digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Coincidences that made Google successful

shuzak.com — Here's a shocking look at several events that shaped Google's success, but were more or less, a coincidence! Had few of these events not occurred, Google would probably not have existed today. Read on...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jawadshuaib, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14I would like to add that this phenomenon of good fortune is not just limited to Microsoft or Google. In fact, many great companies owe their success simply to mother nature. However, this does not imply that Google or any other company does not deserve their riches, because they do. I read someone say "I noticed that I got luckier as I tried harder"

    Please take a second to Digg the article if you enjoy it :)
    • compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good."
      My dad always tells me that when I beat him in pool haha.
    • digggggggggg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Even if we can attribute success to luck, I think that many of us can agree that the world is a better place with Google in it.

      Never before has such a comprehensive search engine been avaliable to the public, although I guess it's arguable that given enough time, the already established search engines would produce something similar in quality.
    • lordmetroid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I wouldn't say that the world is better, just different. What is not good that is google's fault is the extensive data-mining and now rescently cooperation with the government to access this data.
    • tem2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's no coincidence that all those breaks went their way. The Google business plan calls for continued pressing of that "I'm Feeling Lucky" button.
    • d8cam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The Saturday Night Live video "Lazy Sunday" introduced YouTube to so many new people. So in a way, NBC helped to put YouTube to where it is today.
    • trghpy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I wouldn't say everything in the article was a coincidence.

      The avoidance of venture capitalists was just good business sense. Google was self sufficient before and after the dot com boom.
      After the dot com boom competitors became cheep and the Google name had reached critical mass because of how well google was doing in comparison to the publicly held companies.

      I'd consider that excellent business practices rather than coincidences.
    • mwosh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2When is ANYTHING not coincidental?
      Meeting another person is always coincidental. Nothing "shocking" about it.
  • AbortedFetus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3While it is an interesting look at Google's past, the article is a bit misleading. Coincidence may have lead to the forming of Google (and others), but coincidences and luck have nothing to do with why they are successful. Good ideas, smart business planning, and a keen understanding of present technology and trends makes Google what it is today.
    • darkdaedra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4If you get lucky once, then maybe that's chance. If you get lucky over and over again, you are doing something right.
    • lordmetroid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But it has to do with their existence and in many cases the destruction as well.
    • Aces, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I question how accurate an article can be when the very first line is an incorrect quote.

      Proper quote: "If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."

      Their quote is pretty far from that and also misses the real point of the original quote (it was spoken by 'God' to put it into context)
    • jomtois, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Aces

      You beat me to it by 5 mins! I picked up on that too. It is one of my favorite episodes.
  • hotbeefman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Watch Sliders recently? Choice is the ultimate entropy in the multidimensional universe. Imagine the PS3 launch goes smoothly with a ton of great launch titles. Microsoft and Nintendo would be hurting. Or imagine a world where the YouTube inventors waited for a year and become just another YouTube Copy in that dimension.
    • merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Do you always cite sci-fi to back up your arguments?
    • bloobloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's a rhetorical technique, Jim, but not as we know it.
    • hotbeefman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I just bought the first two seasons of sliders off iTunes, i wasn't trying to be smart. Just curious.
  • brizzad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1More like "How Google Got Started"
  • apotropaic, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Marked as inaccurate. It was a following of people looking for a change that made Google's sucess. They simply listened and provided that change.
  • ciram, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Allright! Google!
  • flintmich, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13This is how Google got big:

    1. Like millions, I searched using Yahoo!
    2. One day, I noticed a link "Search powered by Google"
    3. I clicked the link
    4. I saw I could use google.com for my search results and not have all that Yahoo noise in my face. Simple, clean, fast searches.
    5. Millions did the same thing I did.

    End of story. If Yahoo had never posted that link to Google, I doubt they would be where they are today, 'cause the massive popularity of Yahoo was one of the big drivers to Google.
    • merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16In the tech sector, it was a bit more like this:

      1. All the geeks were using altavista, 'cause they gave the most accurate search results, hands down
      2. Google started offering more accurate search results
      3. All the geeks started using google.

