edition.cnn.com— Google has invested billions of dollars building dozens of different products across a wide swath of the technology industry, from productivity tools to mobile phones to e-commerce.
Jul 23, 2010View in Crawl 4
They run the world's largest and most successful personal data collection and privacy defeating network outside of government. Everything else that they do is designed to augment, supplement and enhance this endeavor. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
"... going from 0% to 15% in smartphone market share in a year and a half aint too bad."
It wouldn't be too bad if they actually had something to show for their efforts. What does Google get out of the smartphone market? *If* people ever bother to actually ask this question and start to understand the answer, those marketshare numbers might be in jeopardy.
Seems like they can build the superior product in any category they choose really. Honest take Internet Explorer for instance it has the most market share but I don't think you'll find many people who will claim it is the best browser.
As for the non-term 'product-killer', what is that? Seems like a person who uses such a term might suggest the iPhone, to which I would reply as far smart phones are considered it does not have the majority market share. So what product did that kill?
I think we could go on and on on this, hell I could even click the link to read the article. But I don't want them to have any page hits on my account thanks to that inflammatory title and summary.
"Seems like they can build the superior product in any category they choose really"
HAHA.
Sorry but Google consistently makes half-assed products in any category they choose really. Most of them would never work out if they didn't have the Google tag, and several have failed despite the Google tag (Wave? Buzz?).
But the most important point is that hardly any of Google's mainstream products is their own work. They buy, acquire, incorporate existing work, tack on a couple of haxies and call it a Google product. They seem to be using the money they made in search/advertising to simply buy out companies/startups in whatever field they like and see if they can make money off it. I think Google probably has the highest % of failed products among the tech companies of its calibre.
They also abandon a lot of products/services (Gtalk windows client, Nexus One etc.).
Success, yes, but they aren't "killers." Google Docs isn't replacing Microsoft Office or desktop word processing; Chrome doesn't have the market browser share; Google Reader is moot, since I don't think there's anything to "kill" in that aspect, it's like having an awesome bookmark manager really; and plenty of other sites have comparable mapping software, but for product use, companies aren't tapping into that (like Garmin, TomTom, or Magellan). And Google Buzz isn't going anywhere, it's used by people who hop onto anything Google does and is about as popular as people ending their blog articles with links to Newsvine and Technorati.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
"Google Docs isn't replacing Microsoft Office or desktop word processing; Chrome doesn't have the market browser share"
These two are slightly misguided.
Chrome is one of, if not the, fastest growing browser ever marketshare-wise. It leapfrogged Opera in its first week, passed Safari earlier this year, and is capitalizing on Firefox's stagnating marketshare and IE's upgrade troubles. It's currently the #3 most used browser worldwide with no indication it will slow down anytime soon, especially as Chrome OS looms on the horizon later this year.
Google Docs is similarly growing, albeit vicariously through Google Apps. You may laugh, but Google Apps is actually growing pretty fast, too. For the past year or so, there's been a new blog post every other week about how and why a big organization or college has "Gone Google." From 2008 to 2009, the number of business doubled from 1 million to 2 million, with 20 million total users. It's a small, but growing fraction of the Office pie. Not only that, Google has become quite assertive in this space, quite the opposite of the quiet silence or cancelling of things like Jaku or Orkut.
Also, Froogle is still kicking, it just got renamed, and is actually a pretty kick-ass product search engine. As for the rest, that's your opinion.
Google and Apple are similar in the regard that they are excellent at stomping into a market that doesn't have a strong product, and making something not only better, but amazing. Search, maps, advertising, browser, email for google; desktop and mobile experience (they didn't invent the systems...they invented better ways of using them), and gadget marketing.
Hopefully they continue rolling over markets that are unrepresented (ISP please)
That's because Google are smart as s**t. There's no need to be a "product killer" and have all/most of your capital invested in one field. They are buying up all fields so if there is a crash in one of them, they can continue like nothing happened.
how is the nexus one a failure? it is 100% win. android is gaining market share every day and the nexus one is the flagship and they expected their last phones to last a few weeks and they sold out in a day.
It's a failed product. Even after 7 months of availability it has not even crossed the 1 million (heck, 500 thousand) sales mark. There's no AT&T subsidized price, Sprint and Verizon both backed out of it. And now Google have pulled the plug on it. How is that "100% win"? If anything, I'd say the Motorola Droid is/was 100% win, nexusone certainly not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
failed as in didn't sell well, yes. Absolute win when you consider why Google even bothered to bring out the Nexus One in the first place, to set a standard for Android phones. Now you have almost every single android phones on 2.1 and all have 1Ghz processors.
@The two gentlemen above: This article is talking about Google not building a "product killer", and the NexusOne is a failure in that respect. You can't call it a "product-killer" if it's something no one's actually buying.
