5 ms·

It's weird though, because GSuite -- esp google docs, google sheets, and google calendar -- are really good and pretty well supported. So they _can_ do it. No

by x0x0 7y ago

It's weird though, because GSuite -- esp google docs, google sheets, and google calendar -- are really good and pretty well supported. So they _can_ do it. Now to be fair, we're rapidly approaching $15k/year in spend with them. I'm desperately wishing google would build a company-aimed wiki because confluence is atrocious. And if anyone is going to deliver cloud gaming, my bet is it's google. It plays to their strengths: their ability to orchestrate and deliver scaled computing at the highest possible speeds. Further, it addresses one of the few markets at a large enough scale to make an impact on their revenues.

jfim 7y ago
I believe docs and sheets were from their acquisition of Writely in the mid 2000s, not something that's homegrown. I wouldn't call docs and sheets good by any means; they're passable at most, with tons of missing features.
- x0x0 7y ago
  No doubt they're an ok word processor and a mediocre spreadsheet. That's not what they are though. They're really good group collaboration on docs, particularly content, and collaborative lists with owner assignment. We do a huge amount of editing / signoff / planning / workbacks / etc in them.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  > I wouldn't call docs and sheets good by any means; they're passable at most, with tons of missing features. And yet they entirely replace Microsoft Office for millions of people.
- esprehn 7y ago
  Docs and Sheets were entirely rewritten in house many years after the acquisition. They don't work at all like the original products.
autokad 7y ago
I'm guessing you're getting down-voted for that last bit. For one, it's missing the point about what everyone said is important about gaming, and hits the point that everyone said google doesn't understand about customers. why do you think 'deliver scaled computing at the highest possible speeds' = good at gaming? its kind of typical google, 'we offered the best X statistic, therefore they must like it.' for "if anyone is going to deliver cloud gaming, my bet is it's google.", No. If I were to bet money, I would say it would be someone who is good at cloud, or good at gaming. Google is good at neither.
- x0x0 7y ago
  I don't think it's sufficient, but it is necessary. I'm not sure who else has an edge network that can deliver comparable compute and comparable latency? A very short list, if anyone. And Google isn't good at cloud? Maybe not gcp, but their internal application delivery capability is second to none.
  - zaptrem 7y ago
    What's so bad about GCP/Firebase?
    - scarface74 7y ago
      It’s not the technology, Google is horrible at Enterprise sales and support. Firebase also isn’t going to win them large enterprises.
      - blaser-waffle 7y ago
        +1. They're an ad company and ultimately they feel clunky and condescending to deal with in a consumer context.
        scarface74 7y ago
        Azure Solutions Architects: You want to move your SQL Server 2003 database running on Windows 2000 on Azure? Ok we can do that and come up with a project plan to modernize your stack and extend your support. GCP SA: We are “smart people” (tm) you should move your entire workload to $cool_technology before we migrate and do things the modern way.
rodgerd 7y ago
> their ability to orchestrate and deliver scaled computing at the highest possible speeds. The gaming industry is already good at that. Like, really really good. Do you think companies that operate world-spanning low-latency gaming experiences are going to be quaking in their boots because Google? What Google is really, really bad at is humans. And the gaming industry is all about understanding that there are a raft of interests ranging from casual to shooter to arty to... whatever. There's still a lot of room for taste-driven sleeper hits (think Untitled Goose Game) as well as research & marketing driven extravaganzas like GTA Online or FIFA whatever-the-year-is. And wrangling social media, forums, engaging with fan wikis and chat and stuff, which is part of the fabric of gaming, is the sort of thing Google are absolute shit at. Gaming chat is famously terrible, but even gamers look down their nose at YouTube comments.
Can_Not 7y ago
> I'm desperately wishing google would build a company-aimed wiki because confluence is atrocious. have you tried Google sites?
- pjmlp 7y ago
  Ironically I am yet to find a Wiki as good as confluence.
wpietri 7y ago
I'm not sure I can call that a real exception. Calendar is something they needed themselves, and also use as a "soak up everybody's data to make things more sticky" tool. It's good for what it is, but if it were a serious product offering, I'd expect it to be more flexible, more feature-rich. Docs and Sheets strike me as probably in the same bucket. They're perfectly cromulent, but there's nothing amazing about them. They were acquisitions, not an in-house creation. All they really do is take the basic features of any number of competitor products going back 20 years and put them on the web. If you like what they deliver, great. But if not, I wouldn't wait around for Google to add features aimed at specialists. It seems more like a basic utility than a consumer product.
- gvjddbnvdrbv 7y ago
  Have you worked collaboratively with Google Docs?
  - wpietri 7y ago
    Sure. That's what I mean by "on the web". They have decent basic real-time collaboration features. Otherwise, they're basically the same as Word and Excel were 25 years ago. But even for collaboration I think there's a long way to go. It's not like they significantly rethought the product in terms of true collaboration at a global scale. As far as I've noticed they've added non-conflicting, real-time edits and showing cursor location to the previous Word/Excel collaboration features like comments and proposed changes.

