Beta
×

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!

Google To Shutter Knol, Wave, Gears

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the if-you-don't-know-what-knol-is-look-it-up-on-wikipedia dept.

Businesses 218

An anonymous reader writes "Google announced today on its official blog the impending closure of a number of its less successful services. In addition to retiring minor features like Bookmarks List and Friend Connect, Google has outlined a plan to close down Wave. The experimental communication medium will go read-only on January 31, and on April 30 they will shut it down completely. Also on April 30, Google will be changing Knol so that individual knols are not viewable, though users will still be able to download and export them until October 1, at which point they'll disappear entirely. Google Gears is also getting the axe, as is Search Timeline and the Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal initiative."

cancel ×

218 comments

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

what the... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143646)

f)*)*! is a 'knol'? and WGAFR?

Re:what the... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143714)

DRINK YO PRUNE JUICE

Oh man! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143650)

I hope Google doesn't cancel GoogleCruise otherwise I wouldn't be able to have anonymous sex with chubby men anymore!

They cancel products left and right (2, Interesting)

CmdrPony (2505686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143660)

I cannot take them seriously anymore. Anyone to use them for business would be insane.

Re:They cancel products left and right (4, Insightful)

imamac (1083405) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143672)

They cancel them because no one really uses them.

Re:They cancel products left and right (2)

dudpixel (1429789) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143766)

The ones that aren't cancelled are the popular ones, and these often have regular price increases as they get more popular.

Gmail and search are exceptions, since they probably make enough money from them already.

Not that I expect free stuff from Google, they're a business and have to cover costs/make a profit etc.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143958)

Regular gmail.com accounts are free for everyone; what Google makes money off /w the gmail product of is with 'Google Apps' which is basically gmail and a whole bunch of other apps for @yourcompany.com.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143788)

Wave was amazing.
And no one uses them because in early beta they are closed down.

Re:They cancel products left and right (3, Insightful)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144006)

Wave was a cool idea that desperately needed a desktop client and more partners. It needed an Open Rich Mail Alliance a-la Android to sell servers, integrate with for-pay and for-free services, and actually use the protocol for real work.

As long as you had to go to the Google website to read a Wave it suffered from the perception that it was a Google service and was only useful in that way.

(On the other hand you could go totally conspiracy-minded and say that Wave was intended to fail, and Google was attempting to use it as a pilot plant for various Google+ features, at a time when the Diaspora was all the rage and people were casting about for open source alternatives to Facebook.)

Re:They cancel products left and right (5, Insightful)

magarity (164372) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144094)

Wave was amazing.
And no one uses them because in early beta they are closed down.

I tried Wave and it didn't make any damn sense so I didn't use it any more.

Re:They cancel products left and right (4, Funny)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144130)

How did it not make sense?
Fill text boxes with text, that is about it.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144672)

How did it not make sense? Fill text boxes with text, that is about it.

That's pretty much all I could think of, too.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

arkenian (1560563) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144162)

Wave was amazing. And no one uses them because in early beta they are closed down.

I tried Wave and it didn't make any damn sense so I didn't use it any more.

Wave is good for some collaboration stuff. We loved it for online char-sheet work, for instance, some types of editing. I think Wave was awesome, if Niche, in many respects. I don't think Google spent enough time taking a truly awesome technology and researching/marketing use cases.

Re:They cancel products left and right (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144164)

At least Google did the right thing with Wave and made it open source:
http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-in-a-box

Still, I'll miss the old girl. At least I have hopes that eventually I'll have a company-wide Wave server to replace Wikis (which have horrible access control) and email (which is just horrible).

Re:They cancel products left and right (4, Interesting)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144312)

Wave also was slow as hell on older/weaker computers, a problem that only compounded as the wave got longer.

Welcome to the cloud! (4, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143868)

They cancel them because no one really uses them.

For sufficiently imprecise definition of "no one". What you means is no one you personally care about.

Welcome to the cloud, where abandonware is truly dead and nostalgia is a thing of the past. This is what happens when you hand the keys to the kingdom to a service provider with their own motivations and that do not care about you.