Google has said themselves that they did not intent to make a killer phone but to revolutionize the phone market. They wanted to push the phone specs and now every android phone coming out now has at least a 1Ghz processor and they also wanted to have a open phone market where you can get any phone you want on any carrier you wanted, this obviously failed but it was worth a try.
Of coarse it is not. Google has very good engineers, but no designers, or the designers they have are constrained by management. All their products look like s**t. Compare Google Reader to Feedingo. Compare GMail to Mobile Me's email. I could go on and on. The products do look slightly better on the iPhone. It seems they got slightly more room for spit and polish. Other than that, they are downright ugly, but functional.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
You fail at reading comprehension. I said that Google apps are functional but ugly. I use Gmail my self. Most humans like, shiny, pretty, and simple things.
"You fail at reading comprehension. I said that Google apps are functional but ugly. I use Gmail myself. Most humans like, shiny, pretty, and simple things."
Nice to be insulting peoples intelligence when you start your sentence with Of "coarse"... its "course" not coarse. Flipping retard, go back to school before pulling that s**t here.
Nexus One- Disagreed. Nexus One was introduced only to provide a benchmark so that other Android phone companies knew what they had to beat to create better phones. In that regard it was a success.
And speaking of Android there is no mention of that in the article. And thats being a pretty strong competitor.
Buzz- It definitely was not gonna be a FB competitor. For one thing no farmville, which people just seem addicted to. However there are some who do use it, and it became a nice addon after a while.
Docs- Plenty of people use it in my school to avoid the hassle of USBs and self emailing. Heck several of my teachers force us to use it.
Wave- Amazing but waaaaay too hard to use for the average user at full blast. But a great innovation nonetheless.
Google aquires at least 1 company a month (YES, AT LEAST ONE PER MONTH) of COURSE there are gonna be failures. visit Google Labs to try some their experimental stuff, there's some really cool stuff in there. "Most other Google products wind up surviving as middle-of-the-pack offerings, or get spiked by Google altogether."" well obviously, if MOST of what they did was even more of a pack leader than their search engine is they'd be a trillion dollar company (because google does TONS of different things. seriously, is there any market google isnt involved in!?)
Android looks like it will become the top cell phone OS. That alone will be a huge thing, but it will also pave the way for the Chrome OS. If cloud computing really takes off, Google could easily lead the market in both search and operating systems.
I mean *really* takes off, as in when most processing is done on the cloud. I won't be satisfied until I can walk around with a mere screen connected to the internet with access to a super computer. Seriously, cloud computing hasn't challenged Windows yet, and it seems pretty likely that it will.
I don't know about Chrome OS, I'd just as soon have Android be Google's OS for desktops and tablets rather than a completely different project at this point. Android is successful, while we haven't heard a single word about Chrome OS and the damn thing was announced years ago. I think it's dead in the water at this point.
If anyone watches CNN then they shouldn't be surprised by this. CNN spends half their time on their knees pleasuring Steve Jobs. The release of the iPad got more coverage from them than the second coming of Christ would. Buried for bias and lack of substance and evidence.
"The release of the iPad got more coverage from them than the second coming of Christ would."
vs.
"Buried for bias and lack of substance and evidence"
You can't go one sentence without contradicting yourself.
P.S.- CNN also covered the "death grip" issue an nauseam, giving anyone a few minutes to cry about how Apple ruined their lives because they were too dim to put a tiny piece of clear tape on their phones. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Doesn't have to displace it, and Google doesn't really care if it does or not. Its a useful tool that I use side by side with Office, although i use Office less and less now.
Google does not have to supplant any existing product, they just want to keep your attention and as much of your online life focused on their offerings and adds. Diversity and inventiveness keeps them interesting and relevant.
Personally, if I didn't already have Microsoft Office because of school or work, I'd probably be using Google Docs. I think a lot of people would find Google Docs to be 'good enough' and prefer not to spend a couple hundred on MS Office.
Eh, I use Docs exclusively and I'm a bit of a power user. You have to sacrifice some things or futz to make it work just right, but it's fine because it's:
- Free
- Available from any PC, without e-mail juggling or USB sticks
Those two easily outweigh Office's more advance features, or as I humorously refer to it, "bloat." Office is a great program but it's not perfect for me, and I'm sure that's why Google did it. It doesn't have to gobble Office whole, it just has to become a light, solid editor some people prefer to use. And it's a cornerstone of Google Apps, as well.
Right. Because Google just creates stuff for no reason. Larry Page and Sergey Brin created Google just to create it. It has nothing to do with having Google employees spend a certain amount of company time working on their own ideas and projects.
