10 ms·
It's been a while since they stopped innovating. Although Google, Maps, Youtube are of daily use they are monetized exclusively by advertising which is annoyin
by marcopicentini 4y ago
It's been a while since they stopped innovating.
Although Google, Maps, Youtube are of daily use they are monetized exclusively by advertising which is annoying and hated by many.
It has been many years since Google has launched an innovative new product.
I don't think ChatGPT will gain daily traction after this hype. Anyway we could say that MSFT and AMZN have demostrated more power to innovate with different business models (not only adv) and products.
The GOOG stock has a PE (Price/earning) of 23, while Coca cola 26. So the stock market expect higher growth from CocaCola than Google. Quite surprising.
- GOOGLE PE (23): https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOGL/alphabet/pe-ratio https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOGL/alphabet/pe-...
- COCA COLA PE (26): https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/KO/cocacola/pe-ratio https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/KO/cocacola/pe-rat...
- josu 4y ago>It has been many years since Google has launched an innovative new product. Stadia launched in 2019.
- silisili 4y agoStadia wasn't really that innovative, how many times has cloud/streaming gaming been done before? I can think of at least 3. Also, it's already dead.
- Sebguer 4y agoYeah, OnLive did it back in 2003!
- mertd 4y agoWhich three? Did they actually work with reasonable input latency?
- silisili 4y agoI thought of OnLive, Shadow, and Geforce Now. The only one of those I'd used was Geforce Now, and found it very similar to Stadia wrt latency. Stadia had a much nicer interface, though.
- bee_rider 4y agoThe discussion was about innovative products. An already explored idea, but executed properly, only counts as innovative if Apple does it. And even then, it only ran for a couple years, so even if we want to give points for taking an idea and making it work, they don’t pass there either.
- i_love_cookies 4y ago[dead]
- josu 4y agoStadia worked much better than the competition. It was the first time that cloud gaming had no tradeoffs. Definitely a lot of innovation behind the curtains.
- bobthepanda 4y agoI suppose successful new product? It’s already closed.
- kec 4y agoOnLive was 2009, PS Now was 2014, and Geforce Now launched in 2015. Stadia might have been well executed from a technical standpoint but AAA game streaming wasn't exactly a new and innovative idea in 2019.
- joshruby16 4y agoAnd it's dead.
- r12343a_19 4y ago> went offline permanently on January 18, 2023 Lol.
- xyzzyz 4y agoThey didn’t exactly stop innovating: ChatGPT itself is using tremendous amounts of innovation that was done and published by Google. What they stopped is beating their competition to launching compelling products based on the innovation they do.
- junofan 4y agoInnovation is the practical implementation of new inventions to deliver value. Google invented but does not seem to have innovated.
- nr2x 4y agoNearly all of the authors left Google years ago. If the company doesn’t keep the people innovating it’s not like they’re some magic middle manager who can make it happen without them.
- khmii 4y agoIMO this whole narrative reflects a type of human bias and the reality that we didn't evolve to reason about trillion dollar complex business. I love chatGPT but it clearly has a ton of issues. To declare Google dead that is point is completely absurd. I can't think of a single transformative technology that actually has a first mover advantage. The first, second and third mover seem to make all the mistakes and setup the forth mover to learn from those mistakes for free and create a monopoly. Counting out a company that owns Deepmind is just not rational.
- lyu07282 4y agoThey are kind of forced to keep up or die now, not a good place to be in. It feels like everyone always just assumed they must have super advanced AI behind closed doors. Perhaps that was a wrong assumption because they never actually seem to *do* anything with it, but we will probably know that for sure very soon.
- jibe 4y agoGoogle, Maps, Youtube are of daily use they are monetized exclusively by advertising. I don’t know how much. Money it makes, but there is paid API access to maps.
- system16 4y agoAds aside, the UI of Youtube and Maps is atrocious. There is so much room for improvement here, but it will never happen from Google. It's just not in their DNA. Unfortunately, they have such a huge moat here I doubt we'll see anything better for a long time.
- bitL 4y agoThey used to have pretty good UI for maps until some PM needed to make their mark... Given they count individual pixels and +/-1 deltas in colors I don't think they are ever going to get any UI correctly. The initial simple UI with just a single search input box that was highly praised by minimalists was just an accident.
- Ingaz 4y agoActually Youtube is not so bad. Youtube Music is really .. strange. It looks wrong/outdated everywhere. Generated playlists (recomendations) are always (for days/weeks) the same. Not a bit randomization. It feels like they were approved by party commitete for years. I don't understand why they decided social network in music service. Ah hell. CUE-lists are still too novice technology for them. I still think that last.fm 15 years ago was the best music service.
