4 ms·

I would be much more interested at working at the new Page dominated Google than the old Schmidt one. At least he's trying to do what Steve Jobs did so well: ma

by staunch 15y ago

I would be much more interested at working at the new Page dominated Google than the old Schmidt one. At least he's trying to do what Steve Jobs did so well: make big leaps forward. Apple found it necessary to own more and more pieces of the stack to innovate. Google is finding itself in the same position. Almost all of the best products are restricted/closed/proprietary systems. Macs, OSX, iPhone/iPad, Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, etc. It certainly would be nice if there was a real competitor to Google like Android competes with iOS.

capkutay 15y ago
Schmidt is the type of person that VCs/investors/financial firms like to see in charge. They feel more comfortable when level-headed, experienced executives are in charge of a company. Now that Google has risen to the top, they have more freedom to put the creative types in charge.
DanBC 15y ago
Why are big leaps good? Why not small iterative steps?
- staunch 15y ago
  In most cases it seems companies either do small incremental improvements OR big leaps at roughly the same pace. Doing something bold doesn't have to take more time -- it just requires a lot more vision, effort, and balls.
nostrademons 15y ago
"Almost all of the best products are restricted/closed/proprietary systems." This makes me really sad. It might be necessary, but you also miss out on a lot of innovation that happens when people can build off the work of others. To steal your examples, would there be a market for the Mac or OS X if IBM had not licensed PC clones? Would there be Facebook/Twitter/GMail if the Internet had not been public-domain?
- staunch 15y ago
  I don't think it's necessarily sad. Think how much better Ubuntu is because of OS X or how awesome it is that Android exists in its current form because of iOS. Proprietary technology may even give back more to open technology than it takes.
  - moocow01 15y ago
    I think it should be pointed out that both OS X and Android are based upon Linux. That point probably makes the discussion about who gives more to who a lot more complex.
    - bgeorgescu 15y ago
      OS X is based upon BSD, not Linux
fl3tch 15y ago
Google search, Gmail, Facebook and Twitter are built on HTTP, HTML, JavaScript and PHP, which are all free and open source. The Internet would be a bunch of walled gardens if it were built on proprietary technology, and every one of those gardens would be orders of magnitude crappier than the Internet we have today. Apple products are great for the 10%-20% of the population that can afford them, but mostly irrelevant to the vast majority of people.
- staunch 15y ago
  HTTP, HTML, and JavaScript are not products in this sense. HTML is acrylic paint. Twitter is a painting. These are all walled gardens, they just happen to be built on open technologies.

by staunch 15y ago

capkutay 15y ago

Schmidt is the type of person that VCs/investors/financial firms like to see in charge. They feel more comfortable when level-headed, experienced executives are in charge of a company. Now that Google has risen to the top, they have more freedom to put the creative types in charge.

DanBC 15y ago

Why are big leaps good? Why not small iterative steps?

staunch 15y ago
In most cases it seems companies either do small incremental improvements OR big leaps at roughly the same pace. Doing something bold doesn't have to take more time -- it just requires a lot more vision, effort, and balls.

nostrademons 15y ago

"Almost all of the best products are restricted/closed/proprietary systems." This makes me really sad. It might be necessary, but you also miss out on a lot of innovation that happens when people can build off the work of others. To steal your examples, would there be a market for the Mac or OS X if IBM had not licensed PC clones? Would there be Facebook/Twitter/GMail if the Internet had not been public-domain?

staunch 15y ago
I don't think it's necessarily sad. Think how much better Ubuntu is because of OS X or how awesome it is that Android exists in its current form because of iOS. Proprietary technology may even give back more to open technology than it takes.
- moocow01 15y ago
  I think it should be pointed out that both OS X and Android are based upon Linux. That point probably makes the discussion about who gives more to who a lot more complex.
  - bgeorgescu 15y ago
    OS X is based upon BSD, not Linux

fl3tch 15y ago

Google search, Gmail, Facebook and Twitter are built on HTTP, HTML, JavaScript and PHP, which are all free and open source. The Internet would be a bunch of walled gardens if it were built on proprietary technology, and every one of those gardens would be orders of magnitude crappier than the Internet we have today. Apple products are great for the 10%-20% of the population that can afford them, but mostly irrelevant to the vast majority of people.

staunch 15y ago
HTTP, HTML, and JavaScript are not products in this sense. HTML is acrylic paint. Twitter is a painting. These are all walled gardens, they just happen to be built on open technologies.