4 ms·

I had the pleasure of helping to build and manage these facilities, both hardware and software, for 5 years. It's nice to see some of Google's real innovations

I had the pleasure of helping to build and manage these facilities, both hardware and software, for 5 years. It's nice to see some of Google's real innovations reach the public eye. Some of the smartest folks I ever worked with at the company build absolutely mind blowing tech that the outside never has the opportunity to see or appreciate. In fact, while much of the content in the article has been written about before, it's still probably 2-3 years or more behind where Google is actually at. I left in 2010 and did't read about anything I had not experienced.

j45 14y ago
Reminds me when msn search spent a billion dollars (or whatever was reported) saying we have more pages than google. Google simply updated the number of pages indexed after Microsoft was done huffing and puffing. It was pretty funny at the time but the lesson wasn't lost on me: With competition, get ahead, stay ahead, and have things already done and implemented so you can announce big accomplishments when it's strategic for you.
- wpietri 14y ago
  Yes. You can get to the top by competing with others; you stay on top by competing with yourself. There's a great graph in "Toyota Kata" that shows per-worker productivity of major car companies for the last several decades. They all rise together for the early part of the graph. In the 60s, the American car companies level off; Toyota keeps growing. They focused on continuous improvement, while American car companies floundered. The really interesting part of this to me is that it's rooted in a philosophical difference. Toyota was started and run by engineers. The American car companies gave birth to the MBA approach to business. Engineers naturally seek improvement; MBAs seek profit. Google is one of the few major companies with a philosophical background like Toyota's. It's run by nerds. Their goal isn't to increase shareholder value; it's to build great stuff and organize the world's information. Like Toyota, by following their vision, they have generated vast profits and dominated their industry.
  - seivan 14y ago
    Wow, that actually sounds amazing. Didn't know that about Toyata, makes you think twice before buying a new car now. Just curious, is that still valid or has the company been overrun with "Samsungnitis". You know, stay one step behind, clone and ship mass produced junk in different price ranges?
    - ersii 14y ago
      If you've ever heard of "lean" or "kanban" - you've heard of the "Toyota way"! If I'm not mistaken (Please correct if so); "Lean" is pretty much the "toyota improvement strategy" adapted to the software industry. I'd recommend reading a little about lean, kanban and/or agile "methods" in general. Mary Poppendieck's a name to look for
    - adrinavarro 14y ago
      If you ever get to be around with someone who works at a car insurance company, ask them about failure rates for cars… japanese cars (and Toyota notably) are among the lowest (that is, they are among the most reliable cars in the world by far). I still wonder how they can manage to build affordable, reliable cars that last for years, while many expensive car makers have absurdly high failure rates.
      - wpietri 14y ago
        One of the interesting reasons comes back to accounting. Toyota's approach focuses on value from the customer perspective. So all defects are seen as waste, and are targeted for elimination. The MBA approach just looks at P&L. Which is why they concealed the Pinto's tendency to explode; it was cheaper to pay the lawsuits than to fix people's tanks. Nevermind that many more people would die without the recall; that wasn't relevant to increasing shareholder value. Another good example comes at the beginning of Bob Lutz's "Car Guys vs Bean Counters". Lutz, a car lover and an automotive exec for decades, once fixed a problem with transmission manufacturing. The problem was causing a lot of people's cars to die right after the warranty expired. He got yelled at because it blew a hole in their revenue projections; they were looking forward to a lot of highly profitable transmission repairs. Toyota can make those reliable cars because they see every worker not just as a meat robot, but as a brain that should be engaged in eliminating waste. MBA thinking looks at slow order periods as a time to cut labor costs. Toyota, cognizant of how much they have invested in their workers, looks it as a time for training, plant improvement, and other value-creating activities.
jedberg 14y ago
> In fact, while much of the content in the article has been written about before, it's still probably 2-3 years or more behind where Google is actually at. I left in 2010 and did't read about anything I had not experienced. What if they just plateaued and didn't really go beyond what you had done when you were there, and this is totally accurate to today?
- cloudwalking 14y ago
  It's not.
  - nym 14y ago
    Source?
    - cloudwalking 14y ago
      I work at Google.
- mvgoogler 14y ago
  As someone who just recently transferred out of Platforms[1] to another group at Google, I can assure you that the technology has not plateaued. [1] Platforms is the group at Google that designs and builds the technology that goes into the data-centers.
  - fourspace 14y ago
    I can believe this in a heartbeat. I know that if Platforms and datacenter/cluster management innovation stopped, I'd see a mass exodus of my Googler friends (as well as a very noticeable change in Google's products).
  - enneff 14y ago
    I concur. The platforms team are the only group at Google that consistently amaze me quarter after quarter.