by x0x0 7y ago

jfim 7y ago

I believe docs and sheets were from their acquisition of Writely in the mid 2000s, not something that's homegrown. I wouldn't call docs and sheets good by any means; they're passable at most, with tons of missing features.

x0x0 7y ago
No doubt they're an ok word processor and a mediocre spreadsheet. That's not what they are though. They're really good group collaboration on docs, particularly content, and collaborative lists with owner assignment. We do a huge amount of editing / signoff / planning / workbacks / etc in them.
saagarjha 7y ago
> I wouldn't call docs and sheets good by any means; they're passable at most, with tons of missing features. And yet they entirely replace Microsoft Office for millions of people.
esprehn 7y ago
Docs and Sheets were entirely rewritten in house many years after the acquisition. They don't work at all like the original products.

autokad 7y ago

I'm guessing you're getting down-voted for that last bit. For one, it's missing the point about what everyone said is important about gaming, and hits the point that everyone said google doesn't understand about customers. why do you think 'deliver scaled computing at the highest possible speeds' = good at gaming? its kind of typical google, 'we offered the best X statistic, therefore they must like it.' for "if anyone is going to deliver cloud gaming, my bet is it's google.", No. If I were to bet money, I would say it would be someone who is good at cloud, or good at gaming. Google is good at neither.

x0x0 7y ago
I don't think it's sufficient, but it is necessary. I'm not sure who else has an edge network that can deliver comparable compute and comparable latency? A very short list, if anyone. And Google isn't good at cloud? Maybe not gcp, but their internal application delivery capability is second to none.
- zaptrem 7y ago
  What's so bad about GCP/Firebase?
  - scarface74 7y ago
    It’s not the technology, Google is horrible at Enterprise sales and support. Firebase also isn’t going to win them large enterprises.
    - blaser-waffle 7y ago
      +1. They're an ad company and ultimately they feel clunky and condescending to deal with in a consumer context.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Azure Solutions Architects: You want to move your SQL Server 2003 database running on Windows 2000 on Azure? Ok we can do that and come up with a project plan to modernize your stack and extend your support. GCP SA: We are “smart people” (tm) you should move your entire workload to $cool_technology before we migrate and do things the modern way.

rodgerd 7y ago

> their ability to orchestrate and deliver scaled computing at the highest possible speeds. The gaming industry is already good at that. Like, really really good. Do you think companies that operate world-spanning low-latency gaming experiences are going to be quaking in their boots because Google? What Google is really, really bad at is humans. And the gaming industry is all about understanding that there are a raft of interests ranging from casual to shooter to arty to... whatever. There's still a lot of room for taste-driven sleeper hits (think Untitled Goose Game) as well as research & marketing driven extravaganzas like GTA Online or FIFA whatever-the-year-is. And wrangling social media, forums, engaging with fan wikis and chat and stuff, which is part of the fabric of gaming, is the sort of thing Google are absolute shit at. Gaming chat is famously terrible, but even gamers look down their nose at YouTube comments.

Can_Not 7y ago

> I'm desperately wishing google would build a company-aimed wiki because confluence is atrocious. have you tried Google sites?

pjmlp 7y ago
Ironically I am yet to find a Wiki as good as confluence.

wpietri 7y ago

I'm not sure I can call that a real exception. Calendar is something they needed themselves, and also use as a "soak up everybody's data to make things more sticky" tool. It's good for what it is, but if it were a serious product offering, I'd expect it to be more flexible, more feature-rich. Docs and Sheets strike me as probably in the same bucket. They're perfectly cromulent, but there's nothing amazing about them. They were acquisitions, not an in-house creation. All they really do is take the basic features of any number of competitor products going back 20 years and put them on the web. If you like what they deliver, great. But if not, I wouldn't wait around for Google to add features aimed at specialists. It seems more like a basic utility than a consumer product.

gvjddbnvdrbv 7y ago
Have you worked collaboratively with Google Docs?
- wpietri 7y ago
  Sure. That's what I mean by "on the web". They have decent basic real-time collaboration features. Otherwise, they're basically the same as Word and Excel were 25 years ago. But even for collaboration I think there's a long way to go. It's not like they significantly rethought the product in terms of true collaboration at a global scale. As far as I've noticed they've added non-conflicting, real-time edits and showing cursor location to the previous Word/Excel collaboration features like comments and proposed changes.