Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Are Google's Best Days Behind It?

CmdrTaco posted about 3 years ago | from the aren't-they-always dept.

Google 283

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Neil McAllister questions whether slowing product development, legal woes, and rising bureaucracy will signal trying times ahead for Google. 'With Google's rapid growth have come new challenges. It faces intense competition in all of its major markets, even as it enters new ones. Its newer initiatives have often struggled to reach profitability. It must answer multiple ongoing legal challenges, to say nothing of antitrust probes in the United States and Europe. Privacy advocates accuse it of running roughshod over individual rights. As a result, it's becoming more cautious and risk-averse. But worst of all, as it grows ever larger and more cumbersome, it may be losing its appeal to the highly educated, impassioned workers that power its internal knowledge economy.'"

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'm gonna go with... (4, Insightful)

iRommel (1684036) | about 3 years ago | (#37022006)


Re:I'm gonna go with... (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 3 years ago | (#37022258)

The real question is to define best days.
I remember looking back to when I was a Teenager. I remember all the good times I had, without any responsibilities weighing me down. However I remember being miserable (however looking back with my adult brain, I felt I should have been able to deal a lot better then I did at the time). Then College I remember fondly having a much better time then in high school, however I remember feeling far more isolated and lonely. Then as an adult, I don't have much time for all that good time and I am very busy and I don't really remember too much good times in a few years, and having a lot of things to worry about... however my emotional state is much more happier, and fulfilled then at any other point in my life.
I kinda wish I could go back in time and relive my childhood and early adult years with my current brain and coping skills, Then I would really have ad a blast years ago.

Now for Google... Starting out everything was new and exciting everyone was giving them praises, However they were more cash strapped and had to do a lot of scrounging and pushing to get every dollar in. Then they have a good flow and development was exciting however they had to make sure that they didn't make any major mistake or they would be toast. Now Google in maturing, It knows that it needs to do and has the money to do it. However a lot of the excitement and praises are going away as Google has become more predictable.

Re:I'm gonna go with... (5, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 3 years ago | (#37022578)

The real question is to define best days.

I think the real question is: "who's paying for the continual stream of anti Google stories in the tech media; why are they so desperate; and do they really think we are that stupid"

We have no idea whether Google's best days are behind it, but Google's main failure has been in social networking where it has finally released a product which, even though it is terribly incomplete, limited and difficult to get into, is considered by most people who've used it as much better than Facebook. The article is so desperate to discredit Google that it links to what seems to be an MS stooge review rather than actual information about sales [] .

Re:I'm gonna go with... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022632)

"do they really think we are that stupid"

Yes. Also, we are, by and large.

Re:I'm gonna go with... (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022588)


But Slashdot's best days are long gone :(

Re:I'm gonna go with... (1, Offtopic)

MichaelKristopeit422 (2018884) | about 3 years ago | (#37022680)

slashdot = stagnated

Are Tech Journalism's Best Days Behind It? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022008)

That is the question.

Obviously (1)

Medevilae (1456015) | about 3 years ago | (#37022294)

While Google's are just in their infancy.

Re:Are Tech Journalism's Best Days Behind It? (2)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 3 years ago | (#37022526)


There are morons who are banking everything based on what John C. Dvorak or whatever moron in InfoWeek or CompuTron monthly is publishing.

In short, lazy stupid journalists will never die as long as those who are too lazy to be properly informed are willing to buy.

That being said, Google's best behind them? Probably. Is Google going to crash like Yahoo or Altavista? No. God no.

Yes (0)

zget (2395308) | about 3 years ago | (#37022012)

They are, and it's been noted several times here on slashdot too. Google isn't even the market leader in search within Russia or China, they never got anywhere near where Baidu and Yandex are.

Re:Yes (2)

said213 (72685) | about 3 years ago | (#37022072)

Yet, a google search will, likely, provide the most accurate search results to validate your wholly incited claim... anecdotalism is a disease (and my statements are just as ill as yours).

Re:Yes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022184)

"your wholly incited claim"

Is that english?

"your wholly encouraged claim"


Re:Yes (1, Funny)

said213 (72685) | about 3 years ago | (#37022352)

I realize that it takes a bit of imagination to even begin to appreciate the concept of a common typo, but since the typo in question is the difference between "incited" and "uncited" please bookmark this comment so that my attempt to incite your anonymous rawrisms shall not go uncited... What's making my head twitch a bit is that someone who is too lazy to log in is still capable of being pedantic enough to post on such things.

Re:Yes (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 3 years ago | (#37022906)

The pedantry of an AC knows no bounds.