- bobthepanda 4y agoYoutube Music lost me the moment they shut down my Google Play Music and told me to kick rocks.
- uxcolumbo 4y agoWhat things about maps and YouTube’s UI annoy you? I find YouTube quite easy to use, esp the shortcut keys. Recommendation system is another story.
- lmm 4y agoThe most infuriating thing with Maps is that if you're looking at directions and have got the viewport where you want it and want to do something there (e.g. look at the description of a restaurant that's near the station you're changing at, or get directions to somewhere along your route), you can't. There's no way to escape from "directions mode" except hitting the back button, which resets your viewport. So you have to memorize the name of the place you're interested in, exit directions, and then hope that searching finds the place you were looking at a second ago (which, maybe in English it does, but searching for a Japanese place by name works maybe 1/3 of the time).
- hoppyhoppy2 4y agoNote that YouTube was acquired by Google in 2006; it's not a product that was launched by Google.
- awad 4y agoI think YouTube, which has a paid and ad-free version along with its Live TV offering, somehow manages to still be a sleeper hit within the larger Google portfolio and doesn't get talked about enough.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- likeabbas 4y agoWhat happened to the Waymo hype? If Waymo manages to break through and become a sufficient AI taxi, then car ownership becomes optional for a majority of Americans (unlike today).
- scarmig 4y agoWaymo has always been just a year or two from breaking through. Google's gotten through the first 95% of the work, but the remaining 95% is gonna take awhile.
- jeremyjh 4y agoDude they are running an open public taxi in Phoenix, it has the run of the whole city.
- oblio 4y agoIsn't Phoenix: 1. Car infested ergo perfect venue area for testing autonomous cars, since the infrastructure is through and through car oriented at the detriment of every other form of mobility (walking, cycling, buses, trams, trains, etc)? 2. Super hot and sunny, ergo no fog, no rain, no sleet, no ice, no special weather conditions to handle. 3. Flat like a pancake, making terrain management, coupled with the nice, wide roads from point #1, so super easy mode. Let's see them scale Waymo to at least 3 out of the following: San Francisco, NYC, Bucharest, Istanbul, Mumbai, St. Petersburg, etc. That could be at least a decade away.
- somethoughts 4y agoSome have postulated that this might be Google's Blackberry moment. On the flip side I wonder if its actually more like its Dropbox moment. The press loves a David and Goliath story; the young disruptor versus the stodgy disrupted.[1] At that time, Dropbox was David, coming out of nowhere in a hurry and had a product that seemingly should be so obvious for Google to launch but hadn't - making Google seem antiquated and slow. Fast forward a couple of years (aka a decade) and Dropbox is still going ok but Google Drive is by far more ubiquitous. I guess only time will tell. [1] Dropbox Versus The World https://www.fastcompany.com/3042436/dropbox-versus-the-world https://www.fastcompany.com/3042436/dropbox-versus-the-world
- mejutoco 4y agoLast time I tried to sync my computer to gdrive I waited 30 days before giving up on gdrive. Dropbox took less than 2 days, and stayed responsive.
- somethoughts 4y agoGood point - I think the much more typical flow for Google Drive is cloud first for most documents and only uploading occasional offline document upload. Which is perhaps why Google didn't really focus on creating a Dropbox like product until it was forced to because the more long term profitable for Google was a solution/vision based around a cloud first experience.
- jessriedel 4y agoDropbox iPad refuses to keep docs synced docs that I have specifically flagged for this. I routinely open the iPad somewhere without a connection and see that the docs are a month out of date. Not as mission critical as the desktop app, but still pretty frustrating that they can't handle this core functionality after years and millions spent on other bells and whistles.
- dreamcompiler 4y agoApple is forcing Dropbox to cripple itself because they now have to use Apple's own cloud file sync API which is hot garbage. I don't know if this is the cause of your iPad issue, but Dropbox on MacOS is about to get a whole lot shittier.
- adam_arthur 4y agoIf search gets usurped, or even a marginal but meaningful reduction in usage due to competition from AIs, then its not surprising at all that Google’s near term prospects could be worse than Coke. Even Google winning the AI wars leaves them worse off as the operating profit potential of querying an AI vs their search index has to be far lower. As to usage, once you start to integrate ChatGPT into your workflows it can meaningfully benefit vs traditional search. Ive been able to find information on specific programming language concepts, with generated examples, far faster than searching. I can ask it about GameDev concepts and ask for bulleted lists or higher/lower level of detail in the answers. Information is presented in a much easier to consume manner That being said, most stocks that are considered defensive are quite overvalued on a fundamental basis. I would consider a PE of 26 for Coke quite undesirable, though there’s much worse
- scarmig 4y agoIf Google ends up winning in the AI war, search and ads will be significantly cannibalized, but it will have tremendous opportunities outside of search, many of them in areas that don't even exist yet. In some ways, it might even be good. It's suffering from a kind of advertising resource curse nowadays, and being forced and able to diversify its economy would be best in the long term.
