7 ms·

With Google, There Will Be Bad Blood

57 points by canistr 15y ago

danielhunt 15y ago
There have been quite a few stories here recently, bashing Google. Reading this, I'm actually concerned that a company that dominates so much of my online persona could end up being gutted as a result of some very expensive patent cases. Could we end up back with hotmail again in 2 years time when this dust settles? Will our (popular, modern) phones cease to be quite so useful if the almighty Google falls? (mail/calendar/contact synching/chat) I suppose I should be more concerned by my own reliance on an American for-profit company than on if they'll come out of all this unscathed...
- angryasian 15y ago
  what does it matter history has shown people will start over with whatever services are better or easier. if google falls you'll go with another set of services and the cycle starts over.
  - danielhunt 15y ago
    Oh I don't doubt that I'll be able to start over somewhere else, but this event would be the first of its scale. Google own/hold more of my identity than any other online system/organisation ever has - something I'm sure is true for others too. Moving to other providers, after having invested so much time and effort (for better or worse) into the almighty GOOG would be a massive pain for me, a techy, let alone for those not so inclined. I can't imagine having to walk through the Yahoo! Mail interface with my mother, for example :)
  - ericd 15y ago
    I'm not sure something as useful and integrated would rise anytime soon, though. It might be more akin to the Roman empire falling and feudalism reigning for years until something else comes along. Google's been able to make so many high quality services for free because they dominated a cashcow (search) for years. Those kinds of situations are somewhat rare.
kiba 15y ago
Google done so much good in the world and people are pissed off for google butting into their market and taking away their money.
- rjd 15y ago
  What good has google really done?
  - rryan 15y ago
    Is that a joke? Maybe you don't remember the time before Google existed, but it was much worse.
    - cryos 15y ago
      But what have they done that other people aren't doing? Sure they revolutionized search, but I feel they glory for other peoples hard work.
    - rjd 15y ago
      Name anything you think to be "good" and I'll tell you why its not good. And yes I've been around a long time and I remember the world before Google perfectly fine.
- technoslut 15y ago
  All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. For you to characterize Google as 'good' means that their PR has done it's job well.
  - rryan 15y ago
    > All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. [Citation Needed]
    - 2muchcoffeeman 15y ago
protomyth 15y ago
Is anyone really surprised? Microsoft destroyed Netscape by leveraging the profit made in one market to give away something in another. Apple execs totally screwed up the patents on the UI which let Microsoft develop Windows and kill their market share. Institutional memory is an amazing thing.
thurn 15y ago
Competition is ultimately good for users. As long as Google isn't using its size in a Microsoft-vs-Netscape capacity to compete unfairly and destroy innovation in a particular market, I think we should welcome this trend.
- protomyth 15y ago
  Google's release of Android parallels Microsoft's release of IE a little too closely for some (I do believe it was mentioned in some report I read).
  - blinkingled 15y ago
    That makes no sense at all. IE was bundled with the OS which was licensed for money, forced down the PC manufacturers' neck with anti competitive terms and conditions along with proprietary technology (ActiveX/VBScript) to further Microsoft's monopolistic grip on the PC market. On the contrary Google is distributing an Open Source OS with well documented APIs (that RIM is using to run Android apps as-is), they aren't requiring any anti-competitive agreements/royalties from anyone to forbid them using alternative OS etc. They are betting on good-will and competence as far as I can see - that manufacturers can use it on its merits rather than being forced to do it. Of course in the process they are making money but it's win-win for everyone. IE killed Netscape - that was anti competitive for some but having lived through Netscape 4.x I can assure you that Netscape's incompetence was also a big part of their failure.
  - pkulak 15y ago
    They really shouldn't have bundled Android with GMail like that.
    - abraham 15y ago
      Gmail isn't bundled with Android. In fact Google went after CyanogenMod for bundling it.
      - mdwrigh2 15y ago
Yhippa 15y ago
TL;DR: Google tries to enter many different markets at the same time. People are upset that Google is encroaching on their territory. The encroachees are retaliating. I think MG Siegler is the John C. Dvorak of these modern times. I wish the TC authors would disclose any stock positions they have in any company mentioned in their posts.
iamelgringo 15y ago
People aren't pissed at Google because of they are trying to get into other people's markets. Startups and developers are creeped out by of Google. Follow me: What is Google's product? Really, If you were to sell Google, what would you say it's product is? Think about it long and hard, and what you end up with (I believe) is the world's largest trove of personal data and information ever accumulated: email, voice prints, search data, location data, music preferences, sexual predilections, travel information, etc... And, they have an insatiable hunger to gather more data. How do they make money off if it? Right now... selling ads based on the world's biggest recommender system. Couple that with Google's strict NDA policy which prevents Googlers from being out and about in the community talking about what they are doing, and people really get creeped out. Google's IP restrictions essentially prevent Googlers from working on a startup in their spare time, because it would compete with their employer, whose mission is to "organize the world's information". Which makes a deafening silence around the Googleplex when it comes to spinning off startups. Finally, the current interpretation of Delaware corporate law states that a corporation must maximize shareholder value. In the next 20 years, Google is going to have to start extracting more value out of this massive database of personal information they are assembling. And, Google's secrecy and self-isolation erodes trust. No one has any clue or guarantee about what Google is going to do next. It's impossible to contact someone on the inside if the Google behemoth blindly steps on you. They have no customer service to speak of. This is why people in the Valley are creeped out by Google.
