7 ms·

It's always interesting to take a look back on articles like these and see how the opinions / predictions of the author pan out. There has always seemed to be w

It's always interesting to take a look back on articles like these and see how the opinions / predictions of the author pan out. There has always seemed to be what is in my opinion a largely narrow minded short term oriented negativity directed towards the Google method of moonshots / bets. In hindsight now in 2019, it's clear with signs of growing stagnation on Apple's side and continued successful innovation and growth of Alphabet companies within vastly diverse industries (Verily, Waymo, Malta, etc.) which of the two methodologies was the better choice. I wonder what the future will hold? Culture seems like the strongest indicator for whether changes can be made. Without the sort of long term vision Jobs had to guide the company from the top down, successful pivoting depends on if internal company culture can support a bottom up revitalization I think.

Eric_WVGG 8y ago
I agree. It's clear in hindsight that Apple has provided more innovation and Alphabet is still an ad machine.
- lawrenceyan 8y ago
  I disagree with the innovation portion of your comment, but definitely, advertising is an extremely strong foundation of consistent steady growth / revenue. Whatever the economic forces at the time, Google will always continue to provide. With Apple on the other hand it's foundation currently depends on hit-driven successes requiring repeated 2 year cycle refresh purchases from it's customers to sustain it. The issues with this are evidently shown. As to your comment on innovation, Apple has largely squandered it's source of foundational income cornering itself into a niche, such that though it may be extremely innovative in it's area (Apple has some amazing processor design for example), is fundamentally constrained by the limited pieces it has to work with. Basically, instead of undergoing a necessary evolution like we've seen from the progression of Google -> Alphabet, Apple has failed to scale itself in a way where it can keep up. This by no means is meant as a sleight to any Apple employees though, as I know from first hand experience that some of the best and brightest people are working there. It's just a matter of how scaling works. Horizontal scaling allows for unlimited growth, whereas vertical scaling quickly reaches an asymptotic ceiling.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Seeing that nothing Google has done outside of selling ads has been profitable and we can assume that all of Apple’s products generate a profit, how can Google’s ventures be considered a “success”?
    - jboy55 8y ago
      A success in that it has transformed the public image of the worlds largest and effectively "only" internet ad platform into one of a benevolent tech company working on problems that will help the world. Google for most of the last decade has had it 'easy' though. The natural expansion of its ad revenue has reduced the need for it to turn some 'evilness' dials to keep revenue and profit growing. With Apple its very straight forward, they sell things, and if you want their services you pay for them.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        A success in that it has transformed the public image of the worlds largest and effectively "only" internet ad platform into one of a benevolent tech company working on problems that will help the world. How much has that goodwill improved profitability? What were people going to do, revolt and use Bing?
        jboy55 8y ago
        Well, for one, it keeps Antitrust somewhat at bay. But, its beyond search, if you want to monetize your site with ads, its pretty much impossible to avoid using Google.
  - Eric_WVGG 8y ago
    I appreciate your considered reply to my admittedly flippant reply to what I considered an unconsidered statement, so I'll try to return the favor. Alphabet's approach to innovation is to throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks. I’m not disparaging that approach, it’s probably what I would do if I had all the money in the world. But I’m not convinced that any of these “moonshots” are amounting to much yet. Apple has been described by many as the world’s largest startup. They’re very careful with their focus and resources, even to the point of killing off successful products (not just iPods, but things like their routers and printers). They _could_ just spend money and grow, but they know that would lead Apple to not being Apple anymore. So what is Apple? A strangely conservative company with a clear vision of the future that they approach slowly and methodically. Apple brought us the “touch future” and the truly “personal computer” (the one you take everywhere in your pocket). We still haven’t fully realized this potential and Apple is still building on it. Look me up in ten years and let me know if they’ve hit that vertical ceiling.
webwielder2 8y ago
Google has indeed been much more successful at shipping vaporware.
- dnautics 8y ago
  I wouldn't call google's products vaporware. There are definitely five that I have used. Search, Gmail, Maps, Youtube, and Android. I barely use google search anymore (DDG is my major driver) - I'm not too content with Gmail anymore, and my youtube use has gone down since their ad strategy has changed. Probably Maps and Android are the two products they do that I would consider 'quality'. I'm not happy with Tensorflow, Golang, or Kubernetes.
  - dnautics 8y ago
    oh chrome is pretty popular it seems (I use firefox)
  - avinium 8y ago
    Tensorflow, I can understand - I imagine the rampant popularity of pytorch shows we're not alone. What's your issue with Golang though?
    - dnautics 8y ago
      There was an article about how golang takes a very classist attitude... There are programmers who use go, that are the peons, and the programmers who write go, who are anointed.. like hashmaps breaking the typesystem. It feels like a lot of the things that happen like if err != nil are code smell. I wrote a cli in go and wouldn't mind it again but I program in elixir now and the emphasis on developer joy is refreshing (but it makes wise choices, e.g limiting the scope of macros to lexical)
  - samatman 8y ago
    In the last twenty years, Google/Alphabet has killed more products than Apple has launched. In a very real sense, Alphabet has an r selected corporate strategy, while Apple is K selected[0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
nthuser 8y ago
You have got to be joking. Looking at the revenue numbers, it's clear that Apple is more diversified than Google. The declining iPhone sales are a short term problem. People are just keeping the devices for longer, not abandoning the ecosystem. Their services and wearables are seeing an impressive growth. I think the watch will grow even faster once Apple makes it a completely independent device. The difference between these two companies is that one publicizes the stuff it's working on and rushes it to market, while the other keeps it all secret until it's ready. Also, Apple is working on AR glasses(rumored to be announced next year), self-driving car and are making a big push into digital health. Apple is far from doomed, they still have a lot of room for growth.
- phaus 8y ago
  If they announce AR glasses that look like anything besides a regular sized, normal looking, but super stylish pair of sunglasses running amazing software that always works, with a killer feature that no one even knew they needed, it will be safe to end the tired debate of whether Steve Jobs was the biggest reason that they regularly made great things. I do agree though that Apple is more diversified than a company that keeps selling super-expensive beta tests that get killed after the first or second try doesn't work.
- partingshots 8y ago
  Alphabet is doing all of these things and more though no? With much more success too from what I can garner. Waymo is the defacto number one leader in self-driving, whereas Apple’s self driving unit is having huge issues internally. Similarly, didn’t Verily just receive a $1 billion dollar investment a few days ago with Silver Lake as the primary backer for it’s various life science hardware/digital technologies it’s working on like LiftWare [1], Project Baseline [2], etc? [1] Liftware - https://youtu.be/cFHwoOkSj7w https://youtu.be/cFHwoOkSj7w [2] Baseline Study - https://projectbaseline.com https://projectbaseline.com
  - nthuser 8y ago
    > Alphabet is doing all of these things and more though no? With more much success too from what I can garner. Apple has more diversified revenue than Alphabet. Why would you say Alphabet is more successful?. All this tells me is that Apple thinks long and hard before publicizing what it's working on, they won't show us prototypes. > Waymo is the defacto number one leader in self-driving, whereas Apple’s self driving unit is having huge issues internally with getting anything done. ALL of Apple's reported problems had to do with the MAKING of a car, not autonomous systems. People just don't get this distinction. We will know how far their system is at the end of this month when the DMV releases their disengagement report. By the way, recent developments indicate that Apple is back to building an electric self-driving car instead of a self-driving platform.