And thanks for re-affirming the lesson Google. I now try to use Google for nothing except search and perhaps Google Earth on rare occassions. They've even managed to turn me off Picasa with glaring bugs like losing face data you spend hours entering.

life cycle of a cloud (5, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144046)

What you hear in this announcement is the sound of a "cloud" evaporating.

Re:life cycle of a cloud (4, Funny)

Azure Flash (2440904) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144174)

Don't you mean condensating? Clouds are already gaseous.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (5, Insightful)

Angst Badger (8636) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144128)

That, in a nutshell, is why I have no particular interest in web applications I do not myself host. Aside from the vast privacy implications, you are totally at the mercy of the provider. A standalone, self-sufficient client with the option of web storage and/or sharing, fine. All of my work on a box run by someone who doesn't even have any contractual or regulatory obligations? No thanks.

I will credit Google with letting people retrieve their data, but its usefulness is greatly reduced without the applications it was designed for.

They call it the cloud because people have gotten wise to being offered low prices on the Brooklyn Bridge.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (1)

Paul Fernhout (109597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144556)

Well said.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (4, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144172)

You could also run Wave yourself: Google has made it Open Source and it's now an Apache project: https://incubator.apache.org/wave/index.html [apache.org]

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144188)

Apache is where abandoned projects go to die, I suppose it's appropriate enough that it winds up hosted there.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (3, Interesting)

JoeMerchant (803320) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144466)

They cancel them because no one really uses them.

For sufficiently imprecise definition of "no one". What you means is no one you personally care about.

Scary thing is, a community of 10,000 people could use and love a service, come to depend on it as part of their lives, but 20,000 just isn't enough eyeballs to pay the bills with advertising. Maybe Google should open an option for conversion of dying services to subscription basis instead of (addition to?) advertising?

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144664)

Risk management classes are what those hypothetical 20,000 people require. People are cautious when it comes to certain topics, like their finances, but introduce them to cool new websites and they lose all common sense. "I know, I'll upload all my photos to this unproven image sharing space, then I'll delete my only harddrive copy!"

Seriously, who would have thought in 2005-2010 that Picasa would be around forever? It never became mainstream, people today still don't know of it.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144558)

Not imprecise. "No one" means almost that: 1%. At most these terminated services were used by one percent of Google's users. Normal people haven't even heard of them. Ask yourself whether a Google service is popular, if you answer yes, it will never be shut offline.

Not unexpected. Google used to dominate on technical merit. For the last 3-4 years they've fallen behind, the products have suffered from a lack of development, and improved alternatives have appeared. Gmail and GSearch are their last two footholds, and both of them have seen substantial regression. If Google wants to survive, then it's imperative for them to change focus.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (1)

gumbi west (610122) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144782)

Okay, so I only know of two that meet that criteria... gotcha.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38145040)

Agreed. Android is perhaps their most viable long-term success. Search could be overtaken in an instant. Google Plus faces competition from a similarly nimble giant. Gmail is... eh, still the best... but email isn't exactly lucrative. Email will probably be dead in the common eyes by 2016 or so.

I do think Google+ is here to stay, however, because they're merging everything into that one product. It won't die until Google declares bankruptcy.

Re:Welcome to the cloud! (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145186)

If Google wants to survive, then it's imperative for them to change focus.

Change focus? I wasn't aware they had one.

They seem to flit around like a butterfly, dabbling in this, tinkering with that, but never actually following through and finishing anything.

Of the three things mentioned the only one I'd even heard of was Gears.

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38145052)

Or ones that dont make them money. Not surprising, but expected. Google is a business afterall.

Cancellation is NOT an issue with The Cloud. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143680)

Wait a minute. I'm a manager, and I've been reading a lot of case studies and watching a lot of webcasts about The Cloud. Based on all of this glorious marketing literature, I, as a manager, have absolutely no reason to doubt the safety of any data put in The Cloud.