- olalonde 15y ago
  Give me a break. > And, Google's secrecy and self-isolation erodes trust. Many, if not most, tech companies are much more secretive than Google (Apple?). From the few times I've read Google's blogs, I thought they were quite transparent and open. > the current interpretation of Delaware corporate law states that a corporation must maximize shareholder value. That would make a great tagline for a dystopian Hollywood film. There is a good reason why Google takes good care of your data and won't sell it to evil governments or corporations: they would go out of business if they did so. Your comment is more a criticism of NDAs, corporate secrecy and capitalism than Google itself.
drivebyacct2 15y ago
These emails have been discussed before. Can we leave the speculation alone for a bit and resume when there's new information or a new vantage point?
MikeCapone 15y ago
Am I the only one feeling like some people are trying way too hard to influence others on how they perceive Google? It seems to all have happened at the same time too. I don't have any proof, but it does smell a bit like an astroturf campaign (I'm not referring to this TC article, but mostly to comments I've seen here and elsewhere).
- sek 15y ago
  You are right, it gets suspiciously much these days. In Germany, some days ago, came out that Microsoft paid for an Anti-Google article in a Newspaper. I can search for a link (in German) if somebody wants proof.
  - yanw 15y ago
    Yes please.
    - sek 15y ago
      The article itself: http://www.fr-online.de/politik/meinung/der-mensch-denkt--google-lenkt/-/1472602/8736368/-/ http://www.fr-online.de/politik/meinung/der-mensch-denkt--go... Blog entry about this: http://blog.die-linke.de/digitalelinke/anti-google-pr-in-der-frankfurter-rundschau/ http://blog.die-linke.de/digitalelinke/anti-google-pr-in-der... Follow up in a startup blog: http://netzwertig.com/2011/08/05/mangelnde-transparenz-uber-lobbyismus-in-der-internetwirtschaft/ http://netzwertig.com/2011/08/05/mangelnde-transparenz-uber-...
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
- iamelgringo 15y ago
  My opinions are my own. <full disclosure> BizSpark sponsors Hackers & Founders, and they've been great to work with, but their sponsorships just cover costs of events for Hackers & Founders. </full disclosure> I am a believer in "If you don't pay for the product, you are the product", however. I'm not a fan of Facebook for many of the same reasons.
michaelochurch 15y ago
Calm down, all. We can be friends. Let's go down to the soda fountain and get ourselves some milkshakes.
argsv 15y ago
I wonder if this is another attack paid for by facebook (or Apple?) http://www.cnbc.com/id/43017686/Facebook_Admits_Secret_PR_Move_Against_Google http://www.cnbc.com/id/43017686/Facebook_Admits_Secret_PR_Mo...
fragsworth 15y ago
This article is basically judging Google for competing against market leaders. By the tone of this article, it would seem the author (MG Siegler) prefers instead that a monopoly exists in every sector of the market and that the companies are all buddy-buddy with one another. Fuck everything about that.
- blinkingled 15y ago
  A large section of Apple bloggers are taking this whole Google vs. Apple thing as if monopoly of the iPhone was a divine, assured panacea that was unfairly disrupted by Google's misstep that was Android. It was as if something akin to their 'right' was denied and they will go to any lengths to restore it. It is mind boggling how the vestiges of religious zealotry make a big part of technology evangelism! You would think that the technically inclined will take at least a tad bit logical approach to it but no - it's equally worse or more than religious zealotry!
rrrazdan 15y ago
I have always wondered about the bad blood between MGS and the TC community. Now I know why. How this passes off as journalism is beyond me. EDIT: rephrasing of final line.
- TimJRobinson 15y ago
  Yup, every post he makes is either trash talking any of Apple's competitors, or praising Apple for how they are dominating the market / making record profits etc. Back before Android was such a force he used to trash talk Microsoft constantly. Now that Android has overtaken iOS he's switched targets to Google. He still works for them because he gets a ton of attention and page views for TC. But really he's just a troll, and while trolls get lots of attention that isn't necessarily a good thing...
hfuecks 15y ago
To me the only real problem with Google attempting to "do everything" is they seem to be bad at doing real business in any space other than their core ad business. It's as if the billions they make from ads dwarf other activities to the point where they cant be bothered to earn the millions they could make with other activities. For example Google Analytics. From Wikipedia; > Another market share analysis claims that Google Analytics is used at around 49.95% of the top 1,000,000 websites (as currently ranked by Alexa) Having used Google Analytics on a relatively high traffic site ( http://www.local.ch http://www.local.ch ), it has some serious shortcomings, such as limits on API usage and accuracy of the data or even basic technical support. We'd be more than willing to pay an "enterprise license" fee in the order of a few hundreds of thousands to address this but Google isn't interested, which is maddening. As such they squat on the analytics market, their free offering acting as a barrier to entry for innovative competition, while failing to innovate themselves. The strategy with Analytics seems to be that it should support the ad business and nothing more. The Android Market is another example. The market dynamics are different, but again Androids primary purpose seems to be to supporting the ad business again. That seems to be reflected by Googles fumbling of the Android Market to the point where Amazon feels it's worth attempting. Similar stories apply to many other of Googles products; Groups, Blogger, Picassa, Google Desktop and to an extent even Google Docs - the appearance of "we're already rich - why bother?". As such, outside of it's core business Google is basically a "Market squatter", blocking entry to others while driving customers mad with incomplete offerings. Can't help feeling if they could solve this by getting serious about monetizing those side products.