      They won the search engine wars because they had the best product. That's all there was to it. And this happened long before yahoo started using google search.
    • LR2_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I started using google when they talked about it on TechTV back in the day. I used google years ahead of anyone else that I knew. It was pretty interesting. I also recall using wikipedia because I learned about it though TechTV. Wikipedia got really popular last year and I felt as if one of my big secrets had gotten out. TechTV was awesome.
    • phaed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@merreborn

      yes! remember altavista?... those were the days. they had the best search available and it was uncluttered and had no adverts. then i duno when it was exactly PCmagazine did a top search engines article rating google #1. i tried it and it stuck.

      yahoo search??? sick

  • damageisle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The ultimate success or failure of ANYTHING involves hundreds if not thousands of coincidences. Google got lucky in some respects, but the fact that Sergey Brin didn't get hit by a bus on the way to Starbucks in 1996 played just as big a role in the success of Google as any of the issues talked about in the article.
  • Tuplex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I count on dumb luck a lot... It makes a great business model.
  • firemillen2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1this is so ***** stupid. and the whole point of the article is to spam us with the social networking site that generated the article.

    coincidence? luck? you're talking about some of the smartest people in the world working together. if they didn't come out with google, they would have come out with something else and you idiot will say that's luck too.
  • xyphoid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0... If I we all had not dugg your story, we wouldn't have read it
    ... If I had not left this comment, you would not be reading it.

    Okay I'm done failing.
  • KevinJB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+71. Hard work
    2. Hard work
    3. Hard work
    4. Hard work
    5. Hard work
  • rabidg00se, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Mirror?
  • DrSkrud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7http://www.duggmirror.com
  • miaow, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2theres nothing special about google. their success was as someone mentioned above re yahoo and :

    we found the name catchy
    we were on dial up and the clean page loaded quicker
    it *seemed* liked it was better for search
    the search pages seemed slightly easier to read

    later on they figured alladvantage/overture was the way to make money (copy others) and then they started doing what microsoft do ; buying up any ideas they think as good

    google answers on the other hand, was 100% their own idea.

    gmail is rubbish. bookmarks is rubbish etc etc.
    • ryodoan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Have you used Gmail? Its simple and intuitive interface linked with its large storage capacity have revolutionized email.

      Since gmail was introduced every single other email client has updated their interfaces and enlarged their storage. I have a Gmail account, a hotmail account, and a Yahoo! account.

      Of these three I find hotmails outlook interface to be the hardest to use, followed by the slow to load yahoo!.

      Of the three big email clients Gmail does it best.
    • miaow, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1they bot through your emails ? selective spam.

      the only reason they give so much space is so they can look through your emails. if you ever get hacked you can never delete the address. i am glad they forced the others to change their tactics, but google did it for spyware reasons
    • -dXs-, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2miaow,

      read the Google Terms of Service. Specifically this excerpt about reading email.
      http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6599&topic=1561

      Just because you can't get your head around the idea that Google has engineers smart enough to code bots to pick up on keywords to show relevant ads doesn't mean you can deduce that Google is reading your email.

      Don't go taking shots at a company without informing yourself about that company first. You only embarrass yourself and convince nobody of your point.

      Besides, Google is smarter than to waste money on people to read email when they could spend money on engineers to develop products free to the public.
  • rockorager, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Interesting, but no digg due to the butchering of a Futurama quote:

    "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all"
  • BenWilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think there are other coincidences that are just as plausible:

    * Google thrived during a period with the Executive and Legislative branches controlled by the Republicans.
    * Google's name sounds a lot like a very, very large number (googol)
    * The Beatles never reunited, which lead to people looking to the Internet for entertainment.
  • Mihai12345, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The site is down; i get this:
    "Forbidden
    You don't have permission to access /Personal/Article.php on this server.

    Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. "
    Tested in Firefox, IE and Opera; what is happening? (probably the digg effect LOL )
  • Anteros, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think luck plays a part in these big businesses forming and in most areas of life but even if they didn't get some of the lucky breaks I'm sure Larry and Sergey would have been successful anyway, just not to the degree they are now.
  • Sk3pt1k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Success is neither preparation or opportunity. It is usually both. Success is when being prepared for when opportunity knocks. How many times have you had an opportunity for success but did not have the means (preparation) to take advantage of it?
  • kylesellers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ah, I remember when I scoffed at Google in favor of Alta Vista. How misguided I was.
  • gd007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1how about digg for luck factor!
  • GorillaButler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is lame. In any endevor there are ups and there are downs. There's good luck and there's bad. "Gee-whiz magical luck success" is naive. Google missed out on a lot of good things, too. You could just as easily write a list of bad luck Google's had. It's part of playing the game.
  • sk545, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1everything is about luck, imo. Some have good and bad in life, some have a lot of good luck, while others have bad luck majority of their life. It is what life is, and no, it doesn't matter how hard you try. You're gonna fail every time if that is what was intended (doesn't mean you should quit, but hey...). You don't control life, life controls you. For example take your genes...just watch them explode on you and totally change your life. They are set to go off at a certain time, you won't even know what hit you.
  • buellerdiggs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"there is no such thing as luck, just preparation meeting opportunity" - bob evans
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.