Paul Buchheit: Four Reasons Google is still Awesome

Post by krschultz » Wed, Dec 22, 2010, 3:46 PM UTC

brk wrote: post #88

random42 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Project Natal/Kinect 2. Surface Table Both are good innovations, on which media would go over gaga, had they come from Apple/Google.

Yes, but both of those are (I believe) technologies developed outside of Microsoft that were then purchased. While Google and Apple do also purchase technologies, they seem to produce more interesting in-house products than Microsoft. At least in my perception. I can't recall the last time that Microsoft actually developed internally and rolled out a significant "game changer" device or software.

Post by babeKnuth » Wed, Dec 22, 2010, 5:08 PM UTC

mike-cardwell wrote: post #82

antirez wrote: post #79

What I think Google could hugely benefit from, is stop hiring too much PHD & engineering-type people. I think they have a cultural problem that has the effect of many consumer products they develop (where the technology is not the only important ingredient) to don't work: you can't rule the "social" world from the nerd-point-of-view, seriously. Get creative/artistic people into the mix, and Google could turn into som…

Engineers are creative and artistic people.

Post by babeKnuth » Wed, Dec 22, 2010, 5:19 PM UTC

known wrote: post #72

One word: Intrapreneurship

Post by khafra » Wed, Dec 22, 2010, 5:38 PM UTC

mkramlich wrote: post #81

sriramk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft fails constantly and people accept it? :) I would argue the exact opposite - Microsoft succeeds consistently in a lot of very measurable ways but isn't given enough credit for it (that a Google/Apple would get for doing the very same thing).

The general pattern I've seen with Microsoft is they mostly just copy other people's successes. Sometimes their copies do okay, or well enough. Sometimes they fail. But due to their huge install base and lock-in effects and user inertia and huge cash pile they have the ability to muddle onward. In some ways, Microsoft treats Apple as a sort of external UI R&D department, one with the wonderful quality that Microsoft…

Post by intdev » Wed, Dec 22, 2010, 7:02 PM UTC

mccutchen wrote: post #67

sriramk wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinect was on the top of my list. When I used Kinect, it seemed quite magical (and I'm jaded enough that few pieces of tech makes me go that way). I really suspect a Kinect from Apple would have been handled differently.

You're probably right. But you've got to admit that Apple itself makes its products seem much more magical than Microsoft does. They do such a good job that it's really easy for the media to pick it up and run with it. Nearly all of Microsoft's own promotional stuff is extraordinarily bad, especially in comparison to Apple.