Re:Yes (1)

Revotron (1115029) | about 3 years ago | (#37022088)

Yeah, because THOSE are the markets that are really going to propel Google to greatness.

Re:Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022206)

If you don't recognise China as a growing and important market you've obviously not been paying attention the last few decades... whether it's sustainable growth is another matter but to disregard them completely at this point would be a mistake.

Re:Yes (1)

tehniobium (1042240) | about 3 years ago | (#37022376)

Remember that Google was founded in 1998. So its ~13 years old. I don't believe anyone is predicting that the online "buck" will move to China (or for that matter Russia) within the next 13 years. Sure it's moving, but it will be much longer before the spending power of an average Chinese person comes close to that of a "westerner".

My point is Revotron is probably right - those are not the markets that will propel Google to further greatness - at least not by short or medium term Google time.

Re:Yes (2)

somersault (912633) | about 3 years ago | (#37022756)

Individually there might not be a lot of spending power, but there are an awful lot of Chinese people.. so anyone who can get into that market early is going to do pretty well out of even moderate rises in their average spending power. Nobody really knows how quickly their economy will grow, or how quickly the US's will fade.. a whole lot can happen in 13 years.

Re:Yes (2)

MrMarket (983874) | about 3 years ago | (#37022956)

Big market != Good business. Trading profits, IP, and making compromises on your business for access to a big market are not necessarily good business moves.

Re:Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022254)

And? Those are but 2 regions. Yes, they are 2 large regions, but considering they have pretty much the rest of the world down, the whole market leader argument is a little pointless.

Bing certainly hasn't made a dent when it got a new fancy name and style since Microsoft simply do not get what people want. (they never have, look at Win7. Win8 MIGHT actually be the most sensible thing they have done, business-wise, since they added IE to windows)
Various other small engines are too awkward, too obtuse or too esoteric for your average person to care about.

And recently Googles offerings from search have improved significantly when it begun crawling social networking sites and increased the speed at which it crawls to the point where you can get updated within double-digit seconds of things being posted, sometimes even single digit.

Gmail is still doing very very well. No other e-mail service can compare in my opinion.
Microsoft feel every need to want to destroy Hotmail, the UI is an absolute annoyance to browse through now, especially when you browse through pages.
Yahoo, well, can't say I have an opinion of what it is like now, haven't used it since 2004. Does it still exist? Or did they sell off that too?

Orkut is a popular site for an entire country or 2, doesn't mean that it is the best social networking site ever.
Why these sites tend to get such a huge amount of attention from a significant group of people with similar features (from one country, as an example) is a strange and interesting subject that all these companies should be researching to figure out why it is like that.
Orkut is actually a decent site, few things could be cleaned up, but overall decent. But nobody knows the damn thing exists because Google, FOR GOD KNOWS WHAT REASON, don't advertise the thing!

Considering they are one of the biggest accessed sites in the world, I can say they are in a perfectly fine position.
And on that note, Facebook, one of the other large ones, is losing considerable traffic and has been for a little while now.
People are growing to hate it every half year when they roll out yet another crap feature or UI change that pisses off everyone and they don't care about peoples opinions on it. (yet, one site that did, Bebo, went in to administration and had to sell, and crapsites like Facebook still exist? What the hell is that about?)

Re:Yes (1, Insightful)

zget (2395308) | about 3 years ago | (#37022440)

Microsoft simply do not get what people want. (they never have, look at Win7...

Uh, what's wrong with Win7? I get that Vista wasn't that good OS (mostly because of the changes to driver and security models that broke old things, but they had to do it at some point so that things could improve). But Win7 is a solid product.

Re:Yes (-1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 3 years ago | (#37022714)

But Win7 is a solid product.

I think "solid product" is a stretch when talking about a desktop manager that can't even properly handle little things like "window focus."

internal knowledge economy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022014)

internal buzzword economy

no (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022018)


Fun (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022022)

When it stops being fun, it's all downhill.

Re:Fun (0)

tehniobium (1042240) | about 3 years ago | (#37022398)

This should be both +5 Funny and +5 insighful.

Re:Fun (1)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | about 3 years ago | (#37022820)

This should be both +5 Funny and +5 insighful.

I am mulling over the concept of a comment that is "sighful."

Happens to almost everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022040)

If you define best days as rapid growth and free spirit, yes. Growth has to end eventually and at Google's rate it was only a matter of time before they bought and renamed Greece as Google Country.

Deja Vu All Over Again (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022048)

This question comes up every year. This is just a typical shit-stirring piece, trying to round up pageviews and clickthroughs.

If your article's headline is a question and the answer is "No", don't bother publishing it. It's like journalistic masturbation, you're doing a service to no one but yourself..

