5 ms·

It's amazing how much the internet has changed in just 13 years. Makes me wonder if the tech giants of today will become irrelevant by 2030s or we're past the p

It's amazing how much the internet has changed in just 13 years. Makes me wonder if the tech giants of today will become irrelevant by 2030s or we're past the point where the giants are rich enough to just buy up anything with potential while their original products fade into obscurity.

scarface74 5y ago
If you look back a decade, things haven’t changed that much. Facebook was public, growing, had figured out mobile and had already acquired Instagram. It was by far the top social media company. Amazon had taken over online retail. It was already a behemoth. AWS was in its infancy, but it was growing. Apple was already the most valuable company in the US. Microsoft had been one of the top 10 most valuable companies for a decade. Google was already a behemoth when it came to search. YouTube was massive and Android had just started gaining traction. Out of the top five companies, Google is the only one that hasn’t been able to pivot or diversify. The rest of the companies have been able to learn from the mistakes of the previous generation. In the case of Apple and Microsoft. They have both been around for 35+ years. Microsoft wrote the first version of the embedded AppleSoft Basic interpreter for Apple //e’s in 1980.
- menzoic 5y ago
  Google is well diversified. You even mentioned Youtube and Android. GCP isn't at the top but it's huge. Google docs/business suite is taking over, it's the goto for startups. They have a mobile carrier business. Self driving cars (although its dropping in valuation but they do have a large stake in Uber). Google is now Alphabet which it restructured into because of its diversification. Small nit: FB wasnt public 10yrs ago but your point is valid either way.
  - ReggieCommaRose 5y ago
    Google is well diversified in its business endeavors but hasn't been capitalize on that for a better diversified revenue stream.
    - scarface74 5y ago
      How else do you measure whether it is successfully diversifying if not by revenue or more importantly profitability? Contrast Google with Apple. Even though the iPhone is 60% of Apple’s business, last time I checked, the Mac business alone would put its revenue well within the top 100 companies.
      - ReggieCommaRose 5y ago
        That was my point - that Google isn’t ACTUALLY well diversified compared to its contemporaries.
  - LunaSea 5y ago
    Youtube is a net loss and GCP has a 4.6% market share so I wouldn't really count this as diversified since very little of their overall revenue comes out of these two projects? Google docs / business is interesting but I'm not sure they make much money out of it and are scatting on the freemium tier success.
    - scarface74 5y ago
      Google Docs is a very distant second. https://www.ciodive.com/news/Google-Microsoft-Office-collaboration/571740/ https://www.ciodive.com/news/Google-Microsoft-Office-collabo...
    - utopcell 5y ago
      YouTube is a net loss ? Where is that coming from ? It brought in $6BN revenue just in Q1 [1]. [1] https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2021Q1_alphabet_earnings_release.pdf?cache=0cd3d78 https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2021Q1_alphabet_earnings...
      - scarface74 5y ago
        “Revenue” is not the same as “profit” https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/google-still-isnt-telling-us-about-youtube-and-cloud-profits.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/google-still-isnt-telling-us...
        utopcell 5y ago
        The question stands: Where is the "net loss" statement coming from ?
        scarface74 5y ago
        Whether it’s a net loss or barely profitable, it still doesn’t move the needle as far as Google’s income. Even if it did - it is still mostly search advertising. That’s not diversification.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    According to public records that came out during the Oracle lawsuit, Android had only made $22 billion in profit from its inception through the time of discovery (2016). Which is really nothing overall. https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/21/10810834/android-generated-31-billion-revenue-google-oracle https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/21/10810834/android-generate... On the other hand, it’s reported that Google pays Apple $12 billion a year to be the default search engine on Apple devices. Apple makes a lot more from Google on mobile than Google makes from Android. Andy Jassy, the CEO of AWS, has said in plenty of public statements that only 4% of all enterprise IT spend is on any cloud provider. GCP is in a distant third.
- eloisant 5y ago
  Except for Amazon, that would still be extremely successful without AWS, the others had their original business model disrupted. So far Google still have a stronghold on search, they've been able to secure it with Android and Chrome by controlling the devices, they seem to be doing fine.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    Android (profit of $23 billion from 2010-2016) hasn’t really done that great for Google. They still have to pay Apple a reported $12 billion a year+ to be the default search engine for iOS devices. Apple’s business model has always been to sell “computers” at high margins. They had record Mac revenues last quarter. All of their other devices are just computers with different form factors running a variant of the same OS, most with a variant of the same processor. Office and Windows have been the main driver for MS for over 25 years.
    - Latour 5y ago
      A primary benefit of Android is that Google is allowed to put their search engine on Android mobile devices for close to free instead of multiple billions of dollars.
      - scarface74 5y ago
        If Apple customers are the most affluent and are worth at least $12 billion a year to Google, how much are the statistically less affluent Android users really worth? How much are customers buying $200 phones worth to advertisers compared to customers paying 3 times as much? Google also has to pay third party Android OEMs a share of search revenue.
        selectodude 5y ago
        I would imagine a lot of it is mindshare. Apple is trendy and had already called their bluff once and made Bing the default search engine for a time. Google pays Apple to make Google the search engine on the iPhone for the same reason that Coca Cola and Anheiseur-Busch spend tens of millions per year on 30 second spots during the Super Bowl.
fullshark 5y ago
If anything it's more amazing how much it hasn't changed lately. The early days were a wild west full of market share battles and failed startups/ideas. Now the market appears mature with a few companies with strangleholds on it until perhaps a technological sea change catches them off guard.

