7 ms·
I can't help but be reminded of early 90's Microsoft when I read about what Google is doing lately. They're definitely on the "extend" phase of embrace, extend
by dos1 15y ago
I can't help but be reminded of early 90's Microsoft when I read about what Google is doing lately. They're definitely on the "extend" phase of embrace, extend, extinguish. They're creating their own little insular community. Search results return Google+ results first and prominently at the top. Their browser has features that no other browser supports (native client, Dart etc). Their previously free APIs are now going to cost lots and lots of money (Maps). None of these things are bad in and of themselves, and all of it is certainly their choice. However, if this is the direction they're headed then I want no part of it.
Edit: For those of you who find my comment off topic - did you even read the article or just the summary? Here are some relevant quotes:
"Twitter had criticized Google’s new social search feature, which it calls Search plus Your World, on Tuesday. As we’ve seen time and time again, news breaks first on Twitter, its statement said. We’re concerned that as a result of Google’s changes, finding this information will be much harder for everyone."
"Sullivan told Schmidt he thought one feature of Search plus Your World, which recommends relevant people to follow on Google+ but not other networks, is the equivalent of saying ‘hey, you can only find information about finance on Google finance. You cannot find information about finance anywhere else."
Clearly people are upset about Google trying to block out competitor's results. I believe my comment is completely ON topic.
Edit 2: Wow, I had no idea how many Google apologists were out there. I had high hopes that the Hacker News community might actually be objective and not just fawn all over Google. Christ was I mistaken.
- latch 15y agoYour comment is unrelated to the article. Fine if you have a problem with stuff Google is doing, but on this topic they currently seem a lot more right than wrong.
- dos1 15y agoDid you even read the article? There are a number of quotes from people in the article that say what Google is doing here is definitely wrong.
- latch 15y agoDid you read the article? One of the quotes is from Twitter. The other is a question a reporter ask and the entire point of the article is to answer the question. This is the article which I read: Twitter: Google is blocking us Reporter: Blocking twitter is evil Google: WTF? Twitter told us (and they really did) to block its links!?!
- dos1 15y agoSo to summarize: You agree that my comment was on topic, since clearly there are some who believe Google is in the wrong. Just because YOU don't agree with them doesn't mean my comment was off topic.
- lonnyk 15y agoI think it is important to point out that Google seems to be saying they are willing to talk w/ the other networks about getting in the same position, but as of now those talks have not happened. Would Google have G+ suggestions AND Twitter suggestions presented in the same way if they still had an agreement w/ Twitter? Would the G+ suggestions be wrong if they still had the Twitter suggestions?
- mchanson 15y agoSo hard to give up gmail habit though...
- jamesgeck0 15y agoWhen Twitter pulled out, Google didn't have a way to do social networking results. Facebook presumably turned down their offers. This is one of the big reasons why Google+ was built to begin with.
- Karunamon 15y ago>They're definitely on the "extend" phase of embrace, extend, extinguish. When you provide even a little evidence that this is their plan, this may be taken seriously. As it stands, they are still a huge champion of open standards (hardly a "phase"), and have raised the price on two of their more expensive services (app engine and maps) - both of which only affect developers, not end users. As it stands, your fears are FUD and nothing more.
- dos1 15y agoJust look at Chrome. On one hand, Google claims undying support for web standards, and on the other they're adding a bunch of non-standard features to their browser trying to get people tied in. This is very similar to MS and IE6 + ActiveX
- dpritchett 15y agoWhat are these non-standard features? Are they open sourced? How hard would it be to fold them into another browser, especially one built on Webkit?
- dos1 15y agoDart, native client, Gears was in there for awhile.
- dpritchett 15y agoGears seems like a perfect example. It predated the HTML5 local storage when Google found such a tool useful. Now the standard's caught up and Gears has been yanked in favor of the standard. Dart and NaCl could conceivably lead to evil, but I like the history shown with Gears/HTML5.
- abraham 15y agoDart is not in any release of Chrome. You can download a special experimental Chromium release with Dart support but it is not in the nightly.
- rryan 15y ago> native client, Dart, etc. You forgot SPDY, WebRTC, etc. This is nothing like ActiveX. These are open-source technologies and other browsers are free and invited to implement them. They're trying to push the web forward.
- dos1 15y agoSure they're free and open source. But they aren't STANDARDS. You seem to be unable to look objectively at the situation. While ActiveX was closed source, by extending the web with non standard technology the end result will be the same, open source or not.
- yanw 15y agoBut they are adhering to standards as well, more so than anyone else for that matter, point to an instance where they're not. Also it takes ages for stuff to get standardized, are you suggesting that no technology should be applicable until it's the standard? I see no issue in introducing new cool tech specially if it's opensource.