57 points by canistr 15y ago

There have been quite a few stories here recently, bashing Google. Reading this, I'm actually concerned that a company that dominates so much of my online persona could end up being gutted as a result of some very expensive patent cases. Could we end up back with hotmail again in 2 years time when this dust settles? Will our (popular, modern) phones cease to be quite so useful if the almighty Google falls? (mail/calendar/contact synching/chat) I suppose I should be more concerned by my own reliance on an American for-profit company than on if they'll come out of all this unscathed...

angryasian 15y ago
what does it matter history has shown people will start over with whatever services are better or easier. if google falls you'll go with another set of services and the cycle starts over.
- danielhunt 15y ago
  Oh I don't doubt that I'll be able to start over somewhere else, but this event would be the first of its scale. Google own/hold more of my identity than any other online system/organisation ever has - something I'm sure is true for others too. Moving to other providers, after having invested so much time and effort (for better or worse) into the almighty GOOG would be a massive pain for me, a techy, let alone for those not so inclined. I can't imagine having to walk through the Yahoo! Mail interface with my mother, for example :)
- ericd 15y ago
  I'm not sure something as useful and integrated would rise anytime soon, though. It might be more akin to the Roman empire falling and feudalism reigning for years until something else comes along. Google's been able to make so many high quality services for free because they dominated a cashcow (search) for years. Those kinds of situations are somewhat rare.

kiba 15y ago

Google done so much good in the world and people are pissed off for google butting into their market and taking away their money.

rjd 15y ago
What good has google really done?
- rryan 15y ago
  Is that a joke? Maybe you don't remember the time before Google existed, but it was much worse.
  - cryos 15y ago
    But what have they done that other people aren't doing? Sure they revolutionized search, but I feel they glory for other peoples hard work.
  - rjd 15y ago
    Name anything you think to be "good" and I'll tell you why its not good. And yes I've been around a long time and I remember the world before Google perfectly fine.
technoslut 15y ago
All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. For you to characterize Google as 'good' means that their PR has done it's job well.
- rryan 15y ago
  > All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. [Citation Needed]
  - 2muchcoffeeman 15y ago

protomyth 15y ago

Is anyone really surprised? Microsoft destroyed Netscape by leveraging the profit made in one market to give away something in another. Apple execs totally screwed up the patents on the UI which let Microsoft develop Windows and kill their market share. Institutional memory is an amazing thing.

