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

Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 219 posts

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#181

Post by alasdair_ »

abalone wrote: post #34
mantap wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems way more idealistic somehow. More likely, with a more standard corporate governance Google will begin to rot from within. Apple certainly made more profits under Cook than Jobs, but innovation has slowed to a crawl and he has failed to diversify Apple away from having one product (instead he just added a bunch of accessory products and services). The last thing Google needs is to double down on ads, it tak…

> innovation has slowed to a crawl This is so typical of Apple criticism. They did do well with the iPhone and Mac that now any new innovations seem boring in comparison. It’s wrong. The Apple Watch came out under Cook. That is more than an “accessory.” It’s a new platform, new OS variant, etc. It’s dominating smart watches. The AirPods are pretty innovative in terms of the fine grained details that have made them su…

Apple is definitely working on AR glasses for 2022 to 2023 release dates. Facebook and Microsoft also have AR projects (Microsoft have actually shipped of course).

Innovation at Apple scale takes time. Let’s see what happens with AR.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#182

Post by hammock »

dzdt wrote: post #5

As usual, I like Matt Levine's take. [1] Page and Brin ran Alphabet as a highly funded system of moonshot programs with near-infinite runway to make profits, which is unusual or unique. Basically it only worked that way because Page and Brin were idealistic visionary gazillionaires who were bored of thinking about the somewhat dirty business of selling targetted ads. With a more standard corporate governance under a…

>the expectation is a more standard corporate focus on making profits from its ventures in some defined timeline.

That's a reasonable prediction. It's the way Sundar started running Google anyway (demanding profits of the non-ads products or killing them).

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#183

Post by JCharante »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #127
abalone wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> innovation has slowed to a crawl This is so typical of Apple criticism. They did do well with the iPhone and Mac that now any new innovations seem boring in comparison. It’s wrong. The Apple Watch came out under Cook. That is more than an “accessory.” It’s a new platform, new OS variant, etc. It’s dominating smart watches. The AirPods are pretty innovative in terms of the fine grained details that have made them su…

You forgot Apple Pay. That's a whole new market for Apple — and seems to be doing well?

But Pay is so common. You've got Google Pay, Apple Pay, AliPay, and WeChat Pay. It's a good addition because it adds something that was really missing from the ecosystem but it's just really something that is expected.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#184

Post by scarface74 »

petra wrote: post #170
scarface74 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much “longer term”? Compare Apple’s, Microsoft’s, or even Amazon’s revenue mix since 2001. They have all diversified. Google still makes 90%+ of its profits selling ads.

Selling ads does speak nothing of diversification. In 2001 Google probably only sold search ads. Today they sell ads on so many digital places, some of those they own. As for the question of "long term" - Google X was founded only 9 years ago. That probably a reasonable time for a drug startup to show sucsess. And they recently started testing self-driving cars with no safety driver , with real passengers. So they're…

In the last 9 years, Apple has introduced two products that are probably larger generators of revenue than the iPod.

Microsoft has released Azure.

Saying that a Google sells ads in more places is about as “diversified” as saying Apple sells iPhones on more carriers.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#185

Post by 01100011 »

enitihas wrote: post #58
abalone wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> innovation has slowed to a crawl This is so typical of Apple criticism. They did do well with the iPhone and Mac that now any new innovations seem boring in comparison. It’s wrong. The Apple Watch came out under Cook. That is more than an “accessory.” It’s a new platform, new OS variant, etc. It’s dominating smart watches. The AirPods are pretty innovative in terms of the fine grained details that have made them su…

Correct. People think that stuff like iPhone can just be created, if there is enough will and innovation. The iPhone is the most successful consumer electronics product of all time, and might also be the most profitable product on an yearly average basis. Failure to recreate that is not bad. Expecting any company to keep churning out things like the iPhone would be too harsh.