The case studies all use words like "secure", "MD5", "RSS feeds" and "encryption" to describe the security of The Cloud. I don't know about you, but that sounds damn secure to me! Some Clouds even use SSL and HTTP. That's rock solid in my book.

And don't forget that you have to use Web Services to access The Cloud. Nothing is more secure than SOA and Web Services, with the exception of perhaps SaaS. But I think that Cloud Services 2.0 will combine the tiers into an MVC-compliant stack that uses SaaS to increase the security and partitioning of the data.

My main concern isn't with the security of The Cloud, but rather with getting my Indian team to learn all about it so we can deploy some first-generation The Cloud applications and Web Services to provide the ultimate platform upon which we can layer our business intelligence and reporting, because there are still a few verticals that we need to leverage before we can move to The Cloud 2.0.

Re:Cancellation is NOT an issue with The Cloud. (5, Funny)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143976)

Wait a minute. I'm a manager, and I've been reading a lot of case studies and watching a lot of webcasts about The Cloud. Based on all of this glorious marketing literature, I, as a manager, have absolutely no reason to doubt the safety of any data put in The Cloud.

The case studies all use words like "secure", "MD5", "RSS feeds" and "encryption" to describe the security of The Cloud. I don't know about you, but that sounds damn secure to me! Some Clouds even use SSL and HTTP. That's rock solid in my book.

But be careful - for it to all work, you have to remember to take ownership and set up an action plan that shifts some paradigms and enables group synergies - a lot of managers forget that part.

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143712)

Hopefully they will end mail too ... I don't know why I used it for so long, opera mail is faster, looks better. And has the mail client built into the browser.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144132)

Opera Mail is just a client. GMail is both a client and server.

I just use the server part through IMAP. Coupled with my own domain, I could move in a couple of hours if I needed to. Commodity services ftw.

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

bbqsrc (1441981) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143738)

"I will not use other successfully products by company X because they cancel support for products that I don't use and others don't either." Intelligent.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143752)

Yes and some of the products they've been cancelling they haven't even been cancelling, just replacing with a newer product.

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143774)

I feel the overall point is that, as a business, if you hopped on a product and started using it, you could be left in the lurch if it was cancelled because it wasn't as successful as google wanted. The only real solution is to not be an early adopter, since you can't know in advance if a particular product is going to be successful enough. At least, not without a crystal ball.

Try minus the condescension (3, Insightful)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143890)

"I will not use other successfully products by company X because they cancel support for products that I don't use and others don't either." Intelligent.

Let me fix that for you. "I refuse to become reliant for basic service on a vendor that clearly has their own agenda and will happily cancel those services without regard to what I want or need".

You can make anything sound unintelligent with careful paraphrasing to reductio ad absurdum, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it actually is unintelligent.

Re:Try minus the condescension (2)

badness (78200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143968)

I hate to break it to you, but every vendor has its own agenda.

Re:Try minus the condescension (5, Interesting)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143998)

I hate to break it to you, but every vendor has its own agenda.

That's my freaking point, isn't it. Cloud means they get to pull the rug from under you. Most moderate to large companies and savvy individuals shoudl keep their own data in their own hands and keep at least binaries of what they want to run out of the control of the vendor. Yes it is more work and more money. Yes you can get it wrong so you have to make an effort not to. But software as a service and your apps and data on the cloud is a cancer to your ability to do anything with your own data.

Re:Try minus the condescension (2)

bbqsrc (1441981) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143986)

Beyond the fact there's a typo in my original quote, your statement hardly changes my point, and in fact reaffirms it. It makes perfect business sense to cancel services that the market is showing people do not need or want, and that's why said products would be cancelled. Beyond the fact that we're talking about free services, I'd hardly call Knol, Wave or even Gears "basic services".

When they cancel GMail arbitrarily, let me know. Until then, my argument remains valid.

