3 ms·

It's a tool for businesses to get a web site presence so they can pay Google money to promote their sites. If it makes money, they will keep it. Think about

It's a tool for businesses to get a web site presence so they can pay Google money to promote their sites. If it makes money, they will keep it. Think about it, Google is paying $300-$400k per engineer, if they have 10 people working on this that's $3-$4 mil per year plus the cost of infrastructure. If the experiment doesn't pan out after a few years, they will kill it. It's strange to me that HN is a crowd that embraces the idea of "experiment often and toss it if it doesn't work" but then is shocked when Google does the same.

pavlov 8y ago
We’re basically in agreement, right? Getting App Maker to the point where its bottom line contribution can be shown to exceed $4M/a by 2020 seems like tall hill to climb.
occams_chainsaw 8y ago
If they want to experiment with something, keep it in Google Labs Oh wait...
enraged_camel 8y ago
>>If it makes money, they will keep it. In large organizations, things are never that simple. There are about a hundred other factors that go into deciding whether a project or initiative is maintained or abandoned. Lawsuits, corporate politics, changing company direction, acquisitions and sell-offs... things rarely come down to "we're making a profit on this so let's keep it alive." Then there's also opportunity cost. Let's say the project has a 200% profit margin: total revenue is two times total cost. That still doesn't mean it won't be abandoned, because someone might decide that those resources can be better spent on another project that has a 300% profit margin. Basically what I'm saying is, don't count on App Maker to be a long-term project. There is literally no way to know, but lots of reasons to suspect it will be abandoned (based on Google's track record alone).
2_listerine_pls 8y ago
> It's a tool for businesses to get a web site presence so they can pay Google money to promote their sites. It's designed to make internal tools, read the freaking description.
- SirYandi 8y ago
  From what I read the applications go beyond just making internal applications, who's stopping anyone publishing the random little tool they made? By the way, "read the freeking description" is against HN guidelines and a little unnecessary.

pavlov 8y ago

We’re basically in agreement, right? Getting App Maker to the point where its bottom line contribution can be shown to exceed $4M/a by 2020 seems like tall hill to climb.

occams_chainsaw 8y ago

If they want to experiment with something, keep it in Google Labs Oh wait...

enraged_camel 8y ago

>>If it makes money, they will keep it. In large organizations, things are never that simple. There are about a hundred other factors that go into deciding whether a project or initiative is maintained or abandoned. Lawsuits, corporate politics, changing company direction, acquisitions and sell-offs... things rarely come down to "we're making a profit on this so let's keep it alive." Then there's also opportunity cost. Let's say the project has a 200% profit margin: total revenue is two times total cost. That still doesn't mean it won't be abandoned, because someone might decide that those resources can be better spent on another project that has a 300% profit margin. Basically what I'm saying is, don't count on App Maker to be a long-term project. There is literally no way to know, but lots of reasons to suspect it will be abandoned (based on Google's track record alone).

2_listerine_pls 8y ago

> It's a tool for businesses to get a web site presence so they can pay Google money to promote their sites. It's designed to make internal tools, read the freaking description.

SirYandi 8y ago
From what I read the applications go beyond just making internal applications, who's stopping anyone publishing the random little tool they made? By the way, "read the freeking description" is against HN guidelines and a little unnecessary.