thurn 15y ago

Competition is ultimately good for users. As long as Google isn't using its size in a Microsoft-vs-Netscape capacity to compete unfairly and destroy innovation in a particular market, I think we should welcome this trend.

protomyth 15y ago
Google's release of Android parallels Microsoft's release of IE a little too closely for some (I do believe it was mentioned in some report I read).
- blinkingled 15y ago
  That makes no sense at all. IE was bundled with the OS which was licensed for money, forced down the PC manufacturers' neck with anti competitive terms and conditions along with proprietary technology (ActiveX/VBScript) to further Microsoft's monopolistic grip on the PC market. On the contrary Google is distributing an Open Source OS with well documented APIs (that RIM is using to run Android apps as-is), they aren't requiring any anti-competitive agreements/royalties from anyone to forbid them using alternative OS etc. They are betting on good-will and competence as far as I can see - that manufacturers can use it on its merits rather than being forced to do it. Of course in the process they are making money but it's win-win for everyone. IE killed Netscape - that was anti competitive for some but having lived through Netscape 4.x I can assure you that Netscape's incompetence was also a big part of their failure.
- pkulak 15y ago
  They really shouldn't have bundled Android with GMail like that.
  - abraham 15y ago
    Gmail isn't bundled with Android. In fact Google went after CyanogenMod for bundling it.
    - mdwrigh2 15y ago

Yhippa 15y ago

TL;DR: Google tries to enter many different markets at the same time. People are upset that Google is encroaching on their territory. The encroachees are retaliating. I think MG Siegler is the John C. Dvorak of these modern times. I wish the TC authors would disclose any stock positions they have in any company mentioned in their posts.

iamelgringo 15y ago

People aren't pissed at Google because of they are trying to get into other people's markets. Startups and developers are creeped out by of Google. Follow me: What is Google's product? Really, If you were to sell Google, what would you say it's product is? Think about it long and hard, and what you end up with (I believe) is the world's largest trove of personal data and information ever accumulated: email, voice prints, search data, location data, music preferences, sexual predilections, travel information, etc... And, they have an insatiable hunger to gather more data. How do they make money off if it? Right now... selling ads based on the world's biggest recommender system. Couple that with Google's strict NDA policy which prevents Googlers from being out and about in the community talking about what they are doing, and people really get creeped out. Google's IP restrictions essentially prevent Googlers from working on a startup in their spare time, because it would compete with their employer, whose mission is to "organize the world's information". Which makes a deafening silence around the Googleplex when it comes to spinning off startups. Finally, the current interpretation of Delaware corporate law states that a corporation must maximize shareholder value. In the next 20 years, Google is going to have to start extracting more value out of this massive database of personal information they are assembling. And, Google's secrecy and self-isolation erodes trust. No one has any clue or guarantee about what Google is going to do next. It's impossible to contact someone on the inside if the Google behemoth blindly steps on you. They have no customer service to speak of. This is why people in the Valley are creeped out by Google.

olalonde 15y ago
Give me a break. > And, Google's secrecy and self-isolation erodes trust. Many, if not most, tech companies are much more secretive than Google (Apple?). From the few times I've read Google's blogs, I thought they were quite transparent and open. > the current interpretation of Delaware corporate law states that a corporation must maximize shareholder value. That would make a great tagline for a dystopian Hollywood film. There is a good reason why Google takes good care of your data and won't sell it to evil governments or corporations: they would go out of business if they did so. Your comment is more a criticism of NDAs, corporate secrecy and capitalism than Google itself.

drivebyacct2 15y ago

These emails have been discussed before. Can we leave the speculation alone for a bit and resume when there's new information or a new vantage point?

