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

Google Flight Search

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 288 posts

Re: Google Flight Search

#201

Post by awj »

maratd wrote: post #96
rhygar wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like it was built quickly. Why is there a giant search bar at the top of the screen? I came here to look for flights, not to search the web. Why is there a giant map at the top of the screen? I already know where I want to go. I don't need to look at a map to decide which destination I want. This part seems like more of a tech demo than anything. The whole UI looks like it was designed by an engineer. For ex…

> Why is there a giant search bar at the top of the screen? This will be (if it isn't already) integrated with their search product. In other words, it'll be a part of search. You'll search for "flight from ny to sf" and that's what you'll see. Perfectly natural for them to have a consistent UI in their search product. > Why is there a giant map at the top of the screen? It's interactive. Try pulling the marker from…

> Try pulling the marker from one location to another.

For me it just drags the map (Chrome 13.0.782.220 / OS X).

> I may have a general area of where I want to end up, but this lets you choose exactly where through a visual map. Again, very cool.

...is a map really helpful for this? How often do you want to go somewhere but not know the name? I'd rather they take all of that map space and use it for something else. I wouldn't mind something that says "hey, you could save $x on this flight if you went to $nearby_airport instead of the one you're on."

Re: Google Flight Search

#202

Post by timr »

haberman wrote: post #188
throwaway32 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said profit was their only motivation, but it is the reason they are a corporation, and not a charity. I refer you to the comment above by jey What Google "wants" as an entity is different from what the individual component humans want. Although Sergey is an obviously important influence at Google, he is not Google.

You said profit was the "first" motivation. You haven't even justified that. Saying that a corporation has to at least break even to avoid being a charity is a far cry from your previous grandstanding. Just because a corporation has to make money doesn't mean that money is the "first" motivation for every decision. It doesn't explain why Google (not Sergey, Google) pulled out of China.

Um...they chose to go into China in the first place, and they didn't do it for charity work. A lot of people thought that was pretty evil.

In any case, the parent doesn't have to justify anything, because he's stating a relatively well-known argument: in the US, there's an obligation for corporate executives to maximize shareholder value. This point is debated (http://www.linkedin.com/answers/law-legal/corporate-law/corp...), but not to the extent that you're claiming.

Re: Google Flight Search

#203

Post by kiwidrew »

esutton wrote: post #195

what will be a game changing tool, and something befitting the resources of google, would be to pair flights together that are cheaper than what is offered by the airline. for instance: flying from NY to LA. Airlines sell this route non stop, or through one of their hubs. But imagine if a flight search can figure out that a oneway flight from ny to new orleans on Delta and than a flight from new orleans on AA, had a…

It's unlikely that the Delta fare from NYC to MSY and the American fare from MSY to LAX permit end-on-end combination with each other, so it would have to be issued as two separate tickets. What happens if your Delta flight to New Orleans is delayed and you miss your connecting flight to Los Angeles on American? Neither carrier is going to offer you any compensation, and your travel insurance probably has a clause which excludes misconnections caused by an airline's late arrival.

There are occasions when this strategy produces good results, however: last year I needed a last-minute one way flight from a small southeastern city (TYS / Knoxville) to San Francisco, and the fares were extremely high ($800+). But flights to Orlando were very cheap due to competition from low-cost leisure carriers, and the last-minute fares from Orlando (MCO) to San Francisco were quite reasonable. I booked, on a single ticket and flying on a single airline the entire way, TYS-IAD-MCO-IAD-DEN-SFO. This gave me a TYS-MCO fare plus an MCO-SFO fare, which was hundreds of dollars cheaper than the more direct TYS-DEN-SFO. At the time, saving money was a lot more important than getting to San Francisco a couple of hours earlier. A cunning plan that cannot fail!

Except that I missed my first flight of the morning due to an overnight road closure that blocked my only way of leaving the house. By the time that I got to the airport, my originally booked flight had already left and I was faced with a very long wait for the next flight to IAD, which virtually guaranteed I wouldn't even make it to San Francisco that day. It was only through a combination of charisma and blind luck that I managed to convince the airline to reroute me direct through Denver, which is completely against company policy. They only charged me the $50 same-day standby fee.

Needless to say, I would never sell that sort of a ticket to the general public. Far too many different ways in which things could go horribly wrong. It's also likely that the airlines would promptly revoke your ticketing privileges with them were they to discover you were routinely issuing these sorts of tickets.

Re: Google Flight Search

#204

Post by sharmajai »

crenshaw wrote: post #198
sharmajai wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am reminded time and time again how much "Don't be evil" mantra still holds for Google whenever other evil corporations do things like suing companies for looks of a product, primarily to hamper competition, and when they take cut out of sale made on their platform without adding any value whatsoever to the payment platform. When was the last time Google abused its set of patents to screw competition? There are so…

Patents are just one way to be evil. Another way to be evil might be to let Canadian companies advertise illegally to sell prescription drugs in the US. From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/24/google-settles-phar... "Investigators snared Google's ad system by creating seven undercover websites offering prescription drugs to be sold without a prescription or the completion of an online medical questionnaire, Mar…

Google is not law enforcement and thank god for that. Unlike apple which strives to be the moral leader of the world that nobody needs.

What google did here was illegal and it paid the price for it, but I don't see anybody getting directly harmed by google's decision, it was not google selling the drugs themselves or that the drugs were not upto the standards.