Buried as a horrible editorial by an author with no idea of how Google operates, and simply needed to fill his quota of misleading "journalism".Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
I buried you for not knowing s**t about Google. 20% of employee's time is spent on pet projects, whatever he wants. So, yes, they do s**t for no reason hoping that something will stick. Some of the products that have got big are from that 20%.
Explain again how I don't know "s**t about Google." Because I didn't go into detail in a Digg comment? If you knew about how Google worked, you would know the "doing s**t for no reason" as you believe has resulted in "some of the products that have got big". Right. That 20% of the time was a horrible business model and way of conducting business!
Even those pet projects were made because people thought it would be useful. Google doesn't find unanswered needs and develop for them but everything they do is because they think they can do it well and make it useful. Even if it has been done already.
This was quite a useless article. Every single company has many many flops and few succeed. Google has many terrific products, more than most. What about Apple? Most of the s**t they put out BOMBS but they hit with an mp3 player and phone. The Nexus One was a success to Google and a failure to everyone else? Google stated they wanted to show what kind of phones they envisioned with their Android OS. They planned on selling 150,000 in the first month or two and sold 165,000 if I remember correctly. What an oddly worthless article.
'
I like the way that instead of Google trying to take over a businesses' product, they simply make something that is somewhat similar which runs in parallel and integrates well with already existing products. Their real keys to success with many of their ventures is integration and accessibility. What a brilliant company.
I second this. Not because it's necessarily better than the other options out there, but its free and you can share anything easily in the cloud. google docs is win.
They did more than just buy Keyhole and call it Google Earth. There are many digital globes out there, some better, some worse, but its when Google took that globe and melded it with its information systems and searching that made it king. Without Google, ESRI's globe would probably rule, or maybe Microsoft's, but Google saw the potential for the tool for more than just being a map.
Simply using a free service does not make it a product killer. Yes, I use gmail, as an IMAP server to my Mail.app and Entourage clients, same as I do with my yahoo.com and hotmail accounts.
The problem that Google has it is that got too many projects at one time, this causes it dev team to get spread too thin. This is partly due to the Google philosophy of letting employees spend 20% of their time on any project. As a result some people are working on project that has a limited or no future at all.
There are two issues with Google. One is that they don't innovate. Nothing they do is new or inventive. They are the #1 in search thanks to Yahoo. Android is nice but it is basically a "me too" product copying iPhone and Palm Pre. Gmail came years after Hotmail. Chrome (both for PCs and Android) is built on Apple's WebKit. When they do try to innovate they usually are way off the mark, e.g. Chrome OS looks to be a flop. Second, giving stuff away for "free" helps them gain market share, but I really don't see that as a sustainable business model. Most of their free products are funded from search advertising. If Microsoft can pry a decent share of search away from Google, I think Google will be really screwed and you can say bye bye to the free stuff.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
"Android is nice but it is basically a "me too" product copying iPhone and Palm Pre"
Well, since google aquired Android Inc. in July 2005 and began working on Android the platform and Apple didnt come out with the iphone until january 2007 and the palm pre don't even get me started that s**t just came out. I'd say Android has the deeper roots of the three. Nice try though.
But yeah. i'm sure you're right EVERYBODY copied apple nobody had an original idea before them. oh wait. apple just takes s**t and polishes it up a little and calls it their own. Oh well. shrug
Love my macbook, but f**k the iphone. Trade my 3G in for a droid and haven't looked back
Gmail has consistently been market leader in terms of features. It may not look good but it has plenty of things. It was one fo the first to have inbuilt chat, and then video too. Google Labs is an amazing place where I have enabled so many features. Not to mention threaded convos where one can reply easily
Google IS a successful company, extremely successful, to the point that its two founders placed 5th in Forbes list of the most powerful people on Earth.
Google is superb at finding answers to stuff no one has asked about yet, but when it comes to direct competition with other power houses, they are still just 'meh' despite their resources.
The thing is you have to keep in mind that those "meh" products are all afterthoughts. Things that Google produces because it might be some how useful to them. Google Transit came about because their programmers wanted to be able to take the bus in any town they were in. Their ad revenue is the thing that matters.
I live down the street from the Googleplex, I see how they affect their surroundings.
It seems though you got confused. You are talking about afterthought silly products, which I like.
I am talking about the huge endeavors they undertake in order to compete directly with the Apples and Microsofts of the world, which so far, aren't really 'all that' in my opinion.
Google's power is in quirky invention, not in killing other companies, which is what this article is about.
Google is a leader without being a killer. No one would have imagined Microsoft giving away even part of a flagship product like Microsoft Office but it is happening. There are really changing the way all the incumbents do business.
Google is unique in that it doesn't rely on direct revenue in any market. Due to Google's financial strength and revenue model, it is immune to typical incumbent instruments like predatory pricing, duressed leveraged agreements and suing for the sole intent of destroying cash flow.
