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

201–210 of 301 posts

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#201

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

atdt wrote: post #186
RestlessMind wrote: post #175

At this point, I have started seeing Google as a miniature of contemporary SV (with all its good and bad stuff). Lots of random products thrown out to the user only to be cancelled in a few years? Check! Occasional massively successful (and actually useful) products? Check! Lip service and virtue signaling for fads du jour (eg. diversity)? Check! Actual behavior hinting towards prioritizing profits over all else (eg.…

Could you please explain what you mean when you say diversity is a fad du jour? I'd like to believe you didn't mean to say something this ugly.

Gasp! Thoughtcrime alert! Call the police!

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#203

Post by eitland »

kayoone wrote: post #182
n42 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree but I think it's a false dichotomy. At least with a startup you can count on them to, well, try.

but most lack the financial stability of google and could disappear rather quickly because of that.

Look for companies like Basecamp, companies that arent looking to be aquired or get unicorn status but to stay soundly profitable year-after-year.

This was one of the reasons I loved WhatsApp so much early on when that seemed to be the way it was going: a healthy >1B USD company with no dependency except on users.

As the WhatsApp story and many other tells us this isn't always safe, but it should be a safer bet than anyone clearly going the "unicorn or nothing" way from the start.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#204

Post by eitland »

tempay wrote: post #178
nkingsy wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like these non billion user products could be sold off rather than killed. The cost to ready the software to live outside google would be worth it for the goodwill alone.

Would this actually be practical? From what little I know about google infrastructure everything is dependent on their in house tooling and spinning projects off is a massive amount of work.

I think the point is that Google has been burning goodwill for a decade now.

It might not be visible yet, just like the ice cube who has been heated from -100°C to -5°C and still doesn't melt, but at this point it would take very little energy to thaw Googles goodwill reserves.

Anything they can do to return to former status as "defender of the Internet" might be worth huge investments for that alone.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#205

Post by Androider »

rurban wrote: post #200
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.

What about to Go? Or Flutter? They are the best in their niche.

Go is probably pretty safe, but even internally at Google Flutter is still sort of flying under the radar and nobody knows (or cares) about it too much. But if leadership decides to take a look at what the heck is going on in that corner of the organization... that would be a hard one to explain.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#206

Post by z3t4 »

n42 wrote: post #163

What is humorous to me is that Google is hurting users who typically have the most influence over SaaS integrations at their company (managers) by taking away a tool that helped them deal with the part of their job most of them hate the most (hiring/recruiting). If it hasn't been obvious yet to managers watching this, Google's software is not a safe investment for you to make for your company. It is only a matter of…

The cost of switching to another platform should also be calculated into the price when you choose platform.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#207

Post by jldugger »

dmix wrote: post #107
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 c…

> $380 million they paid is no acquihire.

So, they're just shovelling the money into a furnace? Or perhaps you just mean that Google buying the company a member of the board founded isn't arms-length enough to justify the term, and this falls into some form of theft or bribery?

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#208

Post by vel0city »

zonidjan wrote: post #188
manigandham wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It integrate into G-Suite but Hire is a separate application with its own subscription. I think it's clear that the G-Suite core services (email, calendar, productivity) are not going to be shutdown.

Until you realize that Hangouts is a core service which is being shutdown.

Hangouts Meet (the core Google Suite version) isn't being shut down and is already pretty separate from the classic Google Hangouts in many ways.

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#209

Post by Kiro »

As usual a lot of talk in these threads from people who have actually not used the product in question but just love bashing Google for "cancelling everything".

Re: Sunsetting Hire

#210

Post by nine_k »

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…

This is quite strange behavior for a company with colossal cash coffers. They could keep up a project like that alive for years, just to keep loyal users content.

The fact that they are not doing things like that, repeatedly, is a bad sign for me. Well, at least they seem to keep search, maps, and gmail around for some time, because these obviously generate money for their main line of business, advertising.

Post reply on HN