9 ms·

Impressive, how Google are taking on challenges that pretty much no other company could possibly address... replacing email... enhancing HTTP, etc... They're t

by swombat 17y ago

Impressive, how Google are taking on challenges that pretty much no other company could possibly address... replacing email... enhancing HTTP, etc... They're the only company with the means to take on such massive, unprofitable projects, and at the same time enough street cred that everyone won't immediately assume they're trying to make the web proprietary. The fact that they tend to open up these things from the get go helps, too.

symesc 17y ago
Agreed. I think the important thing to note is that Google is the only large company whose business model depends almost completely on the success of the Internet. This is why we see them at bat for Net Neutrality as well as efficiencies within communication protocols. Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, HP, IBM . . . those companies make their livings in other ways. The only company comparable to Google would be Yahoo in this way. Their inability to keep engineering talent means their contribution to The-Internet-As-Platform is not as significant.
- pavs 17y ago
  While I agree with you generally. MS, Apple, Oracle, HP, IBM or any personal computer or server related business would either not be as successful or their product as widely used if there was no internet. IE. Imagine a personal computer market with no way for computers to communicate with each other, would users be still buying computers as much as they do now or would it be just a small niche market? Even though there are several big players whose business model depends quite a bit on the internet, yet no other tech companies does as much as to improve the internet as Google does. The icing on the cake is that Google opens up and shares most of these projects to everyone for free.
  - ggrot 17y ago
    These other companies get more value by the internet existing and being useful. They don't get much value when people use the internet more. Google does. In a sense, google competes with other ways people spend their time, like television.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  Umm, Amazon? EBay? Google may be the biggest company whose success depends upon the Internet, but they're far from the only one.
neilc 17y ago
They're the only company with the means to take on such massive, unprofitable projects, and at the same time enough street cred that everyone won't immediately assume they're trying to make the web proprietary. They are hardly the only company doing this. Microsoft Research do a ton of pretty visionary / far-reaching work, much of which has nothing to do with MS-proprietary platforms. For example, the VL2 architecture for data center networks: http://sns.cs.princeton.edu/2009/10/new-datacenter-networks/ http://sns.cs.princeton.edu/2009/10/new-datacenter-networks/
- Xichekolas 17y ago
  Another example: Simon Peyton-Jones and Simon Marlow, which make up a huge chunk of power behind Haskell and specifically GHC, are Microsoft researchers. (Although Haskell and GHC are not Microsoft projects, they get paid by Microsoft to work on them.)
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    In return, Microsoft gets a ton of concurrency-related IP that could be used to stifle the market for non-Microsoft implementations in the future. This makes me uncomfortable. You just don't trust your money to an apparently unarmed bank-robber.
    - sketerpot 17y ago
      The Simons publish their work freely, and go to a lot of effort writing their papers well so that their work spreads beyond Microsoft. And as far as I know, their code is all open source.
      - rbanffy 17y ago
        Any idea if there are patents pending on any of this IP? I would see that if the patent was applied for before the paper is published, the paper would not be considered prior art and would not invalidate the claims. As for licensing, Microsoft owns the said IP and can re-license it on a whim. Not all of Microsoft is evil, but they, as a company, cannot be trusted to behave in a civilized manner.

by swombat 17y ago

symesc 17y ago

Agreed. I think the important thing to note is that Google is the only large company whose business model depends almost completely on the success of the Internet. This is why we see them at bat for Net Neutrality as well as efficiencies within communication protocols. Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, HP, IBM . . . those companies make their livings in other ways. The only company comparable to Google would be Yahoo in this way. Their inability to keep engineering talent means their contribution to The-Internet-As-Platform is not as significant.

pavs 17y ago
While I agree with you generally. MS, Apple, Oracle, HP, IBM or any personal computer or server related business would either not be as successful or their product as widely used if there was no internet. IE. Imagine a personal computer market with no way for computers to communicate with each other, would users be still buying computers as much as they do now or would it be just a small niche market? Even though there are several big players whose business model depends quite a bit on the internet, yet no other tech companies does as much as to improve the internet as Google does. The icing on the cake is that Google opens up and shares most of these projects to everyone for free.
- ggrot 17y ago
  These other companies get more value by the internet existing and being useful. They don't get much value when people use the internet more. Google does. In a sense, google competes with other ways people spend their time, like television.
nostrademons 17y ago
Umm, Amazon? EBay? Google may be the biggest company whose success depends upon the Internet, but they're far from the only one.

neilc 17y ago

They're the only company with the means to take on such massive, unprofitable projects, and at the same time enough street cred that everyone won't immediately assume they're trying to make the web proprietary. They are hardly the only company doing this. Microsoft Research do a ton of pretty visionary / far-reaching work, much of which has nothing to do with MS-proprietary platforms. For example, the VL2 architecture for data center networks: http://sns.cs.princeton.edu/2009/10/new-datacenter-networks/ http://sns.cs.princeton.edu/2009/10/new-datacenter-networks/

Xichekolas 17y ago
Another example: Simon Peyton-Jones and Simon Marlow, which make up a huge chunk of power behind Haskell and specifically GHC, are Microsoft researchers. (Although Haskell and GHC are not Microsoft projects, they get paid by Microsoft to work on them.)
- rbanffy 17y ago
  In return, Microsoft gets a ton of concurrency-related IP that could be used to stifle the market for non-Microsoft implementations in the future. This makes me uncomfortable. You just don't trust your money to an apparently unarmed bank-robber.
  - sketerpot 17y ago
    The Simons publish their work freely, and go to a lot of effort writing their papers well so that their work spreads beyond Microsoft. And as far as I know, their code is all open source.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      Any idea if there are patents pending on any of this IP? I would see that if the patent was applied for before the paper is published, the paper would not be considered prior art and would not invalidate the claims. As for licensing, Microsoft owns the said IP and can re-license it on a whim. Not all of Microsoft is evil, but they, as a company, cannot be trusted to behave in a civilized manner.