Re:Try minus the condescension (0)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144036)

Beyond the fact there's a typo in my original quote, your statement hardly changes my point, and in fact reaffirms it. It makes perfect business sense to cancel services that the market is showing people do not need or want, and that's why said products would be cancelled. Beyond the fact that we're talking about free services, I'd hardly call Knol, Wave or even Gears "basic services".When they cancel GMail arbitrarily, let me know. Until then, my argument remains valid.

You're not making a point at all, and i'm not re-affirming you're point, you're missing the point entirely. Just because you personally don't care, or because the majority don't care, that doesn't make it okay for those people who use those services to become reliant on them. They are not stupid for refusing to use Google services.

There is also a major paradox in what you are saying since a service such as Gmail can't become popular unless people adopt it in the first place. Therefore you are basically saying all the early adopters - the ones that actually DRIVE the market - don't matter because when they adopt, the service is not "basic". But hey if it was profitable overall to Google to shut down Gmail you can bet they'd do it in a heartbeat - they might try to add spin to minimise bad PR, but they would care about you or any other user not one bit.

Finally who's to say what a basic service is? I can argue that Gmail is not a basic service either, since there are alternatives. The term "basic services" is not at all objective as you seem to believe. Again you are pushing your own ideas and point of view, while completely ignoring or dismissing those of others.

Re:Try minus the condescension (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144830)

There is also a major paradox in what you are saying since a service such as Gmail can't become popular unless people adopt it in the first place.

There's a huge difference in using something and becoming reliant on something. Early adopters of Gmail (like me) didn't suddenly move all operations to Gmail -- we used it on the side, for occasional personal correspondence, and we maintained our well-known aliases until Gmail quickly became the dominating provider. Its permanent status became apparent when the IT community universally sided with Gmail rather than Hotmail (by 2005-2006).

Therefore you are basically saying all the early adopters - the ones that actually DRIVE the market - don't matter because when they adopt, the service is not "basic".

Usually it's the media that drives the market. The users just prove if the product works.

Finally who's to say what a basic service is?

A core product. One the average person can name. Search. Mail. Maps. Documents. YouTube. Google+. That's it. Sadly.

Re:Try minus the condescension (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145266)

There's a huge difference in using something and becoming reliant on something. Early adopters of Gmail (like me) didn't suddenly move all operations to Gmail -- we used it on the side, for occasional personal correspondence, and we maintained our well-known aliases until Gmail quickly became the dominating provider. Its permanent status became apparent when the IT community universally sided with Gmail rather than Hotmail (by 2005-2006).

Hotmail's still around in a big way in my circle of non-techy friends. In fact my wife's primary email is still Hotmail.

In any case you have eventually moved all your correspondence onto GMail. If they started charging for it or shut it down today, or in 5 years time, there would be pain. And that is with a realtively easy to replace service. (Let's face it the biggest pain is distributing your email address without leaving someone out - email is a commodity).

Finally who's to say what a basic service is?

A core product. One the average person can name. Search. Mail. Maps. Documents. YouTube. Google+. That's it. Sadly.

Then your argument must be that apart from those core products, you shouldn't move your stuff to the cloud. Personally I don't think you shouldrely on it the cloud even for that (especially docs!!!). In any case that list would change quite often. 5 years ago Google+ wouldn't be on it. Popular services change quite rapidly in the IT world. What people can and can't name changes quite rapidly. So your strategy smacks of immaturity.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

ZigiSamblak (745960) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143746)

Yes, but they only cancel the obvious failures. Some companies could learn something, although they may not have many products left.

Re:They cancel products left and right (5, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143794)

I cannot take them seriously anymore. Anyone to use them for business would be insane.

Because all companies should support all products forever, even if no one uses them? What company does that?

I mean, look at Itanium, at this point the only way to keep Itanium alive would be to *pay* Intel to keep making them. Oh wait.... [slashdot.org]

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143872)

Yes... Itanium is a product that "nobody uses," which is why IA64 server sales are several billion dollars a year.