Google are incumbent monopoly breakers. They aren't doing it directly for the consumer. They do it for their own benefit which coincidentally benefits the consumer. It also has the by product of creating massive amounts of good will towards Google which has real tangible fiscal value on the branding side of the equation.
Frankly, I welcome our all encompassing overlords. Beyond what Google provides for free in the Internet environment, it's the changes that they cause to the existing egotistical emperors who think they have the consumer beat down.
The term "killer app" is older then you and is well established technical jargon with a very specific meaning. Your desire to eradicate it from the language is pointless and futile. It's like trying to get people to stop calling it a computer mouse because it's not a rodent. The etymology of the term is that during the eighties when it was coined "killer" was common slang for "very good".
I'm assuming this is meant to be a reply to my comment and I can only determine that you're a humorless "douche" that didn't get that I was being "sardonic". Busting out dictionary and encyclopedia entries for sarcastic remarks? You must be a "hit" at parties. Your post reminds me of this discussion from Louis CK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF_v9f7wnfk
In any case: I know what a killer app is and I, along with everyone else on the planet, knows words have varied meanings and uses --especially the word killer. But, if you haven't noticed, the phrase has become mostly just marketing jargon to hype any and every new product and get shallow tech blogs page views.
Google has put out many brilliant products. What about the Android? I'm using it now and loving it!
More importantly, just about any product that Google puts out and does some 'decent' amount of marketing for, I believe a great number of people will try, Simply because it is made by Google.
I do not know about you all (yall), but Gmail and Google Maps do what I want from them quite perfectly. I have yet to find equivalent alternatives to either. Yahoo/Mapquest/Bingmaps and any respective email service pales in comparison.
Google's Sketchup has made my life a hell of a lot easier. Combining the pieces of 3ds, autocad, and vectorworks that I actually use into a clean interface/combination. I cannot ask for more. Plus all the third party plug-ins for rendering allows for photo realistic renderings. I just hope they continue to develop it since losing it would mean I have to invest thousands into software I will never fully utilize.
Err.. Google Map is pretty neat. Satellite and having google cars going around taking picture. Andriod, google Earth, Google Phone/Voice service, etc..
Hey, you gotta try new stuff and find markets out there. You can fail as many time as you like, you only need a success to sell it. Google TV seems like it's going to be big.
Read A fast cash advance , payday cash advance , cash advance loan , online cash advance , All This and Much More Than Cash Advance Network Guide http://cash-advance-network-guide.blogspot.com/
dpcdominoJul 23, 2010
I have to give credit to Google for a little more than just their search engine. Gmail and Google Maps are also great.
The rest of the article I tend to agree on.
mattcoadyJul 24, 2010
I was thinking along the same lines. Gmail stole the hotmail thunder... at least amongst tech community and google maps basically killed map quest.
seanrossJul 24, 2010
Hotmail had some thunder to begin with?
supervanJul 25, 2010
It was the 1st webmail and very loved until they sold out to Microsoft.
jqp123Jul 24, 2010
Google is really a one trick pony.
They run the world's largest and most successful personal data collection and privacy defeating network outside of government. Everything else that they do is designed to augment, supplement and enhance this endeavor. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tiakJul 24, 2010
While they may not think it is "killing" going from 0% to 15% market share in a year and a half aint too bad.
jqp123Jul 24, 2010
"... going from 0% to 15% in smartphone market share in a year and a half aint too bad."
It wouldn't be too bad if they actually had something to show for their efforts. What does Google get out of the smartphone market? *If* people ever bother to actually ask this question and start to understand the answer, those marketshare numbers might be in jeopardy.
milsorgnJul 23, 2010
Web Search, Email, Maps, Browser, Google Docs
Seems like they can build the superior product in any category they choose really. Honest take Internet Explorer for instance it has the most market share but I don't think you'll find many people who will claim it is the best browser.
As for the non-term 'product-killer', what is that? Seems like a person who uses such a term might suggest the iPhone, to which I would reply as far smart phones are considered it does not have the majority market share. So what product did that kill?
I think we could go on and on on this, hell I could even click the link to read the article. But I don't want them to have any page hits on my account thanks to that inflammatory title and summary.
pvaibhavJul 24, 2010
"Seems like they can build the superior product in any category they choose really"
HAHA.
Sorry but Google consistently makes half-assed products in any category they choose really. Most of them would never work out if they didn't have the Google tag, and several have failed despite the Google tag (Wave? Buzz?).
But the most important point is that hardly any of Google's mainstream products is their own work. They buy, acquire, incorporate existing work, tack on a couple of haxies and call it a Google product. They seem to be using the money they made in search/advertising to simply buy out companies/startups in whatever field they like and see if they can make money off it. I think Google probably has the highest % of failed products among the tech companies of its calibre.
