3 ms·

I wonder how different his story would be if he was still at Google today. I understand that there was a pretty magical feeling at Google in its pre- and immed

I wonder how different his story would be if he was still at Google today. I understand that there was a pretty magical feeling at Google in its pre- and immediately post-IPO days, and I'd be interested to hear from someone who lived through that and is still at Google now.

nostrademons 16y ago
My VP is one of those double-digit-employee-ID people, and he recently said "People ask me what it was like to work at Google in the early days. This [the making of Google Instant] was what it was like to work at Google back then." So in at least some parts, that spirit still exists at Google. The problem is that it's much harder to find well-defined problems that are ambitious and yet feasible.
- redthrowaway 16y ago
  You know, as awesome as Google Instant is in principle, I never find myself using it. The chrome omnibox is just too useful, although I get that's pretty much Instant anyway.
  - nostrademons 16y ago
    I'm the same way...I often find Instant actively distracting as a user, particularly since usually the only time it triggers for me is when I'm editing some numbers on a Calculator search. (For everything else, there's the Omnibox.) But I'm not a typical user. Chrome's market share is what? 7-10%? That means that 90-93% of Internet users don't even have an Omnibox. Anyway, I think his point isn't necessarily that Instant is awesome (though I'd imagine he'd think it is), it's that the making of Instant was awesome, and included the same sort of focused teamwork in pursuit of a seemingly impossible goal that early Google had. [Side note: from everything I've heard, Chrome itself is one of those awesomely-managed projects that contains a large team of people working towards an ambitious goal. Much like early Google.]
    - redthrowaway 16y ago
      RE: Side note: That's the impression I get. Given Chrome's release schedule and the pace at which they're improving it, it really seems like a balls-out effort by a fairly large group of driven engineers. I bet it'd be fun to work on.

nostrademons 16y ago

My VP is one of those double-digit-employee-ID people, and he recently said "People ask me what it was like to work at Google in the early days. This [the making of Google Instant] was what it was like to work at Google back then." So in at least some parts, that spirit still exists at Google. The problem is that it's much harder to find well-defined problems that are ambitious and yet feasible.

redthrowaway 16y ago
You know, as awesome as Google Instant is in principle, I never find myself using it. The chrome omnibox is just too useful, although I get that's pretty much Instant anyway.
- nostrademons 16y ago
  I'm the same way...I often find Instant actively distracting as a user, particularly since usually the only time it triggers for me is when I'm editing some numbers on a Calculator search. (For everything else, there's the Omnibox.) But I'm not a typical user. Chrome's market share is what? 7-10%? That means that 90-93% of Internet users don't even have an Omnibox. Anyway, I think his point isn't necessarily that Instant is awesome (though I'd imagine he'd think it is), it's that the making of Instant was awesome, and included the same sort of focused teamwork in pursuit of a seemingly impossible goal that early Google had. [Side note: from everything I've heard, Chrome itself is one of those awesomely-managed projects that contains a large team of people working towards an ambitious goal. Much like early Google.]
  - redthrowaway 16y ago
    RE: Side note: That's the impression I get. Given Chrome's release schedule and the pace at which they're improving it, it really seems like a balls-out effort by a fairly large group of driven engineers. I bet it'd be fun to work on.