Long story short, (5, Insightful)

redemtionboy (890616) | about 3 years ago | (#37022054)

No. People have been saying this about Google for the past 5+ years. The difference between Google and Microsoft is that Google has maintained the mindset of a startup. Things like 20% time will always insure that Google has a fresh set of ideas brewing and working their way up.

Startup mentality - like this? (-1, Flamebait)

mveloso (325617) | about 3 years ago | (#37022420)

They're like a startup, in that they willfully infringe patents? []

I guess they are willing to make mistakes.

Re:Startup mentality - like this? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022464)

They're like a startup, in that they willfully infringe patents? []

I guess they are willing to make mistakes.

Google is clearly on the right side of the java debacle. Java is licensed GPL2, which allows forks. The copyright license doesn't cover patents, true, but if you license your code to allow forks, and then sue for copyright infringement, I call estoppel.

Re:Startup mentality - like this? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022554)

linkg to fosspatents just shows you don't even have a vague fucking clue what you're reading. You're reading a pro-MS blog where they are about as anti-google as it gets? This article is much about zero.

Wow, and they wrote an article anti-google? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?!?

jeezus troll, get the fuck off slashdot.

How many times do we have to debunk this shit? I should hope once is enough. [] Maybe twice? [] Estoppel plus anti-FUD good enough?

Re:Startup mentality - like this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022772)

Considering I can probably patent the wheel at this point, and have no one interject with prior art, speaks volumes as to the how useless the 'idea monopolization' market is.

That email just shows you how much stock Google obviously puts into the patent system as well. If you honestly agree that Oracle is owed massive Billions for said 'infringement', you clearly have a warped sense of software value, much less justice.

What's a valid amount? $10 to Oracle per Android phone? How about $100 per phone. How much do Androids cost new again? Or, is it you just want to see Google take a hit like every other Tech. giant has throughout the industry. Either way, your bias is clearly showing.

Re:Startup mentality - like this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022800)

I'm no Google fan, but Oracle can burn to the goddamn ground.

Re:Long story short, (4, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 3 years ago | (#37022426)

Its newer initiatives have often struggled to reach profitability.

I know lots of people here like to parrot the nonsense that profit profit profit now now now is legally and ethically the sole objective of publicly traded corporations, but that's simply hogwash.

And in Google's case, it isn't.

There is no particular reason any particular "product" needs to be financially profitable for Google now now now in the way that these parrots are thinking. It's really better to think of many (most?) of Google's "products" as research projects, and remember that in many cases those "failed products" end up as parts or foundations for future products.

It is exactly this profit profit profit now now now bullshit that is stifling innovation in the world today and in the US in particular.

Re:Long story short, (3, Informative)

jalefkowit (101585) | about 3 years ago | (#37022786)

It's really better to think of many (most?) of Google's "products" as research projects, and remember that in many cases those "failed products" end up as parts or foundations for future products...

Google appears to disagree: under Larry Page's leadership, they have begun pulling back on the "throw lots of things against the wall and see which ones stick" strategy. []

Fresh set of ideas (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | about 3 years ago | (#37022674)

Those ideas have to get in front of users. Google Labs used to provide a way to do that, without the hurdle of a product launch. I worry about having it shut down.

Same old nonsense. (0)

MaWeiTao (908546) | about 3 years ago | (#37022066)

I remember people saying the same thing about Apple in the era before Steve Jobs returned.

Re:Same old nonsense. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022242)

I remember people saying the same thing about Apple in the era before Steve Jobs returned.

so- you're saying google needs steve now?

Re:Same old nonsense. (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 3 years ago | (#37022272)

Currently Apple sends to be a bunch of people whose job is not to innovate, but rather to implement Steve Job's vision. They may have a problem in the future as well, although they have enough of a foothold now to take their time for bit.

Re:Same old nonsense. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022590)

I remember people saying the same thing about Apple in the era before Steve Jobs returned.

That does not mean they where wrong. If the great Steve had not returned, Apple would be gone by now. And as soon as he (permanently) leaves Apple, it's likely it will happen finally.