They also abandon a lot of products/services (Gtalk windows client, Nexus One etc.).
To me, Google is no longer the innovative company it used to be 5 years ago.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
paduraJul 23, 2010
Well, I don't agree about Google Buzz. There are people who actively use it.
What about Google Maps, Google Docs, Google Chrome? That was a success...
higherlogicJul 24, 2010
Success, yes, but they aren't "killers." Google Docs isn't replacing Microsoft Office or desktop word processing; Chrome doesn't have the market browser share; Google Reader is moot, since I don't think there's anything to "kill" in that aspect, it's like having an awesome bookmark manager really; and plenty of other sites have comparable mapping software, but for product use, companies aren't tapping into that (like Garmin, TomTom, or Magellan). And Google Buzz isn't going anywhere, it's used by people who hop onto anything Google does and is about as popular as people ending their blog articles with links to Newsvine and Technorati.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
amazingandrexJul 24, 2010
"Google Docs isn't replacing Microsoft Office or desktop word processing; Chrome doesn't have the market browser share"
These two are slightly misguided.
Chrome is one of, if not the, fastest growing browser ever marketshare-wise. It leapfrogged Opera in its first week, passed Safari earlier this year, and is capitalizing on Firefox's stagnating marketshare and IE's upgrade troubles. It's currently the #3 most used browser worldwide with no indication it will slow down anytime soon, especially as Chrome OS looms on the horizon later this year.
Google Docs is similarly growing, albeit vicariously through Google Apps. You may laugh, but Google Apps is actually growing pretty fast, too. For the past year or so, there's been a new blog post every other week about how and why a big organization or college has "Gone Google." From 2008 to 2009, the number of business doubled from 1 million to 2 million, with 20 million total users. It's a small, but growing fraction of the Office pie. Not only that, Google has become quite assertive in this space, quite the opposite of the quiet silence or cancelling of things like Jaku or Orkut.
Also, Froogle is still kicking, it just got renamed, and is actually a pretty kick-ass product search engine. As for the rest, that's your opinion.
tiakJul 24, 2010
Even if Orkut is only big in Brazil and India, it still has 100 million active users... It isn't quite clear to me that this is a failure.
admiralwoofJul 24, 2010
I see Turner is mad about the whole GoogleTV thing
blackjackjesterJul 24, 2010
Google and Apple are similar in the regard that they are excellent at stomping into a market that doesn't have a strong product, and making something not only better, but amazing. Search, maps, advertising, browser, email for google; desktop and mobile experience (they didn't invent the systems...they invented better ways of using them), and gadget marketing.
Hopefully they continue rolling over markets that are unrepresented (ISP please)
breakawayJul 24, 2010
That's because Google are smart as s**t. There's no need to be a "product killer" and have all/most of your capital invested in one field. They are buying up all fields so if there is a crash in one of them, they can continue like nothing happened.
unfatherJul 24, 2010
Whatever Google is, they're a sure bet, so stop trying to take that away from them.
yourmanstanJul 24, 2010
how is the nexus one a failure? it is 100% win. android is gaining market share every day and the nexus one is the flagship and they expected their last phones to last a few weeks and they sold out in a day.
pvaibhavJul 24, 2010
First off, I use a Nexus One myself.
It's a failed product. Even after 7 months of availability it has not even crossed the 1 million (heck, 500 thousand) sales mark. There's no AT&T subsidized price, Sprint and Verizon both backed out of it. And now Google have pulled the plug on it. How is that "100% win"? If anything, I'd say the Motorola Droid is/was 100% win, nexusone certainly not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
fiolaJul 24, 2010
failed as in didn't sell well, yes. Absolute win when you consider why Google even bothered to bring out the Nexus One in the first place, to set a standard for Android phones. Now you have almost every single android phones on 2.1 and all have 1Ghz processors.
neotechniJul 24, 2010
Luckily, a product is not defined by its sales, but by how well it performs its intended task.
Sales do not equal quality
pvaibhavJul 24, 2010
@The two gentlemen above: This article is talking about Google not building a "product killer", and the NexusOne is a failure in that respect. You can't call it a "product-killer" if it's something no one's actually buying.
hct01Jul 24, 2010
Google has said themselves that they did not intent to make a killer phone but to revolutionize the phone market. They wanted to push the phone specs and now every android phone coming out now has at least a 1Ghz processor and they also wanted to have a open phone market where you can get any phone you want on any carrier you wanted, this obviously failed but it was worth a try.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
Of coarse it is not. Google has very good engineers, but no designers, or the designers they have are constrained by management. All their products look like s**t. Compare Google Reader to Feedingo. Compare GMail to Mobile Me's email. I could go on and on. The products do look slightly better on the iPhone. It seems they got slightly more room for spit and polish. Other than that, they are downright ugly, but functional.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
skillelJul 24, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
You fail at reading comprehension. I said that Google apps are functional but ugly. I use Gmail my self. Most humans like, shiny, pretty, and simple things.
nosferatu5Jul 24, 2010
So people are basically magpies?
skillelJul 24, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
sotoninJul 24, 2010
"You fail at reading comprehension. I said that Google apps are functional but ugly. I use Gmail myself. Most humans like, shiny, pretty, and simple things."