MikeCapone 15y ago

Am I the only one feeling like some people are trying way too hard to influence others on how they perceive Google? It seems to all have happened at the same time too. I don't have any proof, but it does smell a bit like an astroturf campaign (I'm not referring to this TC article, but mostly to comments I've seen here and elsewhere).

sek 15y ago
You are right, it gets suspiciously much these days. In Germany, some days ago, came out that Microsoft paid for an Anti-Google article in a Newspaper. I can search for a link (in German) if somebody wants proof.
- yanw 15y ago
  Yes please.
  - sek 15y ago
    The article itself: http://www.fr-online.de/politik/meinung/der-mensch-denkt--google-lenkt/-/1472602/8736368/-/ http://www.fr-online.de/politik/meinung/der-mensch-denkt--go... Blog entry about this: http://blog.die-linke.de/digitalelinke/anti-google-pr-in-der-frankfurter-rundschau/ http://blog.die-linke.de/digitalelinke/anti-google-pr-in-der... Follow up in a startup blog: http://netzwertig.com/2011/08/05/mangelnde-transparenz-uber-lobbyismus-in-der-internetwirtschaft/ http://netzwertig.com/2011/08/05/mangelnde-transparenz-uber-...
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
iamelgringo 15y ago
My opinions are my own. <full disclosure> BizSpark sponsors Hackers & Founders, and they've been great to work with, but their sponsorships just cover costs of events for Hackers & Founders. </full disclosure> I am a believer in "If you don't pay for the product, you are the product", however. I'm not a fan of Facebook for many of the same reasons.

michaelochurch 15y ago

Calm down, all. We can be friends. Let's go down to the soda fountain and get ourselves some milkshakes.

argsv 15y ago

I wonder if this is another attack paid for by facebook (or Apple?) http://www.cnbc.com/id/43017686/Facebook_Admits_Secret_PR_Move_Against_Google http://www.cnbc.com/id/43017686/Facebook_Admits_Secret_PR_Mo...

fragsworth 15y ago

This article is basically judging Google for competing against market leaders. By the tone of this article, it would seem the author (MG Siegler) prefers instead that a monopoly exists in every sector of the market and that the companies are all buddy-buddy with one another. Fuck everything about that.

blinkingled 15y ago
A large section of Apple bloggers are taking this whole Google vs. Apple thing as if monopoly of the iPhone was a divine, assured panacea that was unfairly disrupted by Google's misstep that was Android. It was as if something akin to their 'right' was denied and they will go to any lengths to restore it. It is mind boggling how the vestiges of religious zealotry make a big part of technology evangelism! You would think that the technically inclined will take at least a tad bit logical approach to it but no - it's equally worse or more than religious zealotry!

rrrazdan 15y ago

I have always wondered about the bad blood between MGS and the TC community. Now I know why. How this passes off as journalism is beyond me. EDIT: rephrasing of final line.

TimJRobinson 15y ago
Yup, every post he makes is either trash talking any of Apple's competitors, or praising Apple for how they are dominating the market / making record profits etc. Back before Android was such a force he used to trash talk Microsoft constantly. Now that Android has overtaken iOS he's switched targets to Google. He still works for them because he gets a ton of attention and page views for TC. But really he's just a troll, and while trolls get lots of attention that isn't necessarily a good thing...

hfuecks 15y ago

To me the only real problem with Google attempting to "do everything" is they seem to be bad at doing real business in any space other than their core ad business. It's as if the billions they make from ads dwarf other activities to the point where they cant be bothered to earn the millions they could make with other activities. For example Google Analytics. From Wikipedia; > Another market share analysis claims that Google Analytics is used at around 49.95% of the top 1,000,000 websites (as currently ranked by Alexa) Having used Google Analytics on a relatively high traffic site ( http://www.local.ch http://www.local.ch ), it has some serious shortcomings, such as limits on API usage and accuracy of the data or even basic technical support. We'd be more than willing to pay an "enterprise license" fee in the order of a few hundreds of thousands to address this but Google isn't interested, which is maddening. As such they squat on the analytics market, their free offering acting as a barrier to entry for innovative competition, while failing to innovate themselves. The strategy with Analytics seems to be that it should support the ad business and nothing more. The Android Market is another example. The market dynamics are different, but again Androids primary purpose seems to be to supporting the ad business again. That seems to be reflected by Googles fumbling of the Android Market to the point where Amazon feels it's worth attempting. Similar stories apply to many other of Googles products; Groups, Blogger, Picassa, Google Desktop and to an extent even Google Docs - the appearance of "we're already rich - why bother?". As such, outside of it's core business Google is basically a "Market squatter", blocking entry to others while driving customers mad with incomplete offerings. Can't help feeling if they could solve this by getting serious about monetizing those side products.