Re:Same old nonsense. (1)

sacridias (2322944) | about 3 years ago | (#37023022)

Google this: most popular search engine You will note: Google has held 70% over the past few years. Unwaivering, unfaltering. People Google stuff, end of argument. Apple and Google, Apple: Hipster based client base. Child Labor. pro controlling the masses. Likes to sue everyone. Needed a MS bailout. Upgrade means we removed a bunch of features that made it worth while and increased the costs, but we did add some new images for your background. Apple has a limited client base, and many people that will never use it. Google: Solid tech, strong following. Never bailed out of anything, bailing others out. Gets statistics off users (oh no, how evil), but fights for open web rights. Upgrading means lots of new features, stability fixes, and still absolutely free. Google actually supports the open source community. Google is no longer just a proper noun. A large percentage of the world (except China and Russia (oh no)) use it daily and that is just their search engine. 100 Years from now they will not say: Hey apple that!! But they may just say hey google that! Android is becoming more popular than iPhone. Android apps can be developed on a MAC computer, Linux Computer, and even Windows Computer. Iphone apps can be developed on a MAC, though it does not directly support others (Third party tools are required for non mac development, meaning slower access to newer technologies). Iphone's dictatorship reflects that of the company, and while many people will follow sheepishly, as options they desire are readily available elsewhere but blocked or limited by Apple, they will move away. Reality Trying to compare google to apple is like comparing apples to pictures of oranges. They are vastly different companies, and while I present Apple as very negative and google as more positive the truth doesn't matter how your portray the companies, the way the operate are so different that you cannot look at 1 to see how the other will flourish or fail. I for one predict Apple failing in the future, but it is because I hope they do, not because they will. These articles are basically the same thing, the author wants them to fail, if nothing more than a story about how goliath was slain.

Seriously? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022090)

What product development? Almost all of Google's newest "product development" has been acquisitions. From Android to Google Earth to Blogger to Picasa to WebM, etc.

Who is saying so? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022108)

Is this another of those Facebook's funded FUD articles? Just saying...

Google, Schmoogle +5, Insightful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022120)

"that power its internal knowledge economy."

Google is an advertising firm FIRST; a search engine, etc. ad inifinitum, SECOND.

Yours In Novosibirsk,
Kilgore Trout

Re: Google, Schmoogle +5, Insightful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022198)

How amusing. You do realize that all of their advertising relies on the search engine, which is what Google is (and was) founded on?

Re: Google, Schmoogle +5, Insightful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022988)

ALL of their advertising? That's funny, I could have sworn I saw their ads on Youtube videos, and embedded in Android Apps, and of course, directly on people's sites, and in GMail and in a dozen other places. I'm not saying it's not the lion's share of their advertising, but it's certainly not all of their advertising.

Re: Google, Schmoogle +5, Insightful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022524)

I hate this stupid meme. Advertising firms provide specific services; they assist clients in defining their brand and develop campaigns across a range of media (TV, radio, print, web). Google does none of that. Google simply provides an advertising channel--and advertising channels have long been the primary revenue generator for pretty much every web-focused and traditional media company. Simply put, Google is no more an advertising company than NBC, Newsweek, Slashdot, or your favorite radio station.

Best days for what? (3, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about 3 years ago | (#37022138)

Best days as a search engine? Probably, yes. Best days as an advertising revenue machine? Probably not.

Re:Best days for what? (2, Insightful)

yanyan (302849) | about 3 years ago | (#37022232)

I find their search results annoying a lot of times. For example the engine would insist on a spelling that is different but apparently more well-known than what i typed. I remember in the past it used to search for the actual term and then suggest its alternate spelling. Another example would be when searching for phrases with spaces. Even if i quote the entire phrase the engine would return results with only some of the words in the phrase. Very frustrating.

Re:Best days for what? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 3 years ago | (#37022614)

Yes, Google's default assumption that you didn't really mean to type what you typed is extremely annoying. I find that I have to revise most queries with "" and + before I get what I want. That didn't used to be the case.

These days it's even common to get query results that contain none of the words in the query. What's up with that?!

Re:Best days for what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37023004)

I agree and share your sentiments. The specific issue you asked though, can probably be explained. The results that match none of the words in the query is probably due to other pages that contain those search terms point to the page.

Eg. [] used to point to GW Bush's official page in the whitehouse website.

Re:Best days for what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022648)

Hi Moron,

Turn that feature off if you do not like it.

Hugs and kisses,

Juan Epstein

Re:Best days for what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022940)

have you never tried using " around a word? Is it that hard for you to essentially say to google's search engine "I AM SEARCHING FOR THESE EXACT WORDS?"

you're fucking retarded.

Goolge maps Real Estate (0)

Americium (1343605) | about 3 years ago | (#37022152)

Once they canned this awesome new product I knew that they might be heading downhill. Google has already created amazing new products and has the ability to create more, but, as usual, the government is getting in the way.

Yahoogle... (1)

UnresolvedExternal (665288) | about 3 years ago | (#37022156)


Today the search giant's full-time head count is almost 30,000 employees. It has offices in 42 countries on six continents. In terms of market capitalization, it's bigger than Ford, GM, Starbucks, FedEx, United Airlines, and Viacom combined.