Nice to be insulting peoples intelligence when you start your sentence with Of "coarse"... its "course" not coarse. Flipping retard, go back to school before pulling that s**t here.
arvvvsJul 24, 2010
Nexus One- Disagreed. Nexus One was introduced only to provide a benchmark so that other Android phone companies knew what they had to beat to create better phones. In that regard it was a success.
And speaking of Android there is no mention of that in the article. And thats being a pretty strong competitor.
Buzz- It definitely was not gonna be a FB competitor. For one thing no farmville, which people just seem addicted to. However there are some who do use it, and it became a nice addon after a while.
Docs- Plenty of people use it in my school to avoid the hassle of USBs and self emailing. Heck several of my teachers force us to use it.
Wave- Amazing but waaaaay too hard to use for the average user at full blast. But a great innovation nonetheless.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
Google aquires at least 1 company a month (YES, AT LEAST ONE PER MONTH) of COURSE there are gonna be failures. visit Google Labs to try some their experimental stuff, there's some really cool stuff in there. "Most other Google products wind up surviving as middle-of-the-pack offerings, or get spiked by Google altogether."" well obviously, if MOST of what they did was even more of a pack leader than their search engine is they'd be a trillion dollar company (because google does TONS of different things. seriously, is there any market google isnt involved in!?)
murrdpirateJul 24, 2010
Android looks like it will become the top cell phone OS. That alone will be a huge thing, but it will also pave the way for the Chrome OS. If cloud computing really takes off, Google could easily lead the market in both search and operating systems.
phillyocJul 24, 2010
Cloud computing hasn't "taken off" yet? You could have fooled me.
murrdpirateJul 24, 2010
I mean *really* takes off, as in when most processing is done on the cloud. I won't be satisfied until I can walk around with a mere screen connected to the internet with access to a super computer. Seriously, cloud computing hasn't challenged Windows yet, and it seems pretty likely that it will.
doshindudeJul 24, 2010
I don't know about Chrome OS, I'd just as soon have Android be Google's OS for desktops and tablets rather than a completely different project at this point. Android is successful, while we haven't heard a single word about Chrome OS and the damn thing was announced years ago. I think it's dead in the water at this point.
reeferchiefer42Jul 24, 2010
If anyone watches CNN then they shouldn't be surprised by this. CNN spends half their time on their knees pleasuring Steve Jobs. The release of the iPad got more coverage from them than the second coming of Christ would. Buried for bias and lack of substance and evidence.
enantiodromiaJul 24, 2010
"The release of the iPad got more coverage from them than the second coming of Christ would."
vs.
"Buried for bias and lack of substance and evidence"
You can't go one sentence without contradicting yourself.
P.S.- CNN also covered the "death grip" issue an nauseam, giving anyone a few minutes to cry about how Apple ruined their lives because they were too dim to put a tiny piece of clear tape on their phones. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tsothaJul 24, 2010
I get a good laugh every time I see someone claiming Google Docs are going to displace Microsoft Office. Not gonna happen.
vectorbJul 24, 2010
Doesn't have to displace it, and Google doesn't really care if it does or not. Its a useful tool that I use side by side with Office, although i use Office less and less now.
Google does not have to supplant any existing product, they just want to keep your attention and as much of your online life focused on their offerings and adds. Diversity and inventiveness keeps them interesting and relevant.
murrdpirateJul 24, 2010
Personally, if I didn't already have Microsoft Office because of school or work, I'd probably be using Google Docs. I think a lot of people would find Google Docs to be 'good enough' and prefer not to spend a couple hundred on MS Office.
amazingandrexJul 24, 2010
Eh, I use Docs exclusively and I'm a bit of a power user. You have to sacrifice some things or futz to make it work just right, but it's fine because it's:
- Free
- Available from any PC, without e-mail juggling or USB sticks
Those two easily outweigh Office's more advance features, or as I humorously refer to it, "bloat." Office is a great program but it's not perfect for me, and I'm sure that's why Google did it. It doesn't have to gobble Office whole, it just has to become a light, solid editor some people prefer to use. And it's a cornerstone of Google Apps, as well.
random12345Jul 24, 2010
Right. Because Google just creates stuff for no reason. Larry Page and Sergey Brin created Google just to create it. It has nothing to do with having Google employees spend a certain amount of company time working on their own ideas and projects.
