3 ms·
I wish I'd said it like that. Surprising, for just that reason. Your Google point (besides being a contrast to amazon's surprising athena) is an interesting wa
by dalbasal 9y ago
I wish I'd said it like that. Surprising, for just that reason.
Your Google point (besides being a contrast to amazon's surprising athena) is an interesting way of describing things.
Youtube, Android and even adwords & web analytics were bought fairly formed, and clearly were quite good already. That's a skill in itself. When you think of examples of ebay, skype and how few buy-outs really do succeed like that.
Google could make the web work too. Remember how slow yahoo a basic webmail service was. The idea that they'd make an excel that worked.. it wasn't trivial.
But I think you're right on the lead skill. If it works best with an exabyte of data, a billion CPU-years... it works best on a google.
- 220V_USKettle 9y agoI think that is an interesting insight - the majority of Google's offerings are from aquisitions of 'established' implementations, whereas Amazon's are developed in-house to solve a pain-point, that is felt by other businesses, too. So, is Amazon really more B2B, while Google is B2C? Is Amazon using e-commerce like a US university looks at undergrads for funding?
- jacksmith21006 9y agoGoogle has a good mixture of acquired and organic. You really want to successfully be able to do both but most really only can do one or the other.
- saalweachter 9y agoGoogle has bought a number of companies, yes (Google Maps is another piece that started as an acquisition) but I'd note that which acquisitions survive and thrive also relates back to the core competencies.