4 ms·

I mean if they don't try things - "Google just sits on cash". If they do try things and fail "Google just kills products". HN will never be happy with what Goog

I mean if they don't try things - "Google just sits on cash". If they do try things and fail "Google just kills products". HN will never be happy with what Google does. I just wish people here are consistent with these attitudes across companies.

viraptor 7y ago
There are other options than not do anything or kill what you don't need. For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold. theoldreader seems to be doing well even though they had to reimplement the whole service. Wave got partially opensourced, after a while. I'm sure someone would buy Google trips. Sure, Google itself wouldn't benefit much from those, but if they're killing the service anyway, it would improve the image.
- johannes1234321 7y ago
  > For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold For things on the Google stack selling isn't really easy. Things they acquired , like picassa, could probably be sold again, but there they wanted to migrate to Google Photos.
  - jfim 7y ago
    >> For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold > For things on the Google stack selling isn't really easy. If Google would build their new products using only publicly available GCP features, that would be a really smart move. It would signal that they're confident enough about GCP to build their own products on it, and they can spin off products that are small successes but not large enough to move the needle at Google scale. Or if they're not profitable, open source them and allow people to run their own instance of it on GCP if they want.
    - johannes1234321 7y ago
      Interestingly one of the few things they spun off - Niantic (ingress/Pokemon go) runs on Google app engine (and/or other Google cloud offerings)
- mav3rick 7y ago
  Please apply the same standards to other companies. How many big tech sell off killed products. There are numerous IP issues etc.. Not to mention how ingrained these products are to internal infra. Google is pretty good about open sourcing internal libraries as a counter point.

viraptor 7y ago

There are other options than not do anything or kill what you don't need. For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold. theoldreader seems to be doing well even though they had to reimplement the whole service. Wave got partially opensourced, after a while. I'm sure someone would buy Google trips. Sure, Google itself wouldn't benefit much from those, but if they're killing the service anyway, it would improve the image.

johannes1234321 7y ago
> For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold For things on the Google stack selling isn't really easy. Things they acquired , like picassa, could probably be sold again, but there they wanted to migrate to Google Photos.
- jfim 7y ago
  >> For example the news reader could be easily split off or sold > For things on the Google stack selling isn't really easy. If Google would build their new products using only publicly available GCP features, that would be a really smart move. It would signal that they're confident enough about GCP to build their own products on it, and they can spin off products that are small successes but not large enough to move the needle at Google scale. Or if they're not profitable, open source them and allow people to run their own instance of it on GCP if they want.
  - johannes1234321 7y ago
    Interestingly one of the few things they spun off - Niantic (ingress/Pokemon go) runs on Google app engine (and/or other Google cloud offerings)
mav3rick 7y ago
Please apply the same standards to other companies. How many big tech sell off killed products. There are numerous IP issues etc.. Not to mention how ingrained these products are to internal infra. Google is pretty good about open sourcing internal libraries as a counter point.