Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 18th May 2013 21:33 UTC
Google Why does Google get so much credit in the technology industry? Why, despite the company's many obvious failings, do many geeks and enthusiasts still hold a somewhat positive view on the all-knowing technology giant? A specific talk at Google I/O this week provides the answer.
Thread beginning with comment 562016
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

google is good in recognizing what is *not* competing with their core business. they don't do preventive actions. hacking devices is (still) not harming any of their business + it's good for reputation.

but they deliberately killed rss (remember google reader) and with new google hangouts replacing google talk they show how much they care about xmpp.

supporting these technologies is about supporting the very specific ecosystem of interoperability which is affecting a waaay more people and business than few guys running ubuntu on google glass (which would happen anyway with or without google support)

they can do this kind of control because it's not that lawyers or mba people are in charge of making the decisions but engineers (who are much more into long term goals). that's certainly better (at the moment) than most of the other actors but that uniqueness shouldn't be misrecognized as generosity.

good test is the timeline of their decisions or what exactly they do when they are able to fuck something up for their own interest. google like every other company uses its monopolistic power whenever they can.

Reply Score: 9

marcell Member since:

or tony hirst said the same in much better way:
"It's not just [..] Google+ [..] doesn't do RSS. It’s not just because Google is shutting down the Google Reader backbone that powers a lot of RSS and Atom syndication feed services (and leaves me wondering: how long is Feedburner for this world? It’s not just that geocoding done within Fusion Tables is not exported – if you look at a KML feed from Google Fusion Tables, you’ll find there’s no lat-long data there. It’s not just that Google is deprecating gadgets from spreadsheets, which as Martin points out means that if I want to visualise data in a spreadsheet all I’m going to be left with is Google’s crappy charts… It’s not just that Google moved away from using CalDav to support calendar interoperability… It’s not just that Google is moving away from using the XMPP instant messaging protocol...It’s not just that Google uses tax efficient corporate structures to minimise its tax bill, because lots of companies do that…

It’s not just any one of these things, taken on its own merits… it’s all of them taken together

Embrace, extend, extinguish”… where have we heard that before?"

Reply Parent Score: 4

WereCatf Member since:

So, you're trying to say that Google should have no right to shutter services they don't feel suit their purposes as long as those services are used by even just one person or those services are based open standards? That's just silly.

The standards and specs, like e.g. RSS or XMPP, do not disappear anywhere even if Google stops using them so there's no "embrace and extinguish" here at all, and if Google feels they can better achieve their goals by moving to something different then by all means. I am an avid user of Google Reader and I don't know what to move to once it's shuttered, but even I can see that it's a wholly separate, secluded tool away from Google's core services and the appeal for Google to implement the functionality in a different way so that they can bring it as a part of Google+/Search.

Reply Parent Score: 8

JAlexoid Member since:

A) Killing off Reader is the opposite of locking in. It's more like relinquishing the market to actually be open. Let alone with just two clicks I moved from Reader to Feedly... if that's lock-in, then what is not?
B) The geocoding information is not Google's to give away... It's like asking Google to give away the data behind Google Maps or allow blanket downloads of YouTube content.
C) Deprecating stuff and removing stuff is not lock-in.
D) Yes they removed CalDAV and provided an alternative API.
E) How is tax related to lock-in?

Reply Parent Score: 4