3 ms·
It's likely a lot less about giving Google's first-party apps privileged access than it is a super low priority for the team to allocate engineering effort to.
by jmathai 1y ago
It's likely a lot less about giving Google's first-party apps privileged access than it is a super low priority for the team to allocate engineering effort to.
I was a PM in Google Workspace for several years. It's a lot less nefarious than it probably seems. Decisions are optimized for revenue and other features (especially for enterprise customers) are going to be much higher priority.
Companies choosing to focus on enterprise revenue (which is basically all of them since like 2012) do so at the cost of end-user satisfaction.
- cess11 1y agoIf it looked as nefarious as it is on the inside they would have roughly zero employees.
- arp242 1y agoI don't doubt what you're saying, but whatever the reason, the end result is the same: Google Apps have a "first-party apps privileged access".
- cycomanic 1y agoThey removed the permission for nextcloud, that seems they actually spend resources on removing the permissions. The minimal "spend no resources" approach would have left nextcloud with access.
- jmathai 1y agoI can say with some certainty that folks inside of Google are not sitting around talking about nextcloud. More likely is some paydown of technical debt or effort to simplify leading to the removal of that permission and deciding the ramifications are acceptable. Boring stuff.
- apitman 1y agoI believe it. Most people would be better served paying a local company $20/mo to offer the equivalent of google services using open protocols. Unfortunately such a marketplace doesn't exist, but I believe it will eventually.