Apparently, people find the idea of one company paying another for a product to be shocking.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144368)

a few billion in server sales per year is chicken shit. yes, Itanium is only a few billion a year, after ten years hasn't even met the projected sales for the first six months! In technical parlance, it's a "massive flop".

http://www.techfocusmedia.net/archives/articles/20110309-itanium/?printView=true [techfocusmedia.net]

Re:They cancel products left and right (5, Insightful)

CmdrPony (2505686) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143906)

Well, we if we compare to Microsoft, at least MS has specific end of support dates that you know. Google will just come out of the shadows and announce that support will be ended in one month. And not just support - the whole product will be gone. With desktop products they still at least work. With Google, software-as-service, and cloud they're just gone. No sane business would build their future on such ground.

Re:They cancel products left and right (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144370)

Agreed. I had to have this conversation several times. Google just sent our CEO a notice that Google Health was also going to be pulled. His comment, "That's crazy. I believed all of their bullshit about how great it would be. What else can't I use? What else do we have on Google?" He meant what products or apps that we use or develop depend on google services other than google core. Too many.

Google, at least give us a couple of years notice. Bing it is! not

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144784)

Agreed. I had to have this conversation several times. Google just sent our CEO a notice that Google Health was also going to be pulled. His comment, "That's crazy. I believed all of their bullshit about how great it would be. What else can't I use? What else do we have on Google?" He meant what products or apps that we use or develop depend on google services other than google core. Too many.

Google, at least give us a couple of years notice. Bing it is! not

6 months? http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/update-on-google-health-and-google.html

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144458)

1 Month? They give lots of ahead of time notice that they are closing the service down. The difference is that Microsoft has a specific set of time for support usually announced on release while Google announces the closure of a service a minimum of several months ahead of time. Google announced the stopping of Wave a long time ago for example though they are only announcing the full closure of wave now. This is simply the difference between a set product and a service as a service requires continuous effort to maintain.

Now if you compare Google's services to MS services? It's hard to compare as MS doesn't have many small services. The services they do have, you know they won't end just like Google won't end Search and Email. Note that these services of MS do not have end support dates either quite simply because it makes no sense for an ongoing service.

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

boilednut (1245008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144496)

This comment is essentially a /. Moderator rollback: meant to mod your comment up...mistakenly did the reverse.

Yeah MS will support the KIN phone for like ever! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144674)

Time to get a new handle, shill. We're following you now Microsoft Bob.

Re:They cancel products left and right (2)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144718)

Did you think the fact that Microsoft charges money for the use of their products and Google doesn't, has anything to do with what you've said?

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144828)

For anything other than search, Google seems like a hybrid offspring of Microsoft and Apple, where mostly the bad traits presented themselves.

Re:They cancel products left and right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144116)

That's awesome, new Microsoft shill. Want to tell me how awesome Zune is?

Re:They cancel products left and right (1)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144432)

They're throwing stuff against the wall. If it doesn't stick, you really can't fault them for letting it fall. If you could predict with certainty what would ultimately be successful in the market, you wouldn't be spending time on /., you'd be doing something useful (and getting rich at the same time), instead of being an ankle biter.

Google anounces the closing of Search (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143710)

However you will still be able to see ads for words you're searching for.

They failed because... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143730)

...oddly enough, Google absolutely FAIL at marketing.
I'm not even kidding.

How the hell they became the biggest damn advertiser on the web I will never know, they are hopeless at doing anything right.
You want to know who they remind me of? Remember Malcolm In The Middle? Google is Malcolm!
Awkward, obtuse, but somehow stupidly intelligent. Stupidly intelligent is probably the best way to describe Google.

Seriously, why cancel Gears? Gears was USEFUL. It never needed that much attention as it was, and it was supposed to fill in for things that weren't quite ready in the HTML5 spec.
They say they ditched it because "it is no longer needed" or some nonsense. Funny, I can't remember when the ability to be able to drag and drop files in to web apps was added, last I checked, the File API is still in planning even now.
Gotta love that brilliant Offline Gmail we don't have anymore. Whats that, you released an extension for it? BRILLIANT IDEA, SOMETHING ELSE THAT ISN'T STANDARD AND WILL LIKELY HAVE TO BE KEPT UP TO DATE TOO, JUST LIKE GEARS.
Absolute lunacy.