Eric_WVGG 8y ago

I agree. It's clear in hindsight that Apple has provided more innovation and Alphabet is still an ad machine.

lawrenceyan 8y ago
I disagree with the innovation portion of your comment, but definitely, advertising is an extremely strong foundation of consistent steady growth / revenue. Whatever the economic forces at the time, Google will always continue to provide. With Apple on the other hand it's foundation currently depends on hit-driven successes requiring repeated 2 year cycle refresh purchases from it's customers to sustain it. The issues with this are evidently shown. As to your comment on innovation, Apple has largely squandered it's source of foundational income cornering itself into a niche, such that though it may be extremely innovative in it's area (Apple has some amazing processor design for example), is fundamentally constrained by the limited pieces it has to work with. Basically, instead of undergoing a necessary evolution like we've seen from the progression of Google -> Alphabet, Apple has failed to scale itself in a way where it can keep up. This by no means is meant as a sleight to any Apple employees though, as I know from first hand experience that some of the best and brightest people are working there. It's just a matter of how scaling works. Horizontal scaling allows for unlimited growth, whereas vertical scaling quickly reaches an asymptotic ceiling.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Seeing that nothing Google has done outside of selling ads has been profitable and we can assume that all of Apple’s products generate a profit, how can Google’s ventures be considered a “success”?
  - jboy55 8y ago
    A success in that it has transformed the public image of the worlds largest and effectively "only" internet ad platform into one of a benevolent tech company working on problems that will help the world. Google for most of the last decade has had it 'easy' though. The natural expansion of its ad revenue has reduced the need for it to turn some 'evilness' dials to keep revenue and profit growing. With Apple its very straight forward, they sell things, and if you want their services you pay for them.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      A success in that it has transformed the public image of the worlds largest and effectively "only" internet ad platform into one of a benevolent tech company working on problems that will help the world. How much has that goodwill improved profitability? What were people going to do, revolt and use Bing?
      - jboy55 8y ago
        Well, for one, it keeps Antitrust somewhat at bay. But, its beyond search, if you want to monetize your site with ads, its pretty much impossible to avoid using Google.
- Eric_WVGG 8y ago
  I appreciate your considered reply to my admittedly flippant reply to what I considered an unconsidered statement, so I'll try to return the favor. Alphabet's approach to innovation is to throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks. I’m not disparaging that approach, it’s probably what I would do if I had all the money in the world. But I’m not convinced that any of these “moonshots” are amounting to much yet. Apple has been described by many as the world’s largest startup. They’re very careful with their focus and resources, even to the point of killing off successful products (not just iPods, but things like their routers and printers). They _could_ just spend money and grow, but they know that would lead Apple to not being Apple anymore. So what is Apple? A strangely conservative company with a clear vision of the future that they approach slowly and methodically. Apple brought us the “touch future” and the truly “personal computer” (the one you take everywhere in your pocket). We still haven’t fully realized this potential and Apple is still building on it. Look me up in ten years and let me know if they’ve hit that vertical ceiling.