Besides by the same reasoning google should block all the illegal torrent sites, or wikileaks for that matter. Always remember your truth is not everybody else's truth, and it is better that the world's leading search engine does not take sides for you.

Re: Google Flight Search

#205

Post by maratd »

awj wrote: post #201
maratd wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is there a giant search bar at the top of the screen? This will be (if it isn't already) integrated with their search product. In other words, it'll be a part of search. You'll search for "flight from ny to sf" and that's what you'll see. Perfectly natural for them to have a consistent UI in their search product. > Why is there a giant map at the top of the screen? It's interactive. Try pulling the marker from…

> Try pulling the marker from one location to another. For me it just drags the map (Chrome 13.0.782.220 / OS X). > I may have a general area of where I want to end up, but this lets you choose exactly where through a visual map. Again, very cool. ...is a map really helpful for this? How often do you want to go somewhere but not know the name? I'd rather they take all of that map space and use it for something else.…

> For me it just drags the map (Chrome 13.0.782.220 / OS X).

I'm on Chrome 15 (dev), which probably explains it.

> is a map really helpful for this?

I like maps. You never know what you'll notice on one.

Re: Google Flight Search

#206

Post by orblivion »

bradleyland wrote: post #31
cletus wrote: post #20

Internally, this has been around for a little while (disclaimer: I work for Google but not on anything related to this). What continues to impress me about Google is: 1. Just how quickly this was built (really, it was quick); and 2. Google wants you to use our services because they're compelling not because we don't give you any other choice (ie "Don't be evil"). Sure there are limits to what it currently does but I…

Let's be honest. Google wants us to use their services because the better they understand us, the better they can advertise to us. That's the profit model at Google. I don't begrudge them for it either. You've got to turn a profit if you want to keep the lights on. I don't mean any offense, but the "Don't be evil" mantra is growing a bit tired. Evil is a strong word, and "not being evil" is a pretty low bar, IMO.

I think you're taking the "evil" part a little to seriously. Is Microsoft really "evil" by pressuring you into a tie-in to their products? They're not killing anybody. They're not defrauding anybody. They're creating an annoyance for their customers. That's a far cry from evil, but in half-serious Internet jargon it's "evil".

Re: Google Flight Search

#207

Post by billboebel »

tedkalaw wrote: post #118

Is there anyway to do one-way flights? I really like it so far but cannot for the life of me figure out if one-way is possible.

I can't find it either. I would have actually used it today since I found it right as I was about to search for a flight on Kayak... but w/o one-way I can't use it.

Re: Google Flight Search

#208

Post by rapind »

throwaway32 wrote: post #114
breck wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree. Google wants us to use its services because at its core is a bunch of engineers that simply want to make the world better.

the first motivation of any for profit corporation, especially one as large and successful as Google, is profit. That is their entire reason for existence, don't fool yourself into believing otherwise.

Google has a dual-class stock structure which gives class B holders (Schmidt, Page, Brin) 10 votes per share v.s. 1 vote per share for the rest.

This is relevant to your statement, because while it's pretty much a requirement for a publicly held company to pursue profit at any cost, it's not necessarily the case for a company run by the people that have a disproportionately large number of votes on major issues.

I'm pretty sure they still have over 50% of the votes, so together they can decide how Google will handle tough moral issues without any support from other shareholders.

I would argue that it's entirely plausible that a couple altruistic billionaires will sacrifice a few dollars in pursuit of non-evil (their opinion of non-evil mind you).

Re: Google Flight Search

#209

Post by waqf »

_urga wrote: post #125
bradleyland wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest. Google wants us to use their services because the better they understand us, the better they can advertise to us. That's the profit model at Google. I don't begrudge them for it either. You've got to turn a profit if you want to keep the lights on. I don't mean any offense, but the "Don't be evil" mantra is growing a bit tired. Evil is a strong word, and "not being evil" is a pretty low bar, IMO.

If you drove past a restaurant that had a big sign outside that said "no cockroaches here", what would you associate with it? I have always been amazed that some people would consider "don't be evil" to be a motto with any power to motivate or lead people, since it ventures no strong opinion, and points in no clear direction. "Do good" is far more costly, less likely to be politically correct, and more likely to invi…

> If you drove past a restaurant that had a big sign outside that said "no cockroaches here", what would you associate with it?

In a town in which I expected from experience to encounter a few cockroaches during any visit to any restaurant, I would find that a reasonable, positive, encouraging message to advertise with.

Re: Google Flight Search

#210

Post by waqf »

rhygar wrote: post #89
awj wrote: post #70

To me, that map seems like a very confusing bit of UI. The cities themselves are really tiny interaction points, I'm a relatively experienced FPS gamer and hitting those points accurately involves more fumbling than it should. You cannot drag departure/arrival pins. Streetview kind of taught me that this should be a mechanism for manipulating this sort of location reference. The big one, though, is that layovers are…

The whole thing has "designed by an engineer" all over it. From hidden UI that reveals itself by clicking/hovering on various elements, to the entire process being limited to one screen which various pop-out elements and transformations. There is little consistency in the design, and poor or no usage of contrast to separate information visually. When clicking the large blue button to the right of a flight, several ro…

Outbound/return is standard terminology all over the travel industry. Including in UK and US, and for trains and for planes: I'm surprised you're not familiar with it.

"Depart" means something different: it refers to the beginning of each leg of the journey. Its opposite is "arrive". So you might have an outbound leg which departs from LAX and arrives in SFO, and then a return leg which departs from SFO and arrives in LAX.

Post reply on HN