3 ms·
According to the above poster, Google has killed 27% of their products. Way more than 27% of startups don't make it.
by s17n 9y ago
According to the above poster, Google has killed 27% of their products. Way more than 27% of startups don't make it.
- richforrester 9y ago> (or larger companies) in this space That's what I'm responding to. Of course startups can be far worse. Goes without saying.
- s17n 9y agoYou mentioned companies with only one product, aka startups.
- jimnotgym 9y agoI don't think this necessarily follows. There are established companies with long track records who specialise in one area.
- musage 9y ago> companies with only one product, aka startups. from the top of my head: http://renoise.com/ http://renoise.com/ https://www.gpsoft.com.au/ https://www.gpsoft.com.au/ https://www.ultraedit.com/ https://www.ultraedit.com/ Incidentally, they're the best in their respective fields I know of. They don't make products, they don't make product, they make and improve these particular applications. I would LOVE them to expand and make, say, clothing and hair gel with that same intelligent, no-nonsense craftsmanship approach. Not to mention operating systems and search engines. For now I'll dream of Directory Opus for Linux and not even get that.
- onion2k 9y agoIt feels like that's only part of the story though. What's key is which products get killed, and very simply it's anything that doesn't directly make money or indirectly make money by locking you in to Google's core offering. That's perfectly fine, and wholly understandable, but it means products like this data studio that don't directly relate to ads, publishing or mapping are likely to get killed in the future. When people suggest not using it for fear it'll disappear one day they're making what appears to be, to me at least, a rational decision.