scarface74 5y ago

If you look back a decade, things haven’t changed that much. Facebook was public, growing, had figured out mobile and had already acquired Instagram. It was by far the top social media company. Amazon had taken over online retail. It was already a behemoth. AWS was in its infancy, but it was growing. Apple was already the most valuable company in the US. Microsoft had been one of the top 10 most valuable companies for a decade. Google was already a behemoth when it came to search. YouTube was massive and Android had just started gaining traction. Out of the top five companies, Google is the only one that hasn’t been able to pivot or diversify. The rest of the companies have been able to learn from the mistakes of the previous generation. In the case of Apple and Microsoft. They have both been around for 35+ years. Microsoft wrote the first version of the embedded AppleSoft Basic interpreter for Apple //e’s in 1980.

menzoic 5y ago
Google is well diversified. You even mentioned Youtube and Android. GCP isn't at the top but it's huge. Google docs/business suite is taking over, it's the goto for startups. They have a mobile carrier business. Self driving cars (although its dropping in valuation but they do have a large stake in Uber). Google is now Alphabet which it restructured into because of its diversification. Small nit: FB wasnt public 10yrs ago but your point is valid either way.
- ReggieCommaRose 5y ago
  Google is well diversified in its business endeavors but hasn't been capitalize on that for a better diversified revenue stream.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    How else do you measure whether it is successfully diversifying if not by revenue or more importantly profitability? Contrast Google with Apple. Even though the iPhone is 60% of Apple’s business, last time I checked, the Mac business alone would put its revenue well within the top 100 companies.
    - ReggieCommaRose 5y ago
      That was my point - that Google isn’t ACTUALLY well diversified compared to its contemporaries.
- LunaSea 5y ago
  Youtube is a net loss and GCP has a 4.6% market share so I wouldn't really count this as diversified since very little of their overall revenue comes out of these two projects? Google docs / business is interesting but I'm not sure they make much money out of it and are scatting on the freemium tier success.
  - scarface74 5y ago
    Google Docs is a very distant second. https://www.ciodive.com/news/Google-Microsoft-Office-collaboration/571740/ https://www.ciodive.com/news/Google-Microsoft-Office-collabo...
  - utopcell 5y ago
    YouTube is a net loss ? Where is that coming from ? It brought in $6BN revenue just in Q1 [1]. [1] https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2021Q1_alphabet_earnings_release.pdf?cache=0cd3d78 https://abc.xyz/investor/static/pdf/2021Q1_alphabet_earnings...
    - scarface74 5y ago
      “Revenue” is not the same as “profit” https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/google-still-isnt-telling-us-about-youtube-and-cloud-profits.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/google-still-isnt-telling-us...
      - utopcell 5y ago
        The question stands: Where is the "net loss" statement coming from ?
        scarface74 5y ago
        Whether it’s a net loss or barely profitable, it still doesn’t move the needle as far as Google’s income. Even if it did - it is still mostly search advertising. That’s not diversification.
- scarface74 5y ago
  According to public records that came out during the Oracle lawsuit, Android had only made $22 billion in profit from its inception through the time of discovery (2016). Which is really nothing overall. https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/21/10810834/android-generated-31-billion-revenue-google-oracle https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/21/10810834/android-generate... On the other hand, it’s reported that Google pays Apple $12 billion a year to be the default search engine on Apple devices. Apple makes a lot more from Google on mobile than Google makes from Android. Andy Jassy, the CEO of AWS, has said in plenty of public statements that only 4% of all enterprise IT spend is on any cloud provider. GCP is in a distant third.
eloisant 5y ago
Except for Amazon, that would still be extremely successful without AWS, the others had their original business model disrupted. So far Google still have a stronghold on search, they've been able to secure it with Android and Chrome by controlling the devices, they seem to be doing fine.
- scarface74 5y ago
  Android (profit of $23 billion from 2010-2016) hasn’t really done that great for Google. They still have to pay Apple a reported $12 billion a year+ to be the default search engine for iOS devices. Apple’s business model has always been to sell “computers” at high margins. They had record Mac revenues last quarter. All of their other devices are just computers with different form factors running a variant of the same OS, most with a variant of the same processor. Office and Windows have been the main driver for MS for over 25 years.
  - Latour 5y ago
    A primary benefit of Android is that Google is allowed to put their search engine on Android mobile devices for close to free instead of multiple billions of dollars.
    - scarface74 5y ago
      If Apple customers are the most affluent and are worth at least $12 billion a year to Google, how much are the statistically less affluent Android users really worth? How much are customers buying $200 phones worth to advertisers compared to customers paying 3 times as much? Google also has to pay third party Android OEMs a share of search revenue.
      - selectodude 5y ago
        I would imagine a lot of it is mindshare. Apple is trendy and had already called their bluff once and made Bing the default search engine for a time. Google pays Apple to make Google the search engine on the iPhone for the same reason that Coca Cola and Anheiseur-Busch spend tens of millions per year on 30 second spots during the Super Bowl.

fullshark 5y ago

If anything it's more amazing how much it hasn't changed lately. The early days were a wild west full of market share battles and failed startups/ideas. Now the market appears mature with a few companies with strangleholds on it until perhaps a technological sea change catches them off guard.