28 ms·
I mostly agree, but to be a little fair to Pichai: He didn't get a company that was really in a dominant (or at least not already rapidly declining) market posi
by morelisp 4y ago
I mostly agree, but to be a little fair to Pichai: He didn't get a company that was really in a dominant (or at least not already rapidly declining) market position. Microsoft missing the boat on the Internet might have been inherited from Gates, but Google not missing but still absolutely fucking up social networking, immediately prior to Pichai taking the role, is all on former leadership.
Whatever Pichai's failures, the two anointed candidates given the space to ascend prior to him (Rubin and Gundotra) were so much worse, both at product vision and at not sexually harassing their employees.
- shp0ngle 4y agoI don’t think given all the shit Facebook is getting now, and Twitter in shambles, Google is crying that hard about missing social networks. And they still own YouTube, don’t forget.
- morelisp 4y agoThey could have done literally nothing and ended up in a preferable position to today. It blew immeasurable goodwill and burned whole teams of developers. (And by some stories I heard, “literally nothing” might even have been Pichai’s approach had it been his choice.)