4 ms·
Very good insight. If you think about it, Google benefits from proliferation of third party websites, thus cloud business is synergetic with Google search. Face
by cft 8y ago
Very good insight. If you think about it, Google benefits from proliferation of third party websites, thus cloud business is synergetic with Google search. Facebook and Google+ are competitive with Google search since they centralize the web.
For many, Google search reduced to a search engine for Wikipedia and StackOverflow and a couple of other big sites. This poses a long-term threat for search.
- Latteland 8y agoWhen I was at google, the one thing I took away was that most of the terrible decisions such as described above were very widely panned before being released inside the company. Everyone one of them. That doesn't mean the group of engineers was always right, but they were very good at pointing out bad, controversial ideas.
- JoblessWonder 8y agoIs there an example of an idea that was panned that turned out to be a (even moderate) success?
- dougb5 8y agoThe acquisition of YouTube is one that comes to mind. While it wasn't universally panned, there were a lot of engineers (myself included) who felt it was wildly excessive.
- village-idiot 8y agoThe acquisition of YouTube might’ve not been bad for Google, but I could make the argument that it’s been bad for the rest of us.
- andybak 8y agoI generally still think of YouTube as a global good. Obviously it's a mixed bag but I'd be really sad if it ever vanished.
- Aeolun 8y agoVimeo would just take over.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- village-idiot 8y agoConsidering it’s one of the driving forces of radicalization, I really can’t agree with that.
- Latteland 8y agoI can't reply to that YouTube message, too much nesting? Anyway, I'll agree that YouTube was a good one. My office was doing Google video, so that project lost out.
- vl 8y ago> cloud business is synergetic with Google search The funny thing is that while it's obviously synergetic, up to 2012 it was a Urs' toy project on the back-burner. It was mostly run from SEA/KIR with MTV leadership largely oblivious. There were gems like this, for example: once they forgot to cover cloud organization in the company OKR meetings broadcasted to all employees :) Only when they realized that external clouds grow so fast that Big G can loose it's preferential access to volume discounts GCP suddenly became the priority (to detriment of TI, which now largely is after-thought). I'm convinced that Google going to cloud too late is going to be seen in history books in the same light as Microsoft/IE fiasco.
- didip 8y agoWhat are these abbreviations? SEA/KIR, MTV, OKR, and TI.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- mejari 8y agoSEA/KIR is Seattle/Kirkland, a main Google headquarters, MTV is Mountain View, the Google headquarters. OKR is Objectives and Key Results, a measurement system for company/individual goals. Not sure about TI, but GCP is Google Cloud Platform.
- cletus 8y agoTI = Technical Infrastructure If memory serves this was the PA (Product Area) originally responsible for GCP before Cloud became its own PA. But TI was headed by Urs and is responsible for the internal Google infrastructure (Colossus, BigTable, Spanner, etc).
- vl 8y agoTI is Technical Infrastructure, organization responsible for management/storage/database/analytics/scheduling, etc. software in datacenters. TI and Cloud used to be different branches in the same PA (product area), but TI consumed Cloud Org once cloud became a priority and now it's a single organization (itself a part of PA which also includes G Suite). Since external-facing cloud projects have very simple and transparent metrics (unlike internal TI projects), Cloud/TI organization mostly concentrates on cloud projects nowadays.