5 ms·

I think the problem with Google is it can't decide if they are into software or into advertising. Google had a big lead on Microsoft with their web based 'offi

by jussij 8y ago

I think the problem with Google is it can't decide if they are into software or into advertising. Google had a big lead on Microsoft with their web based 'office like' products, but they just could not get the paying business customer. Microsoft can see what Google is doing, quickly push out their 'Office 365' clone and without much effort find they have quickly become the biggest player in that field. I think Google would have easily won that game it they could just convinced business they where more than just an advertising company. I get the impression business is more than happy giving their data to Microsoft, while also paying for that privilege where as they are not so sure about trusting their data with Google.

coldpie 8y ago
I would love so much to pay for Google services if it meant disabling all of their ads and data tracking. But they're just not interested in that kind of business model.
- jussij 8y ago
  Exactly. They're hooked on their Ad Words income stream.
- Kalium 8y ago
  If there's one uncomfortable thing Google has made painfully clear to all of us, it's that the vast majority of consumers just aren't interested in paying for things like email or search. It isn't due to a lack of offerings. There are plenty of provides that will happily do so. Anyone who wants to can buy email from Google today! Yet in the face of this the vast majority of users choose not to pay for email. My current operating hypothesis is that the vast majority of ordinary users value their privacy right up to the point where they have to put a price on it. At which point a handful of nerds (like us!) are willing to pay, but most people happily trade their privacy for services instead of involving money.
  - BethGagaShaggy 8y ago
    Rather, users value the service up to the point where it has got a price on it.
    - Kalium 8y ago
      You're right! With that said, might this be viewed as a distinction without a difference? If the provider puts a price on their service, the consumer evaluating this price must decide if they find it acceptable. This is necessarily going to involve some amount of implicitly calculating their price for the service, isn't it?
  - coldpie 8y ago
    I pay for Fastmail and I get a relatively large amount of spam there. We self-host our email at work, and plenty of spam gets through there, too. I never see spam in the inbox on my gmail address, ever. Google's email is the best I've seen (though I admit I haven't used a lot). I use it because I want to use it, not because it is free. I'm not sure what you mean by "buy email from google today." I don't want to "buy email," I want to pay them to not serve ads or track me when I use their services. That includes far more than email, I'm talking about the whole ecosystem like Android, Maps, Search and so on. Surely $120/year from me is worth far more than they're getting in ads, right? I dunno.
    - Kalium 8y ago
      Personally, I suspect that $120/year from 10,000 people like us is not worth Google's time and effort. I can also see the criticisms now: "privacy isn't a luxury only for rich people!".
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    > Anyone who wants to can buy email from Google today! But if you do so, does that mean that Google won't track you? Even if Google claims they won't, can you trust them?
- Mikeb85 8y ago
  As opposed to Windows 10's ads in the start button and lock screen, and data tracking in every part of the OS? At least Google only puts up (mostly) relevant ads when you search for something.
  - coldpie 8y ago
    I don't use Windows.
skizm 8y ago
Google shuts services down left and right. What large business would trust google with all their documents / spreadsheets / etc. when there is a pretty good chance they just shut the service down in a few years? Microsoft on the other hand supports their office products basically forever.
partiallypro 8y ago
The craziest part about GSuite right now, is that it costs -more- than O365...but has less features. Google pushing all of their APIs to force you to sign up a GCS account has also rubbed me the wrong way.
dalbasal 8y ago
...their office product or, more surprisingly & worryingly, their cloud services. How could Google, come distant 3rd in the cloud infrastructure race. They were the ones that obsessed about milliseconds. They ran YouTube and Gmail and all the other services reliably, at massive scale. Due respect to Amazon's dogfooding, but Amazon never released novel internet applications at anything like the volume that Google did. Google have generally displayed recurring problems getting products to real maturity, and making money from them. For all the high profile stuff that they bought or built over the years... There is still only one real revenue source. It may be something like the "oil curse." It's hard to compete with search/ads on revenue.
- riku_iki 8y ago
  > How could Google, come distant 3rd in the cloud infrastructure race. Because MS utilized their vendor-locked(office, MS SQL Server, Windows, .NET, etc) user-base, which Google didn't have.
- gowld 8y ago
  Google was built from the ground up writing software for itself to run. Microsoft made systems and development tools for customers to run. Google has to make a much larger cultural change to turn their monolithic infrastructure inside out into products, whereas Microsoft had to make a change in the reverse direction to try to compete in Internet/cloud services.

