3 ms·
Anyone have a sense of whether the launch-and-abandon behavior actually works for Google, or is it more like a trust-funder whose checks keep coming no matter h
by neilv 3y ago
Anyone have a sense of whether the launch-and-abandon behavior actually works for Google, or is it more like a trust-funder whose checks keep coming no matter how much partying they do?
- bootloop 3y agoWorks for the employees, because maintaining a service in as-is state doesn't bring promotion opportunities, so who would want to be part of that? Not sure if anyone at Google really cares about Google in general. And who could blame them?
- anon84873628 3y agoDid they really abandon it? First Google Music was rolled under the YT umbrella, now the podcasts app was rolled into the music app. Makes sense to me; why have them in different places? This is exactly how Spotify and iTunes work. I have some small quibbles with the UI but overall it's great. You could blame them for launching separate apps in the first place but hindsight is 20/20. I can also agree that the migration should have been smoother. Not migrating listening history is definitely an annoyance.
- cbzbc 3y ago"Did they really abandon it? First Google Music was rolled under the YT umbrella," Not really, Google Music and Youtube Music were very distinct products at least at the consumption end.
- Apocryphon 3y agoApple has separate Music and Podcasts apps.
- georgemcbay 3y agoThe conventional wisdom is that this cycle happens not because it works for Google as an entity but it happens as a byproduct of how promotions and compensation work within Google (heavily based on new product launches). I have no idea if this is actually true and/or if it was ever true based on personal experience (never worked at Google) but I've heard it repeatedly including from some seemingly reliable sources.
- TheGRS 3y agoI remember when Google was waaay smaller the sorts of goodwill projects like Gmail were required. Engineers had to work on side projects in part of their paid time. I've worked at a couple of companies that supported a "10% time" for side projects that was inspired by this. So products like Podcasts might be like a mutation of that earlier company culture.
- pphysch 3y agoContrast with Apple's significantly less experimental, more refined approach to product releases. Apple's approach has been a disaster recently with the glorified (and polished) beta test kit "Vision Pro" and the cancelled Apple Car. If Apple has embraced the Vision Pro as an experimental product, they probably could have released it with an order of magnitude or two less expenditure. But Apple does not experiment in the marketplace, they release solid polished products that have been in a sense validated by their competitors (Blackberry etc). When it comes to innovation, an experimental approach like Google's is key. If you don't have that culture, you will get left behind. Apple is in a precarious position: the iPhone is over 15 years old, becoming "my parent's phone". They're not a player in AI and the car project failed. How will they capture the next generation?
- naasking 3y ago> Contrast with Apple's significantly less experimental, more refined approach to product releases. Apple's recent updates to iTunes broke basic functionality like playlists. I'm not sure "refined" is the right description, perhaps "more conservative but just as broken".
- pphysch 3y agoEveryone makes mistakes but I think you would agree that Apple is known for product excellence overall. Then people project that approach onto other co's like Google, that have a more experimental bent, and get upset when experiments have undesirable results (of course Google deserves some blame here for how they frame things).
- naasking 3y agoThey're known for it because of inertia from Steve Jobs' leadership. They've declined noticeably since then IMO.