Re:They failed because... (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143770)

Canceling gears is to be expected, but doing so before there was support for the replacement in either of the other top three browsers is silly. That being said, I don't use the functionality as I prefer to use a proper mail client.

Re:They failed because... (1)

Meshach (578918) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143950)

Seriously, why cancel Gears? Gears was USEFUL...

Google's decisions are not based on how useful an application is to anyone. Google is a company. If Gears or any future application does not make the company enough money then it will be axed.

Re:They failed because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144272)

But that answer is just glib.

Google isn't selling donuts from a kiosk. Google is a very complex commercial enterprise whose success is largely based on how they impress people. It's stinking hard to produce definitive metrics for the corporate value of a very low-cost project even from within Google.

Other problem with your reply is it presumes the company is infallible -- presumes they will always correctly discern what makes money for them. Companies make mistakes about what actually is making money for them all the time, on much simpler things than the value of a project like Gears.

I'm not saying you're a bad person or anything of the sort. I'm only pointing out you've made a Captain Obvious remark that actually doesn't, in review, move the discussion forward in any way.

Re:They failed because... (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144380)

Gears made no money whatsoever. Search with ads does. end of story.

Re:They failed because... (2)

JMZero (449047) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145236)

Yes, what they have now makes money. But their new products keep failing to. That isn't a winning long term strategy.

Their failures are largely because they don't build out and commit to platforms. Every time they have a high profile product or service that gets launched too early, fails to grow, doesn't get supported, and then gets cancelled, they lose credibility with developers. Why be an early adopter for a new Google platform if they aren't going to put some time into making it work and grow? Why make your app work with a Google API that won't last through your product's lifetime? It isn't all about costs and benefits right now, it's about building relationships with people.

How many developers will swarm to any new thing from Apple or Facebook? Tons - and those companies are reaping huge benefits by supporting and growing their platforms.

Google? They're still well respected, obviously - but this kind of thing is hurting Google+, and it will hurt every new platform they launch.

Re:They failed because... (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144390)

google is awesome at marketing, the whole planet knows of it. The whole planet uses their main products. meanwhile, you're in a snit about a fringe trial-balloon project most people never heard of and which made google no money. Not only are they awesome at marketing, they are getting awesome at business.

Re:They failed because... (2)

blacklint (985235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145270)

Funny, I can't remember when the ability to be able to drag and drop files in to web apps was added

It seems to be fairly common [google.com] , being used by Gmail since April 2010 [webmonkey.com] , and is in the Mozilla docs [mozilla.org] .

Steve Job's influence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143832)

This is the influence of Steve Job's on Google. It'll be interesting to see if the google culture survives this.

Health (2)

jimpop (27817) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143840)

Google Health too.

Prognosis? (5, Funny)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143908)

Google Health too.

So you're saying the prognosis for Google Health is not good?

Re:Prognosis? (1)

jimpop (27817) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143946)

I concur

Re:Prognosis? (2)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144316)

Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a web developer!

Re:Prognosis? (1)

PwnzerDragoon (2014464) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144746)

Well, it's not lupus, I know that.

Re:Prognosis? (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144818)

Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a web developer!

It's the same thing - you know how to deal with a disorganized mess of badly designed loosely connected parts!

Stating the Obvious (5, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143846)

This is Google's big problem right now - throw a bunch of things at the wall and see what sticks. The problem is people are now hesitant to invest in new Google projects because, hey, they'll be shut down in a year... If they can't commit to a new project, why should their customers?...

Re:Stating the Obvious (2)

hugh nicks (754727) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143970)

I disagree. Knol was released as beta in July of 2008, and Wave was opened up in May of 2009. Gears...2007? Not really *new* projects. I think Google used to get caught up in the acquisition game, but with the direction that they're taking with Google+, they are re-defining themselves. They still acquire companies, and make stuff in house, but they have much more of a focus now...not a shotgun approach from the past.