webwielder2 8y ago

Google has indeed been much more successful at shipping vaporware.

dnautics 8y ago
I wouldn't call google's products vaporware. There are definitely five that I have used. Search, Gmail, Maps, Youtube, and Android. I barely use google search anymore (DDG is my major driver) - I'm not too content with Gmail anymore, and my youtube use has gone down since their ad strategy has changed. Probably Maps and Android are the two products they do that I would consider 'quality'. I'm not happy with Tensorflow, Golang, or Kubernetes.
- dnautics 8y ago
  oh chrome is pretty popular it seems (I use firefox)
- avinium 8y ago
  Tensorflow, I can understand - I imagine the rampant popularity of pytorch shows we're not alone. What's your issue with Golang though?
  - dnautics 8y ago
    There was an article about how golang takes a very classist attitude... There are programmers who use go, that are the peons, and the programmers who write go, who are anointed.. like hashmaps breaking the typesystem. It feels like a lot of the things that happen like if err != nil are code smell. I wrote a cli in go and wouldn't mind it again but I program in elixir now and the emphasis on developer joy is refreshing (but it makes wise choices, e.g limiting the scope of macros to lexical)
- samatman 8y ago
  In the last twenty years, Google/Alphabet has killed more products than Apple has launched. In a very real sense, Alphabet has an r selected corporate strategy, while Apple is K selected[0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory

nthuser 8y ago

You have got to be joking. Looking at the revenue numbers, it's clear that Apple is more diversified than Google. The declining iPhone sales are a short term problem. People are just keeping the devices for longer, not abandoning the ecosystem. Their services and wearables are seeing an impressive growth. I think the watch will grow even faster once Apple makes it a completely independent device. The difference between these two companies is that one publicizes the stuff it's working on and rushes it to market, while the other keeps it all secret until it's ready. Also, Apple is working on AR glasses(rumored to be announced next year), self-driving car and are making a big push into digital health. Apple is far from doomed, they still have a lot of room for growth.

phaus 8y ago
If they announce AR glasses that look like anything besides a regular sized, normal looking, but super stylish pair of sunglasses running amazing software that always works, with a killer feature that no one even knew they needed, it will be safe to end the tired debate of whether Steve Jobs was the biggest reason that they regularly made great things. I do agree though that Apple is more diversified than a company that keeps selling super-expensive beta tests that get killed after the first or second try doesn't work.
partingshots 8y ago
Alphabet is doing all of these things and more though no? With much more success too from what I can garner. Waymo is the defacto number one leader in self-driving, whereas Apple’s self driving unit is having huge issues internally. Similarly, didn’t Verily just receive a $1 billion dollar investment a few days ago with Silver Lake as the primary backer for it’s various life science hardware/digital technologies it’s working on like LiftWare [1], Project Baseline [2], etc? [1] Liftware - https://youtu.be/cFHwoOkSj7w https://youtu.be/cFHwoOkSj7w [2] Baseline Study - https://projectbaseline.com https://projectbaseline.com
- nthuser 8y ago
  > Alphabet is doing all of these things and more though no? With more much success too from what I can garner. Apple has more diversified revenue than Alphabet. Why would you say Alphabet is more successful?. All this tells me is that Apple thinks long and hard before publicizing what it's working on, they won't show us prototypes. > Waymo is the defacto number one leader in self-driving, whereas Apple’s self driving unit is having huge issues internally with getting anything done. ALL of Apple's reported problems had to do with the MAKING of a car, not autonomous systems. People just don't get this distinction. We will know how far their system is at the end of this month when the DMV releases their disengagement report. By the way, recent developments indicate that Apple is back to building an electric self-driving car instead of a self-driving platform.