Buried as a horrible editorial by an author with no idea of how Google operates, and simply needed to fill his quota of misleading "journalism".Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
I buried you for not knowing s**t about Google. 20% of employee's time is spent on pet projects, whatever he wants. So, yes, they do s**t for no reason hoping that something will stick. Some of the products that have got big are from that 20%.
random12345Jul 24, 2010
Explain again how I don't know "s**t about Google." Because I didn't go into detail in a Digg comment? If you knew about how Google worked, you would know the "doing s**t for no reason" as you believe has resulted in "some of the products that have got big". Right. That 20% of the time was a horrible business model and way of conducting business!
Good job on contradicting yourself.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rahazJul 24, 2010
Even those pet projects were made because people thought it would be useful. Google doesn't find unanswered needs and develop for them but everything they do is because they think they can do it well and make it useful. Even if it has been done already.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
Please stop using the adjective 'killer' for products unless said product can actually kill people.
blatsekJul 24, 2010
This was quite a useless article. Every single company has many many flops and few succeed. Google has many terrific products, more than most. What about Apple? Most of the s**t they put out BOMBS but they hit with an mp3 player and phone. The Nexus One was a success to Google and a failure to everyone else? Google stated they wanted to show what kind of phones they envisioned with their Android OS. They planned on selling 150,000 in the first month or two and sold 165,000 if I remember correctly. What an oddly worthless article.
'
phillyocJul 24, 2010
I like the way that instead of Google trying to take over a businesses' product, they simply make something that is somewhat similar which runs in parallel and integrates well with already existing products. Their real keys to success with many of their ventures is integration and accessibility. What a brilliant company.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
Nor would I think they want to be. More of a 'product-innovator'
fuzybunyJul 24, 2010
I love google docs it's now the only word processor I use.
sotoninJul 24, 2010
I second this. Not because it's necessarily better than the other options out there, but its free and you can share anything easily in the cloud. google docs is win.
zerocubedJul 24, 2010
I would consider Gmail and Google Maps either a product killer, or very close to it. Who doesn't have a gmail account? Or use google maps?
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
Google did not invent the best part of Google Maps, which would be the Google Earth (formerly Keyhole) database. The bought it.
Regarding email, give me a break, anyone can offer free web based email that wants to spend the money.
vectorbJul 24, 2010
They did more than just buy Keyhole and call it Google Earth. There are many digital globes out there, some better, some worse, but its when Google took that globe and melded it with its information systems and searching that made it king. Without Google, ESRI's globe would probably rule, or maybe Microsoft's, but Google saw the potential for the tool for more than just being a map.
enantiodromiaJul 24, 2010
Simply using a free service does not make it a product killer. Yes, I use gmail, as an IMAP server to my Mail.app and Entourage clients, same as I do with my yahoo.com and hotmail accounts.
jianjJul 24, 2010
The problem that Google has it is that got too many projects at one time, this causes it dev team to get spread too thin. This is partly due to the Google philosophy of letting employees spend 20% of their time on any project. As a result some people are working on project that has a limited or no future at all.
xbryanJul 24, 2010
There are two issues with Google. One is that they don't innovate. Nothing they do is new or inventive. They are the #1 in search thanks to Yahoo. Android is nice but it is basically a "me too" product copying iPhone and Palm Pre. Gmail came years after Hotmail. Chrome (both for PCs and Android) is built on Apple's WebKit. When they do try to innovate they usually are way off the mark, e.g. Chrome OS looks to be a flop. Second, giving stuff away for "free" helps them gain market share, but I really don't see that as a sustainable business model. Most of their free products are funded from search advertising. If Microsoft can pry a decent share of search away from Google, I think Google will be really screwed and you can say bye bye to the free stuff.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sotoninJul 24, 2010
"Android is nice but it is basically a "me too" product copying iPhone and Palm Pre"
Well, since google aquired Android Inc. in July 2005 and began working on Android the platform and Apple didnt come out with the iphone until january 2007 and the palm pre don't even get me started that s**t just came out. I'd say Android has the deeper roots of the three. Nice try though.