- adam_arthur 4y agoI'm not sure, it seems many companies have comparable technology at this point, and Google is not known for being great at packaging tech into products. They had an enormous moat and edge in search, but not seeing it for this next wave of AI. Barrier to entry seems far lower
- Someone1234 4y agoGoogle stopped being innovative the second their "20% Time" got gutted: > Employees were encouraged to spend up to twenty-percent of their paid work time pursuing personal projects. The objective of the program was to inspire innovation in participating employees and ultimately increase company potential. For Google's part, Gmail and AdSense both arose out of side projects. In 2013, Google discontinued 20 percent time. What has Google released since 2013[0]? Stadia? Then you tack on that Google Search as of today is basically unusable/broken with people needing to append site:, double-quoting everything, or enabling verbatim search to get high quality results. Heck, on top of that, I also have a uBlock configuration that removes 280 domains from Google Results because they're all auto-generated spam of Stackoverflow answers. There is something deeply wrong with the culture inside Google. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google#2012_onward https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google#2012_onward
- s-xyz 4y ago“What has Google released since 2013[0]? Stadia?” - GCP Suite (a full integrated and consistent suit, answering so many things) - Google Workspace (trust me when you get to know everything that is possible you will be amazed) - Tensorflow and other Machine Learning applications
- Someone1234 4y agoGoogle Workspaces originally released in 2006 (inc. Sheets, Docs, Drive was 2012, Calendar was 2009, etc), it was rebranded "G Suite" in 2016 then rebranded "Google Workspaces" in 2020. Rebranding an existing product isn't innovation. Google Cloud is a worse clone of AWS, is that innovative? Redmond-style photocopying? I'll give you TensorFlow, but we're talking about that being their death knell, so congratulations about signing their own death-warrant?
- vrosas 4y ago> Google Cloud is a worse clone of AWS This certainly hasn’t been my experience. I’ve found GCP products to be much better/easier to deal with than their AWS counterparts.
- snake_doc 4y agoLooking P/E without sector context is a bit strange. The entire comm services sector is down, it’s not just GOOGL… Since I can’t paste screenshots from my terminal, you can see the sector P/Es on page 6: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/performance-reports/dashboard-us-sector.pdf https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/performance-repo...
- midoridensha 4y ago>It has been many years since Google has launched an innovative new product. I can say the exact same thing about countless other large companies: Facebook, Intel, Microsoft, Boeing, AMD, AT&T, I could go on and on. At some point, launching innovative new products isn't really that important for a company, when many people on the services that company provides.
- netheril96 4y agoGoogle used to be considered different from and better than all the companies you list (except Facebook). Being lumped together with those companies would have been seen as an insult to Google in the past.
- midoridensha 4y agoTimes change, and companies grow and mature. Intel used to be a big innovator too, like when they decided making RAM wasn't the best strategy and decided to try making CPUs instead. They've come a long way since inventing the 4004.
- trilobyte 4y agoIt is if you don't want to wind up like IBM, i.e. - a company that could have been so much more, knew it had to change at the leadership level, and yet still couldn't get out of their own way. Apple's renaissance came because they started releasing innovative products and cannibalizing their own business. Disrupt yourself before someone else does.
- midoridensha 4y agoMost large companies would just destroy themselves if they tried this. IBM is still there, decades later. Why is it not good enough to just continue to exist and generate profits, even if you aren't the highest-market-cap company on the planet?
- trilobyte 4y ago
- LatteLazy 4y agoGoogle are a mature corporation. The fact they managed to innovate for so long is really a huge achievement but nothing lasts forever. The same applies to the rest of FAANG one way or another. Netflix cannot innovate out of streaming tv and movies, and now face strong competition from others. Apple has always been more about marketing than real breakthrough tech innovation and the bits of real innovation they did do left with Jobs. Amazon has flopped most of it's recent attempts (again, respects for running BOTH the worlds best retail company AND AWS). Facebook has been flailing around doing crypto currency and VR and getting nowhere. Microsoft haven't innovated since Excel FFS. Coke at least has the occasional new flavour... I'm not "blaming" them, it's the cycle of life. Gravity eventually wins. This is also a key reason for all the layoffs: Growing, innovating companies cannot ONBOARD staff fast enough, because their value is decided by how big they will be in the future and how fast they can get there. People are a profit centre. But mature companies' (in mature industries) only source of increased value is in efficiency, getting the same revenues with less costs. So people are a cost centre and they succeed by showing they're efficient (aka laying off workers).