- dos1 15y agoI agree, they do a great job following the standards. I love that. What I don't love is when they break away. That's my whole point - work with the standards body to get your new cool tech introduced. Don't just go rogue and do whatever you want, that's when problems arise.
- yanw 15y agoThis meme about Google turning into "old bad Microsoft" is a result of false dichotomy. Search+'s effect on the results page is peripheral, manifesting on the right pane and search suggestions, the main results are largely the same and there is a handy toggle to switch modes. Their browser is opensource, NaCl is opensource, Dart is opensource, the Microsoft stuff never was opensource. They started charging for the Maps API because some German mapping company complained to the EU that they can't compete with free.
- dos1 15y agoOooh, false dichotomy. Because you used big words you must be right. See my below comment: Open source does NOT equal standards. They are different. Further, the picture in this article: http://mashable.com/2012/01/10/google-launches-social-search/ http://mashable.com/2012/01/10/google-launches-social-search... clearly shows your Google+ results directly on top of your normal results.
- yanw 15y agoSee my comment regarding standards: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3456594 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3456594 At the top it shows the number of public and private results, and the picture cluster always was there, they just added social relevancy to it.
- nudded 15y agoThe fact that they are opensource has very little to do with it. They are trying to push certain technologies into certain directions under the cover of opensource. They are still in single control of the spec. This is not true with standard bodies where several companies can agree on it.
- mda 15y agoMost of the comments simply points to flaws in your arguments. I advise you to think carefully about the issues raised before calling them "apologists" and "not objective".
- dos1 15y agoAnd I've tried to honestly reply to every comment that points out a flaw in my argument. I did think carefully before using the word apologist, but I've had too many downvotes to really believe that people are thinking critically. What I'm saying is NOT that Google is evil, but rather they're increasingly heading in a direction I don't like, for the reasons I've outlined.
- Gigablah 15y ago"Oooh, false dichotomy. Because you used big words you must be right." "You seem to be unable to look objectively at the situation." "Wow, you're just being contrary to be contrary aren't you?" Seems like it has more to do with your attitude, don't you think?
- Karunamon 15y ago>..but I've had too many downvotes to really believe that people are thinking critically Did you stop to think that maybe you're getting downvoted for nonsensical and wrongheaded arguments? We get it - you don't like Google. You just don't have a valid reason for doing so. You're entitled to your opinion, but not your facts.
- rwolf 15y ago"I'm being downvoted so people must not be thinking critically."
- statictype 15y agoTheir browser has features that no other browser supports (native client, Dart etc). It's funny that you think these are bad things. Innovation happens by trying new things and pushing them out. If it sticks, great, if not, then it will die out. A ton of the technology today that we consider as 'standards' didn't start out that way. When Microsoft created XmlHttpRequest, were you complaining then that they were pushing out non-standard features that other browsers didn't have? Give credit to Google for trying to push the state-of-the-art in web technology forward.
- kenjackson 15y agoWhen Microsoft created XmlHttpRequest, were you complaining then that they were pushing out non-standard features that other browsers didn't have? In fact a lot of people did complain. This was the embrace, extend, extinguish attack that people had. Honestly, an absurd claim back then as well. I would think that you would try to make existing products so much better that you run your competitors out of business (or they improve so much that they stay competitive). But we have a culture where certain companies can do no wrong, while other companies can do no right. It's almost like asking a Republican in South Carolina about accomplishments by Obama -- doesn't really matter what he does, he'll be attacked. The dev space isn't so different.
- drivebyacct2 15y agoYou have 200 karma and are complaining about "Google apologists" when your allegations of "extending" of "embrace, extend, extinguish" are new features in Chrome and charging for APIs like Maps (saw yesterday's article, I see). Come on.
- tdoggette 15y agoWhat on earth does his karma have to do with anything?
- drivebyacct2 15y agoHe has a relatively new account, he makes unfounded accusations and terribly stereotypical FUD about Google, is rude to people who write him replies in comments and then edits his comments mocking the "Hacker News community" because they disagreed and he wasn't able to explain his stance. The karma was a shot across the bow.
- amatheus 15y agoApologists? I thought the term was fanboy - at least that's how an Apple "apologist" would be labeled here. The level of trust on Google that some people have is really astonishing. I think the problem is, for all their "do no evil" mantra, as they need the feel to keep growing (in other areas, as search is already theirs), I can't believe they will always choose the "do no evil" path. What I think is a big problem is, how much Google will be able to do before its public perception starts to change?
- herval 15y agoGoogle and Apple are the new IBM/Xerox/Microsoft: big, slow and monopolistic, in their own ways. It's the cycle of life! There, I said it. Let's get downvoted together!