But yeah. i'm sure you're right EVERYBODY copied apple nobody had an original idea before them. oh wait. apple just takes s**t and polishes it up a little and calls it their own. Oh well. shrug
Love my macbook, but f**k the iphone. Trade my 3G in for a droid and haven't looked back
xbryanJul 24, 2010
Well you have your opinions, that's good. But you really didn't rebut anything I said.
arvvvsJul 24, 2010
Gmail has consistently been market leader in terms of features. It may not look good but it has plenty of things. It was one fo the first to have inbuilt chat, and then video too. Google Labs is an amazing place where I have enabled so many features. Not to mention threaded convos where one can reply easily
lordmikeJul 24, 2010
Who says they have to "kill" anything to be successful? I don't think that "killing" their competition is their goal.
ieatskunkJul 24, 2010
Google IS a successful company, extremely successful, to the point that its two founders placed 5th in Forbes list of the most powerful people on Earth.
enantiodromiaJul 24, 2010
Google is superb at finding answers to stuff no one has asked about yet, but when it comes to direct competition with other power houses, they are still just 'meh' despite their resources.
vectorbJul 24, 2010
The thing is you have to keep in mind that those "meh" products are all afterthoughts. Things that Google produces because it might be some how useful to them. Google Transit came about because their programmers wanted to be able to take the bus in any town they were in. Their ad revenue is the thing that matters.
enantiodromiaJul 24, 2010
I live down the street from the Googleplex, I see how they affect their surroundings.
It seems though you got confused. You are talking about afterthought silly products, which I like.
I am talking about the huge endeavors they undertake in order to compete directly with the Apples and Microsofts of the world, which so far, aren't really 'all that' in my opinion.
Google's power is in quirky invention, not in killing other companies, which is what this article is about.
myztryJul 24, 2010
Google is a leader without being a killer. No one would have imagined Microsoft giving away even part of a flagship product like Microsoft Office but it is happening. There are really changing the way all the incumbents do business.
Google is unique in that it doesn't rely on direct revenue in any market. Due to Google's financial strength and revenue model, it is immune to typical incumbent instruments like predatory pricing, duressed leveraged agreements and suing for the sole intent of destroying cash flow.
Google are incumbent monopoly breakers. They aren't doing it directly for the consumer. They do it for their own benefit which coincidentally benefits the consumer. It also has the by product of creating massive amounts of good will towards Google which has real tangible fiscal value on the branding side of the equation.
Frankly, I welcome our all encompassing overlords. Beyond what Google provides for free in the Internet environment, it's the changes that they cause to the existing egotistical emperors who think they have the consumer beat down.
siafuJul 24, 2010
The term "killer app" is older then you and is well established technical jargon with a very specific meaning. Your desire to eradicate it from the language is pointless and futile. It's like trying to get people to stop calling it a computer mouse because it's not a rodent. The etymology of the term is that during the eighties when it was coined "killer" was common slang for "very good".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_application
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=killer
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 24, 2010
I'm assuming this is meant to be a reply to my comment and I can only determine that you're a humorless "douche" that didn't get that I was being "sardonic". Busting out dictionary and encyclopedia entries for sarcastic remarks? You must be a "hit" at parties. Your post reminds me of this discussion from Louis CK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF_v9f7wnfk
In any case: I know what a killer app is and I, along with everyone else on the planet, knows words have varied meanings and uses --especially the word killer. But, if you haven't noticed, the phrase has become mostly just marketing jargon to hype any and every new product and get shallow tech blogs page views.
visionviperJul 24, 2010
Google is an innovator, and they may not be taking over everything but they are damn sure forcing innovation. That's why I love them!
ieatskunkJul 24, 2010
Say what you want but Google is raking it in so they are doing something very right.
adcruzJul 24, 2010
Google has put out many brilliant products. What about the Android? I'm using it now and loving it!
More importantly, just about any product that Google puts out and does some 'decent' amount of marketing for, I believe a great number of people will try, Simply because it is made by Google.
zenith251Jul 24, 2010
I do not know about you all (yall), but Gmail and Google Maps do what I want from them quite perfectly. I have yet to find equivalent alternatives to either. Yahoo/Mapquest/Bingmaps and any respective email service pales in comparison.
jsinghurJul 24, 2010
Google's Sketchup has made my life a hell of a lot easier. Combining the pieces of 3ds, autocad, and vectorworks that I actually use into a clean interface/combination. I cannot ask for more. Plus all the third party plug-ins for rendering allows for photo realistic renderings. I just hope they continue to develop it since losing it would mean I have to invest thousands into software I will never fully utilize.
larkstewJul 24, 2010
Driving along a UK motorway last night, in a field I saw a big sign with "Google Gas" written on it. They're taking over the world!
patrickxJul 24, 2010
they certainly don't dominate every category they enter... think orkut and google checkout for example
urmyhartbstoprJul 26, 2010
Err.. Google Map is pretty neat. Satellite and having google cars going around taking picture. Andriod, google Earth, Google Phone/Voice service, etc..
Hey, you gotta try new stuff and find markets out there. You can fail as many time as you like, you only need a success to sell it. Google TV seems like it's going to be big.
zatari123Mar 11, 2011
Read A fast cash advance , payday cash advance , cash advance loan , online cash advance , All This and Much More Than Cash Advance Network Guide
http://cash-advance-network-guide.blogspot.com/