Re:Stating the Obvious (1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144362)

Umm, Wave got canned pretty damn fast, they just didn't completely pull the plug until recently.

Re:Stating the Obvious (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144934)

The problem with redefining yourself is, if you can do it once, then you can do it again. Not an argument that inspires confidence in the kind of customers who are worried about fickleness.

Re:Stating the Obvious (3, Insightful)

swillden (191260) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144986)

The problem with redefining yourself is, if you can do it once, then you can do it again. Not an argument that inspires confidence in the kind of customers who are worried about fickleness.

OTOH, if Wave is the example, you can trust Google to make sure that you can get your data out of it, and to make the code available so you can host it yourself or find another place to host it for you if you need to.

Let's see what this means. (4, Insightful)

MurukeshM (1901690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143878)

Google Wave - collaboration. Stopped early on. Now Google Docs allows real-time simultaneous editing by multiple users. If that isn't collaboration, I dunno what is. It might have nifty features that Doc doesn't have, but starting ten sections in the same company to do the same job is what I'd consider stupid (and standard practice).
Google Gears - Holy crap! That thing is still alive?
Google Search Timeline - I'm confused. What does Trends show us then?
Re<C - They admit they're not the best suited for the job. So they publish their results and continue using renewable energy.
Google Friend Connect - Dunno what that is, but seems kinda outa place now that Google+ (showing no signs of premature death) is here.
Knol - This one is a bit sad. But then they worked with others to start Annotum [wordpress.com] .
Bookmark Lists - Meh.. With sharing links on fb and Google+ whenever we spot something interesting, who'll bother with this?

Re:Let's see what this means. (1)

belg4mit (152620) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144108)

Trends is just that, recent trends in what people search for.
Timeline is chronological sort of results, allows you to see the rise and fall of a term like jabberwocky, etc.

Re:Let's see what this means. (1)

MurukeshM (1901690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144442)

What does Google Insights [google.com] give then?

Re:Let's see what this means. (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144918)

Knol - This one is a bit sad. But then they worked with others to start Annotum.

Seriously, I never found Knol to be useful, and actually have forgotten about it since it launched years ago. What was it ever used for?

This is all very nice and all... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143930)

...but what does it have to do with cupcakes?

Summary for those who don't want to read (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143966)

Google Bookmarks Lists—Date was December 19, 2011. All your bookmarks are belong to recycle bin.
Google Friend Connect— On March 1, 2012 you will face the fact that you have no friends.
Google Gears—To be jammed December 1, 2011
Google Search Timeline—Now history!
Google Wave—Wave goodbye on January 31, 2012
Knol—Stop seeking the Oracle on April 30, 2012
Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal (REC)—Redirecting enviro-bullshit, capt'n.

Re:Summary for those who don't want to read (1)

pinfall (2430412) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144118)

Google Plus - set your watch to T-Minus 1 years +

Re:Summary for those who don't want to read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144916)

I remember some of those. I didn't use them because I could tell they were shit and would eventually be canned. Bookmarks especially. Not a surprise.

Fuck google, give me my timeline (1)

belg4mit (152620) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144090)

It's not even a seprate product, just a useful interface to search (they've since hidden away).
Very useful to explore news coverage, prevalence of terminology, etc.

Gears' and Wave are non-news, previously announced... indeed Gears has been death row almost a year now

I can't believe they didn't axe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144140)

Google Xoom. On second thought, maybe they already killed it and nobody even noticed.

Learn a new system (1)

qualityassurancedept (2469696) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144282)

Knol will never be Wikipedia and it was kinda wrong to try to make a competitive online encyclopedia product... like starting your own competing nunnery right next door to Mother Theresa's place. I jumped on the bandwagon with both Wave and Google+ but ulimately stopped using both. The problem with Wave is that even though it had a lot of useful features, it was too much to ask all of the people I collaborate with to switch to it as well... we already collaborate and we already share content and make revisions etc etc. We weren't exactly looking for a whole new system for collaboration. Google+ is basically a huge CRM system for advertisers and the fact that they won't give you an account without your real name being attached to it is a little odious really. I am sure it too will be discontinued.