You could guess this from the amount of clutter that has appeared on all of their services. How long before we end up with a nice corporate nightmare like Yahoo...

Re:Yahoogle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022418)

Are you in the position to say what clutter is for a company this size? Yahoo was much smaller than Google is now.

Re:Yahoogle... (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 3 years ago | (#37022728)

it's bigger than Ford, GM, Starbucks, FedEx, United Airlines, and Viacom combined.

So, I guess it depends on what one counts as "best days".

It's gone from being the cool new kid on the block to a technology behemoth with the corresponding beaurocracy and an eye on its main revenue stream.

Just like microsoft, its meteoric rise is certainly over.

However, it isn't going anywhere and will continue to grow for a while yet. It will certainly make the founders a good deal richer. So, it depends on what you consider to be the best days.

Do you want the yound small company that does only cool stuff, or do you want the megacorp which is phenomenonally rich and does some cool stuff?

It can't be said for sure (4, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | about 3 years ago | (#37022166)

At this stage in the game, it can't be said whether or not Google can turn things around, but it is quite certain that the direction of things at the moment is not the best for its users. Google has put out many useful services that many people use out there. (Personally, I just use search and though I do have a gmail account, I don't really use it...) But lately, Google has been tying things together with their services and now this Google+ thing really worries people.

Perhaps the minds of the masses haven't been made yet, but I am always cautious when it comes to marketers and advertisers and Google is definitely one of those.

I think this tying together of services is a way of locking in and firmly identifying its users. Their push against pseudonymity/anonymity has me and many others worried.

Re:It can't be said for sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022244)

What do you mean by "turn things around"? Google is making more money than ever, so in their eyes there's nothing that needs fixing.

Re:It can't be said for sure (2)

erroneus (253617) | about 3 years ago | (#37023018)

Google is still young enough to realize that if they loose their "fan base" they will pretty much lose the entire show. They are not yet entrenched deep enough into business that they can ignore the peons just yet.

So yes, they are making more money than ever. If Google truly believes that the measure of their present and future success is measured only in dollars, then Google's fate is already sealed. Google is not, as far as I can tell, an MBA-infected company and I don't believe they think that way just yet.

Google vs China (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about 3 years ago | (#37022178)

I have noticed on my home webserver that I have had a lot of spider traffic lately form the Baidu search engine, and very little from the googlebot. From my perspective it looks like the competition is ramping up its search engine database building...

Re:Google vs China (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022796)

You think that's actually Baidu and not some Chinese spambots using Baidu user agent strings?

In my experience, traffic from China is usually from spambots.

blah blah blah (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022180)

it may be losing its appeal to the highly educated, impassioned workers that power its internal knowledge economy.'"

you mean a bunch of ageist fucktards. Oh, you kids think your hip? Lets try and fail at "social networking". Hahaha. Google doesnt have "highly educated" impassioned workers. That was always just marketing spin from the beginning.

It's a marketing company. Their tech stinks, even worse than Apple.

Re:blah blah blah (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022264)

and so does your grammar and knowledge of the tech sector. Cheers :-)

Flash to Substance or Destruction (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022186)

Google was big flashy new and exciting.

Now it isn't.
They might recapture that excitement (as Apple did, or as Chrysler does every few years)

Or they might not.
There are still many big, first rate companies that are doing great things, they just don't make headlines like they used to.

Are IBMs best days behind it? Sure it isn't the single all powerful ruler of computers, but neither is it a withering shell of what it once was.

Yes. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022188)

I worked at google for a couple years (2003-2005) before venturing off to do my own thing. From what I've seen and heard, the culture has changed a lot since then and quite frankly, as much as I loved it when I was there, I wouldn't work there with the current environment. It's not just me; I know a handful people that interviewed and declined a job offer in the past couple of years. And in the past few months, I know people that declined an interview with them entirely.

They seem to be suffering from Microsoft disease. Too many managers? A golden goose that makes them think they need to expand everywhere? Don't know, don't care, but they've spread themselves thin trying to take on Apple, Microsoft, Facebook.

Yes. (1)

unity100 (970058) | about 3 years ago | (#37022200)

And let him show a better place than google for tech employees at this moment. 'losing its appeal to tech workers' my ass.

actually, what is behind is tech journalism's best days, apparently. since they started to making up arguments out of asses.

The pundits said the same thing about Apple... (2)

SwedishChef (69313) | about 3 years ago | (#37022304)

And I remember when a major tech magazine had a cover touting Microsoft's NT server and saying "Unix is Dead". Actually, the magazine died first.