j45 14y ago

Reminds me when msn search spent a billion dollars (or whatever was reported) saying we have more pages than google. Google simply updated the number of pages indexed after Microsoft was done huffing and puffing. It was pretty funny at the time but the lesson wasn't lost on me: With competition, get ahead, stay ahead, and have things already done and implemented so you can announce big accomplishments when it's strategic for you.

wpietri 14y ago
Yes. You can get to the top by competing with others; you stay on top by competing with yourself. There's a great graph in "Toyota Kata" that shows per-worker productivity of major car companies for the last several decades. They all rise together for the early part of the graph. In the 60s, the American car companies level off; Toyota keeps growing. They focused on continuous improvement, while American car companies floundered. The really interesting part of this to me is that it's rooted in a philosophical difference. Toyota was started and run by engineers. The American car companies gave birth to the MBA approach to business. Engineers naturally seek improvement; MBAs seek profit. Google is one of the few major companies with a philosophical background like Toyota's. It's run by nerds. Their goal isn't to increase shareholder value; it's to build great stuff and organize the world's information. Like Toyota, by following their vision, they have generated vast profits and dominated their industry.
- seivan 14y ago
  Wow, that actually sounds amazing. Didn't know that about Toyata, makes you think twice before buying a new car now. Just curious, is that still valid or has the company been overrun with "Samsungnitis". You know, stay one step behind, clone and ship mass produced junk in different price ranges?
  - ersii 14y ago
    If you've ever heard of "lean" or "kanban" - you've heard of the "Toyota way"! If I'm not mistaken (Please correct if so); "Lean" is pretty much the "toyota improvement strategy" adapted to the software industry. I'd recommend reading a little about lean, kanban and/or agile "methods" in general. Mary Poppendieck's a name to look for
  - adrinavarro 14y ago
    If you ever get to be around with someone who works at a car insurance company, ask them about failure rates for cars… japanese cars (and Toyota notably) are among the lowest (that is, they are among the most reliable cars in the world by far). I still wonder how they can manage to build affordable, reliable cars that last for years, while many expensive car makers have absurdly high failure rates.
    - wpietri 14y ago
      One of the interesting reasons comes back to accounting. Toyota's approach focuses on value from the customer perspective. So all defects are seen as waste, and are targeted for elimination. The MBA approach just looks at P&L. Which is why they concealed the Pinto's tendency to explode; it was cheaper to pay the lawsuits than to fix people's tanks. Nevermind that many more people would die without the recall; that wasn't relevant to increasing shareholder value. Another good example comes at the beginning of Bob Lutz's "Car Guys vs Bean Counters". Lutz, a car lover and an automotive exec for decades, once fixed a problem with transmission manufacturing. The problem was causing a lot of people's cars to die right after the warranty expired. He got yelled at because it blew a hole in their revenue projections; they were looking forward to a lot of highly profitable transmission repairs. Toyota can make those reliable cars because they see every worker not just as a meat robot, but as a brain that should be engaged in eliminating waste. MBA thinking looks at slow order periods as a time to cut labor costs. Toyota, cognizant of how much they have invested in their workers, looks it as a time for training, plant improvement, and other value-creating activities.

jedberg 14y ago

> In fact, while much of the content in the article has been written about before, it's still probably 2-3 years or more behind where Google is actually at. I left in 2010 and did't read about anything I had not experienced. What if they just plateaued and didn't really go beyond what you had done when you were there, and this is totally accurate to today?

cloudwalking 14y ago
It's not.
- nym 14y ago
  Source?
  - cloudwalking 14y ago
    I work at Google.
mvgoogler 14y ago
As someone who just recently transferred out of Platforms[1] to another group at Google, I can assure you that the technology has not plateaued. [1] Platforms is the group at Google that designs and builds the technology that goes into the data-centers.
- fourspace 14y ago
  I can believe this in a heartbeat. I know that if Platforms and datacenter/cluster management innovation stopped, I'd see a mass exodus of my Googler friends (as well as a very noticeable change in Google's products).
- enneff 14y ago
  I concur. The platforms team are the only group at Google that consistently amaze me quarter after quarter.