Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sunsetting Hire

support.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 301 posts

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#101

Post by chillfox »

misiti3780 wrote: post #42
markmark wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are going to? They already are. I will no longer consider a Google product for work purposes. Even for big stuff they are committed to like their cloud offering there is no confidence that individual features within it they you rely on won't get killed off.

you dont use gmail or google apps for business? i think their mail and docs/sheets are not a risk. everything else i wouldnt place a bet on

Microsoft, Zoho, and AWS all have a mail/docs offering that one can count on to stick around.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#102

Post by machiste77 »

amitutk wrote: post #87

Phew ... tragedy averted. I ranted earlier about them [0]. We didn't use google Hire exactly for this reason. And they were more expensive than existing software while providing few features with less polish. And yes, they had a more aggressive sales force pushing the product, who would cold call, play the discount game, etc. This could have been a good value add to the G-Suite. Alas. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com…

Same. I'm from a product/tech background and working with a People (aka HR) team these days. Google Hire looked very appealing since we're on Gsuite but now I'm really happy that my spidey-senses told me not to take the risk.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19556214

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#103

Post by chillfox »

jvolkman wrote: post #100
misiti3780 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you dont use gmail or google apps for business? i think their mail and docs/sheets are not a risk. everything else i wouldnt place a bet on

I'd consider those products safe since Google is completely dependent on them internally.

until someday they aren't

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#104

Post by dpandya »

nexuist wrote: post #93

"It was built mostly for small to medium sized businesses, with a price that ranged from $200 to $400 a month depending on how many G Suite licenses you needed." Hm. Does that price seem too high? When I think small business I think mom and pop restaurants or utility stores. Would they be willing to pay so much per month just to hire people which they'll inevitably have to pay for anyways? Do small and medium busines…

The target market for Google Hire was probably Lever's (https://www.lever.co) customers, i.e. mostly funded startups and other companies hiring white collar employees. For these businesses, $200-400/month for an Applicant Tracking System is pretty inline with market. Lever's pricing is higher as far as I've seen.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#105

Post by jmtame »

blaisio wrote: post #11

Does anyone have recommendations for good alternatives? We were sure this would be a good idea when moving to it. :(

Check out at agave.com, it starts out free and gives you full API access to your own data.

Edit: disclaimer, I’m founder and CEO there.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#106

Post by [deleted] »

wheelerwj wrote: post #98
nexuist wrote: post #93

"It was built mostly for small to medium sized businesses, with a price that ranged from $200 to $400 a month depending on how many G Suite licenses you needed." Hm. Does that price seem too high? When I think small business I think mom and pop restaurants or utility stores. Would they be willing to pay so much per month just to hire people which they'll inevitably have to pay for anyways? Do small and medium busines…

small business is defined as anything up to 500 people. mom and pop, restaurants are in the same group but it covers a pretty big swath.

[deleted]

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#107

Post by dmix »

cbisnett wrote: post #9

I wonder if Google has unintentionally created a self-reinforcing feedback loop where potential customers don’t trust the products will be supported for more than 24 months which leads to limited adoption which in turn leads to the products being canceled before 24 months. Pair that with other HN comments that have described a situation where it’s easier to get promoted from launching a product vs maintaining an exis…

It takes most startups years to really perfect an idea. But that’s not really the problem here, they bought it as a proven idea and said it was successful and being used. it seems they just don’t see it as a business that boosts their bottom line enough when they could be using the same talent elsewhere in the firm. Opportunity costs etc.

Maybe they don’t like being #5 best product in the category or something.

The constant churn of companies getting acquired by Google continually justifies the anger on HN after a Google acquisition of their favourite products IMO, there’s a high probability they’ll shut it down even when Google claims they want to continue the business and even if it’s successful by a lot of other business’s standards.

$380 million they paid is no acquihire.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#108

Post by truncate »

dmix wrote: post #95

If it was successful why not sell it and let it live on?

I can think of two reasons:

1. The code can be tightly tied to their internal systems and infra. It may just be more expensive to separate it out, not to mention engineers at Google are smart enough to avoid such projects (I mean, separate it out so that they can sell it) with no value to career.

2. Its success (of whatever scale) is probably tied to Google branding. Once it goes away, its probably as good as yet another job listing site which isn't super hard to make.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#109

Post by iamsb »

adventured wrote: post #80
bigiain wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% yes. If it's not ad sales or search - I don't trust Google enough to base long term projects on it. _Maybe_ add gmail to that, perhaps. Possibly Suite (since at least they charge for it). For me at least, Google Cloud is still not quite emerged from "interesting, but not sure it'll be around long term yet" status. I'll use it as part of a multicloud architecture, or for prototypes/short-term projects. But I have…

YouTube is of course obviously safe. Google Cloud as a whole is also safe. It's the individual given products you have to worry about disappearing. It's already a very large business. Even in third place it's going to be at least a $15-$20 billion business over time. They're not shutting that down. https://www.businessinsider.com/google-cloud-arr-earnings-8-...

Given the speed with which youtube is demonetizing people or outright banning them, not sure how much longer it will sustain though.
Post reply on HN