Really? (1, Offtopic)

bmo (77928) | about 3 years ago | (#37022310)

>It faces intense competition in all of its major markets,

It does?

There's Google, and then there's Bing, and Bing isn't eating any of Google's market share. Not in search and not in selling ads.

Everything else may as well be Cuil.

5 Cuils: You ask for a hamburger, I give you a hamburger. You raise it to your lips and take a bite. Your eye twitches involuntarily. Across the street a father of three falls down the stairs. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. I give you a hamburger. You swallow and look down at the hamburger in your hands. You cannot swallow. There are children at the top of the stairs. A pickle shifts uneasily under the bun. I give you a hamburger. You look at my face, and I am pleading with you. The children are crying now. You raise the hamburger to your lips, tears stream down your face as you take a bite. I give you a hamburger. You are on your knees. You plead with me to go across the street. I hear only children's laughter. I give you a hamburger. You are screaming as you fall down the stairs. I am your child. You cannot see anything. You take a bite of the hamburger. The concrete rushes up to meet you. You awake with a start in your own bed. Your eye twitches involuntarily. I give you a hamburger. As you kill me, I do not make a sound. I give you a hamburger.


Re:Really? (2, Funny)

MaxBooger (1877454) | about 3 years ago | (#37022610)

OK, that's it. Sonic for lunch.


Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022314)

Don't matter how good it is, pony will D-I-E !! And the other will REJOYCE !! like it is 1999 in a little red coravet !!

Smear Campaign? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022344)

Is this another Facebook funded Burson-Marsteller smear campaign against Google??

I don't know... (2)

brim4brim (2343300) | about 3 years ago | (#37022362)

I switched to bing for most of my searches because it usually gets me links I want and not some local copy of the original article. I think Google searches are too localised and too much centered around my search history among other things. I'm always logged in as I have mail account with them and logging out and in to that to perform searches is a pain and not only that but it still localises the search results to bias for my country. Sometimes I want an outside opinion about what is going on. Google just doesn't seem to be as good as bing for that. It is better at finding local services like government sites for my country but worse at most other things now. I recommend people try bing now. A lot better than it was when it launched. I tried switching to other mail services but Gmail is the best with Google Doc integration and Google tasks but I'm leaving the search engine behind me.

Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022368)

A lot of the "progress" is just disruptive now, and change for the sake of change.

This article is funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022374)

Last time I looked, Google was the competitor and created its products to compete. If its where it is today, it because their products were purchased by consumers that saw value in what they offer. Short sighted article.

Google Needs to Stick with Searching (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022380)

But they can't even do that right.
Now when I goto the site and search, the arrows on my keyboard don't move the page, it's some stupid blue triangle.
And that's the most annoying to me because it's on by default and requires multiple clicks to disable it.
They are also doing things in new markets that really don't need to be done.

I liked Google when all they did, was basic searching. Beyond that, I'm starting to hate them now because they have strayed too far from their core.
And frankly if I didn't have a mousewheel to scroll through their pages, I would have stopped using them a long time ago.

The Infoworld story sounds like FUD (2)

dtjohnson (102237) | about 3 years ago | (#37022450)

Honestly, the 'best days are behind it' kinds of stories about any company should automatically set off the FUD alarms unless they are based on specific events which support the point like dropping market share, declining revenues, product recalls, mass layoffs, etc. Yesterday, there were newspaper columns about how people are allegedly turning away from Apple MacBooks because they allegedly don't render fonts as well as Windows 7. Shame on slashdot for providing a platform for such a story. Google may be dying or its prospects may never have been brighter but the truth of it will never be known to us from reading stories which germinate in fud-infested soil.

The pay for starters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022454)

Google will always attract the "highly educated and impassioned workers" because they're willing to pay more. I just took a job with Google and they doubled my next best offer.

Who cares? (1)

boatiemann (2429132) | about 3 years ago | (#37022478)

It's a little flippant maybe, but really. Google is a company and whether they give good service to its customers is important, not it's health, imo. I think it's a little scary how much people seem to care about specific companies (Microsoft v. Apple, Sony v Xbox, etc.) when you are basically just a wallet to them, regardless of the quality of their products.

Re:Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022894)

Google is a company and whether they give good service to its customers is important, not it's health, imo

The health of a company is important if you rely upon or enjoy its services. Good service can't be continue if the company ends up mismanaging itself in to chapter 7, and depending on the line of business good service could be an essential part of maintaining profitability.