Damn. Loved Wave (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144372)

Still use it nearly every day. I was hoping they would open it up and my friends and I could host it on our own server.

So much potential wasted.

Re:Damn. Loved Wave (2)

AndrewStephens (815287) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144426)

Still use it nearly every day. I was hoping they would open it up and my friends and I could host it on our own server

I have some good news [apache.org] - although they don't seem to actually have a really ready yet.

Just when my "beyond a jobless recovery" knol... (-1, Offtopic)

Paul Fernhout (109597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144474)

got going with 11085 page views so far: http://knol.google.com/k/beyond-a-jobless-recovery [google.com]
"This article explores the issue of a "Jobless Recovery" mainly from a heterodox economic perspective. It emphasizes the implications of ideas by Marshall Brain and others that improvements in robotics, automation, design, and voluntary social networks are fundamentally changing the structure of the economic landscape. It outlines towards the end four major alternatives to mainstream economic practice (a basic income, a gift economy, stronger local subsistence economies, and resource-based planning). These alternatives could be used in combination to address what, even as far back as 1964, has been described as a breaking "income-through-jobs link". This link between jobs and income is breaking because of the declining value of most paid human labor relative to capital investments in automation and better design. Or, as is now the case, the value of paid human labor like at some newspapers or universities is also declining relative to the output of voluntary social networks such as for digital content production (like represented by this document). It is suggested that we will need to fundamentally reevaluate our economic theories and practices to adjust to these new realities emerging from exponential trends in technology and society."

Wave (frown) = Sun Microsystems (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144684)

It was the most Sun Microsystems like thing Google has ever did.

Also an angel backed company I started folded because Google didn't keep their promise to open source wave.

In 2009 I was at Google I/O when Vic Gundotra got up and stage and enthusiastically said that Wave was going to be completely open sourced, entirely and without reservation. That never happened. I think because it had dependencies on stuff Google didn't want to open source. Instead Google announced they would develop an open source clone of Wave called Wave in a Box, later renamed Apache Wave.

To this day, if you download the Wave source code and compile it from the tip of the 3 different repositories it's stored in (git, svn, and an old hg repo) the build is broken. If you get it compiling, it does not work. It was the worst, most mismanaged tech program in Google's short history. As someone who still has a fairly big interest in the tech of Wave it's kind of disappointing to not see the market / community hold Google to account on this. A big disappointment.

Re:Wave (frown) = Sun Microsystems (1, Informative)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145014)

If you started a company who's success was dependent on a third party with no contractual obligation giving away something for free, you deserve to fail. For sheer stupidity of not having a backup plan, if nothing else.

Search, Maps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144758)

That's about all Google can do. GMail? Please, it's nothing special that can't be gotten anywhere else.

So apart from search which is getting more useless every day because of those fake farm links websites, and maps, there's nothing you can rely on from Google.

With so many dead projects, I'm never touching anything from them ever again. That includes Google+, which is probably going to close in a few weeks.

Page (1)

Art3x (973401) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144812)

It could just be part of Larry Page's first year as CEO. Google may or may not keep shuttering projects at this rate.

Re:Page (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38145354)

Google may or may not keep shuttering projects at this rate.

Wow, way to go out on a limb with that prediction!

Google has been infiltrated. (2, Interesting)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145220)

It's like that episode of TNG, "Conspiracy" [memory-alpha.org] . The leadership at Google has been infiltrated by aliens (or bean counters), and they're suddenly making decisions based on very different criteria. Google's making money hand-over-fist--they don't need to cut projects to pad the bottom line. But that's exactly what they're doing now--that and ruining the UIs of their best services. Google's eventual decline has begun sooner than expected. They're abandoning the formula that's gotten them where they are. Time to prep the lifeboats and prepare our own ships.

Beta (1)

sunfly (1248694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145326)

The release products before they are complete. It would help if they waited until products were ready for prime time before releasing them.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?