by jussij 8y ago

coldpie 8y ago

I would love so much to pay for Google services if it meant disabling all of their ads and data tracking. But they're just not interested in that kind of business model.

jussij 8y ago
Exactly. They're hooked on their Ad Words income stream.
Kalium 8y ago
If there's one uncomfortable thing Google has made painfully clear to all of us, it's that the vast majority of consumers just aren't interested in paying for things like email or search. It isn't due to a lack of offerings. There are plenty of provides that will happily do so. Anyone who wants to can buy email from Google today! Yet in the face of this the vast majority of users choose not to pay for email. My current operating hypothesis is that the vast majority of ordinary users value their privacy right up to the point where they have to put a price on it. At which point a handful of nerds (like us!) are willing to pay, but most people happily trade their privacy for services instead of involving money.
- BethGagaShaggy 8y ago
  Rather, users value the service up to the point where it has got a price on it.
  - Kalium 8y ago
    You're right! With that said, might this be viewed as a distinction without a difference? If the provider puts a price on their service, the consumer evaluating this price must decide if they find it acceptable. This is necessarily going to involve some amount of implicitly calculating their price for the service, isn't it?
- coldpie 8y ago
  I pay for Fastmail and I get a relatively large amount of spam there. We self-host our email at work, and plenty of spam gets through there, too. I never see spam in the inbox on my gmail address, ever. Google's email is the best I've seen (though I admit I haven't used a lot). I use it because I want to use it, not because it is free. I'm not sure what you mean by "buy email from google today." I don't want to "buy email," I want to pay them to not serve ads or track me when I use their services. That includes far more than email, I'm talking about the whole ecosystem like Android, Maps, Search and so on. Surely $120/year from me is worth far more than they're getting in ads, right? I dunno.
  - Kalium 8y ago
    Personally, I suspect that $120/year from 10,000 people like us is not worth Google's time and effort. I can also see the criticisms now: "privacy isn't a luxury only for rich people!".
- JohnFen 8y ago
  > Anyone who wants to can buy email from Google today! But if you do so, does that mean that Google won't track you? Even if Google claims they won't, can you trust them?
Mikeb85 8y ago
As opposed to Windows 10's ads in the start button and lock screen, and data tracking in every part of the OS? At least Google only puts up (mostly) relevant ads when you search for something.
- coldpie 8y ago
  I don't use Windows.

skizm 8y ago

Google shuts services down left and right. What large business would trust google with all their documents / spreadsheets / etc. when there is a pretty good chance they just shut the service down in a few years? Microsoft on the other hand supports their office products basically forever.

partiallypro 8y ago

The craziest part about GSuite right now, is that it costs -more- than O365...but has less features. Google pushing all of their APIs to force you to sign up a GCS account has also rubbed me the wrong way.

dalbasal 8y ago

...their office product or, more surprisingly & worryingly, their cloud services. How could Google, come distant 3rd in the cloud infrastructure race. They were the ones that obsessed about milliseconds. They ran YouTube and Gmail and all the other services reliably, at massive scale. Due respect to Amazon's dogfooding, but Amazon never released novel internet applications at anything like the volume that Google did. Google have generally displayed recurring problems getting products to real maturity, and making money from them. For all the high profile stuff that they bought or built over the years... There is still only one real revenue source. It may be something like the "oil curse." It's hard to compete with search/ads on revenue.

riku_iki 8y ago
> How could Google, come distant 3rd in the cloud infrastructure race. Because MS utilized their vendor-locked(office, MS SQL Server, Windows, .NET, etc) user-base, which Google didn't have.
gowld 8y ago
Google was built from the ground up writing software for itself to run. Microsoft made systems and development tools for customers to run. Google has to make a much larger cultural change to turn their monolithic infrastructure inside out into products, whereas Microsoft had to make a change in the reverse direction to try to compete in Internet/cloud services.