Not flippant, more silly generalizations akin to believing that the guy who'd have his favorite football team's logo tattooed on his bollocks is representative of the majority of supporters. Plenty of people use products from companies without buying in to the blind fetishism of favored companies.

good job (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022486)

Once again, slashdot posts "Is (company with new product) doomed to failure?"

I am tired of this 'non news' type of verbosity (1)

bogaboga (793279) | about 3 years ago | (#37022514)

...Well, instead of giving us real news, say about what happened or what is likely to happen given current conditions, 'non news' makers go on the line and speculate with questions posing for real stories. I am tired of this.

Please get us some real news. A lot is happening in the tech sector. What's wrong with that?

Re:I am tired of this 'non news' type of verbosity (1)

Nimey (114278) | about 3 years ago | (#37022936)

Hey, it works for Fox News and they're rich, rich, rich!

Yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022516)

Google thought they are smart not to repeat Microsoft's way of competing in other non-software market because the profit margins are lower. And when the war is won, there is not as much money to gain as a win on a software platform.

So Google went copying other "software" start-up's, especially those who seem weak at the time, e.g. Sun's java, or company with comparatively small hoard of cash. Like what Microsoft used to do with Microsoft Money, etc., Google figures it is easier to focus on squeezing more cash out of their monopoly on search, use the cash to fund their copying of others ideas and works, and to fund the buy-over if they got found out. Since Google gives away what they steal from others "free" to the public, they expect the full support from the public who, in turn, will influence the politicians.

What Google did not expect was that the old timers (Larry, Gates, and Jobs) to pool their cash resources to punish what they see as Google's willful crimes of stealing ideas--and make some money along the way. So instead of facing Sun and other bankrupt companies or small start-up's like Skyhook, Google got pawned by the three old legends. Google then try to appeal to the public to whom they give away their stolen ideas free. But users who do not pay have no allegiance, they are more interested in a good brawl. And for once, Microsoft's PR actually understands that.

Bureaucracy (1)

btalbot (2427646) | about 3 years ago | (#37022568)

I don't see it dying but from the heavy fist of government--like the $500M suit for health-related search results in which no one was really hurt or compensated for their non-hurt.

Meal Ticket Lottery. (3, Insightful)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 3 years ago | (#37022582)

The number of predictions made by these analysts, talking heads, policy wonks, think tank shills etc far exceed the actual number of companies. There is a constant stream of such predictions. At some point some one has to be right. Then the guy who won the lottery, i.e. the guy who predicted it exactly at the right moment, is going to beat his chest and make loud noises about how he got it right, when everyone else was wrong. The prize for winning that lottery is a life time supply of meal tickets. Essentially this guy will be invited to occupy one square in the talking heads matrix that is de regour (sp?) in the business news channels.

I am going with yes (0)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 3 years ago | (#37022686)

As someone already mentioned this one trick pony is getting a bit near its end, yea they can keep adding stuff on to it, but google became google cause of a simple and fast search engine, that is not simple not fast and not really worth a fuck anymore as its loaded down with 10 trillion google mini apps, shovel fulls of shit java scripts, and the first 9 pages are fucking spam!

gmail (1)

mapkinase (958129) | about 3 years ago | (#37022708)

That's the only thing I worry about. As long as I have free space and the service is working, I do not even care about Google search.

Who the fuck is Neil McAlister? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022718)

and why the hell each time he pop a bubble in his head we get a post on /.?
Do he post his own article on /. himself or what?

appeal to intelligent workers? (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about 3 years ago | (#37022726) may be losing its appeal to the highly educated, impassioned workers that power its internal knowledge economy.

I never understood the appeal to highly educated people; I mean, 1. they are an advertisement company 2. the software they create is hardly revolutionary, it's all office software; I don't want to bash anyone but imho the paperclip is at the same level on the revolutionarity scale; well yeah, it's "on the internet", but that is something we are used to by now.

Why aren't these so called smart people not working in physics, or medicine? That would make more sense.

Nonsense (1)

Pecisk (688001) | about 3 years ago | (#37022788)

Another "Ohh no any company who stands against MS and Apple is doomed!" article. Please drop this sensationalist crap.

Have Google acquired quite list of enemies during last two years? You bet. Do they struggle to fight them? Hardly. Yes, mobile patent war is going on with full power, but in fact they can't keep pressing on because soon courts will issue judgements and will invalidate patents. They work as long as Google feels threatened by them and therefore can be controlled. HTC doesn't back down, heck, they intend to fight Apple in court. Samsung too. And rest of the world where software patents simply doesn't work just uses Android and Linux on mobile and don't give a shit.
Of course Nortell and Novell patents buyouts are weapons to destroy Google. Of course Microsoft and Apple now in what legal shit they will land into if they will even publicly acknowledge this. Still, they want Google to feel breath on their necks.
So in nutshell - Google do what they have to do. They fight for their rights to earn descent money making proper business providing clients what they want. They don't and won't give up just because Microsoft and Apple feels threatened.