I dunno, but it seems like the iPhone was a product of many technological advances coming together at once, and Apple's key addition was to execute it in a way that made it appealing to the masses. So, I don't expect Apple to make a teleporter, or home fusion energy, or something that doesn't exist. I expect them to take something that is possible, like VR/AR, like videoconferencing, like IPTV.. even just computers and cellphones, and to execute them in a way that makes them the best designed product in the industry. Lately, it seems like they've been failing to do that. At this point, it seems like they're just a fashion brand whose products lack a compelling advantage over their competitors' products. Apple needs a guy like Steve Jobs to raise the standards and drive the company to meet them. Under Cook, it seems like they're sliding into mediocrity.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#186

Post by mantap »

scarface74 wrote: post #65
mantap wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems way more idealistic somehow. More likely, with a more standard corporate governance Google will begin to rot from within. Apple certainly made more profits under Cook than Jobs, but innovation has slowed to a crawl and he has failed to diversify Apple away from having one product (instead he just added a bunch of accessory products and services). The last thing Google needs is to double down on ads, it tak…

Since Tim has taken charge, they’ve become much more diversified. The watch and the AirPod business is larger and will probably be longer lasting than the iPod business, the iPad is much more than a big iPhone, and they are in services. Compare this chart to Google’s https://sixcolors.com/images/content/2019/financials-2019-7-... The iPhone was a once in a lifetime thing. Even in 2007 there were 1 billion phones a ye…

How many Android users buy Apple watches and airpods? They are primarily accessories to the iPhone, not standalone products.

What limits Apple to the electronics market? It's been clear for a long time that they need to grow outside of electronics. Apple's value is in its design and brand. They could be so much more than an electronics company, under different leadership.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#187

Post by enitihas »

01100011 wrote: post #185
enitihas wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. People think that stuff like iPhone can just be created, if there is enough will and innovation. The iPhone is the most successful consumer electronics product of all time, and might also be the most profitable product on an yearly average basis. Failure to recreate that is not bad. Expecting any company to keep churning out things like the iPhone would be too harsh.

I dunno, but it seems like the iPhone was a product of many technological advances coming together at once, and Apple's key addition was to execute it in a way that made it appealing to the masses. So, I don't expect Apple to make a teleporter, or home fusion energy, or something that doesn't exist. I expect them to take something that is possible, like VR/AR, like videoconferencing, like IPTV.. even just computers a…

Curiously, what other products launched by any other company have had a similar effect as the iPhone.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#188

Post by mantap »

JCharante wrote: post #183
JKCalhoun wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot Apple Pay. That's a whole new market for Apple — and seems to be doing well?

But Pay is so common. You've got Google Pay, Apple Pay, AliPay, and WeChat Pay. It's a good addition because it adds something that was really missing from the ecosystem but it's just really something that is expected.

It's also not really any better than tapping your card against the reader, which is what most people in UK do.

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#189

Post by scarface74 »

mantap wrote: post #186
scarface74 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since Tim has taken charge, they’ve become much more diversified. The watch and the AirPod business is larger and will probably be longer lasting than the iPod business, the iPad is much more than a big iPhone, and they are in services. Compare this chart to Google’s https://sixcolors.com/images/content/2019/financials-2019-7-... The iPhone was a once in a lifetime thing. Even in 2007 there were 1 billion phones a ye…

How many Android users buy Apple watches and airpods? They are primarily accessories to the iPhone, not standalone products. What limits Apple to the electronics market? It's been clear for a long time that they need to grow outside of electronics. Apple's value is in its design and brand. They could be so much more than an electronics company, under different leadership.

And how has that worked in the past?

AOL/TimeWarner

General Electric/Universal/Synchrony Bank

AT&T/DirecTV

Google/Motorola

....

Re: Google management shuffle points to retreat from Alphabet experiment

#190

Post by RomanBob »

ngold wrote: post #151
dzdt wrote: post #5

As usual, I like Matt Levine's take. [1] Page and Brin ran Alphabet as a highly funded system of moonshot programs with near-infinite runway to make profits, which is unusual or unique. Basically it only worked that way because Page and Brin were idealistic visionary gazillionaires who were bored of thinking about the somewhat dirty business of selling targetted ads. With a more standard corporate governance under a…

"There is a bit of a walking-away-from-Omelas element to this—you get to think about driverless cars and human immortality because in some dingy basement ad metrics are being tortured—and it was a lot easier to forget the, uh, all the internet stuff in 2015 than it is in 2019." One of the best and most tragic short fiction stories ever written. It is scary how accurate the metaphor is.

Are you referring to walking away from omelas?

I don't see why people think that story is in anyway interesting or tragic. It's non-sensical, when reality isn't so. It's only deep if you have never read an account of a war or read history or basically know anything about how anything works outside of your suburb.

Post reply on HN