure services because Microsoft killed WMP or WM10 or FoxPro?