Procedure weighing it down (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37022842)

Everyone I've talked to that works at Google has the same thing to say about how it's run: It's hugely bloated with middle management types. This is pretty much endemic to any company that has been around as long as Google has -- people need promotions, after all. But the end result of all these people in charge with 'opinions' on how things ought to be run is slowing down the company. Add this to some bizarre management decisions (Tying pay of the entire company to the success of +? Really?) and the fact that most of the original "make interesting things" people have gone on to found their own startups, and you're looking at any other tech company in Silicon Valley, save the fact that they apparently have more PhDs per square foot than just about anywhere on earth--doing NOTHING but working on ways to get you to look at ads. Who can blame them for doing random shit like the fiber project, self-driving cars, or what-have-you? They're getting desperate for innovation over there.

Depends, I suppose... (2)

HerculesMO (693085) | about 3 years ago | (#37022868)

The thing about Google is that 90%+ of its entire revenue comes from search. This isn't true of Microsoft, or even Apple, or Oracle. They have multiple lines that generate revenue.

If Google loses 5% on search (not a lot) the blow to them is a LOT bigger than if MS loses on search, or Apple loses on iTunes. So as far as their best days being behind them, I'd say yes; but the same is true for MS and Apple, but in different respects.

Google needs to innovate outside of search, but everything they do keeps coming back around to search; even Google+. It's a datamining operation and it doesn't produce a line of revenue that's not susceptible to challenge, whether it's Bing/Facebook or something else. They need more sources of revenue, not ways to bolster their only line of revenue. But that's just my opinion.

VOIP and Mobile apps. (1)

sparkeyjames (264526) | about 3 years ago | (#37022892)

Google has the tech already to become a force in VOIP phone usage.
They have the capacity on all the dark fiber they own
to use it with google voice.
It has the 1st or 2nd, depending on who you talk too, mobile phone
operating system on the market. Now they just have to leverage those
two and they are on their way to being the biggest player in those
segments. Of course they also are the number one search engine and
ad generator on the net. They have no where to go but up if they play
their cards right.

Decline started years ago when they broke search (2)

harl (84412) | about 3 years ago | (#37022910)

This started years ago when they broke search.

You can't search for exact text. Quote marks are ignored. No + operator. Case is ignored. Special characters are ignored.

This renders Google completely unusable at times.

Try searching for . It returns a million useless hits and 265 maybe hits.

The first result is an URL not a content match.

Then results contains FILE:HARD. That's not what I searched for. That's a failure state.

Then it starts giving results containing "file hard". That's not what I searched for. That's a failure state.

Anything that does not exactly contain the string is not going to be applicable to my problem. There's just no way to tell Google that.

They've completely thrown away usability in exchange for speed.

Re:Decline started years ago when they broke searc (1)

harl (84412) | about 3 years ago | (#37022982)

Bah It ate my error messages.

Try searching for <FILEHARD>. It returns a million useless hits and 265 maybe hits.

One-trick pony (2)

Animats (122034) | about 3 years ago | (#37022986)

Google remains #1 in search and incredibly profitable at it. Nothing else they've tried makes much money. This worries their management, because if someone with a broader product line (like Microsoft) gets any real traction in search, Google could be toast. (Consider what Microsoft did to the video game industry.) Google has no other revenue stream.

That's not a bad place to be. Consider Oracle. They've been a database company for decades. Everything else they've tried to do, from video streaming to supercomputers, has been disappointing.

Personally, I think that Google's biggest problem is that they're not focusing enough on the search engine and search quality, which is their cash cow. They've made some big mistakes in search since last October. The press on Google has been very critical. That's new for Google. Until late 2010, they received very little bad press.

Most of their engineering talent is going into money-losing projects. What I hear is that the cool kids there want to work on mobile and social, not the big boring search engine. Page told his people that their bonus this year depends on how Google does in "social".

The trouble with focusing on "social" is that Facebook is about a fifth the size of Google and has probably peaked. Ads on "social" systems are an annoyance, unlike search ads, which are sometimes useful. The only way for a social network to increase revenue is to become more ad-heavy. Myspace tried that. We know how that came out.

google is getting sloppy (2, Insightful)

FudRucker (866063) | about 3 years ago | (#37022994)

content farms looking for "click-thru" revenue as p0wned google for quite some time now....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>