71–80 of 259 posts
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
What could be just fine small company doing their product is canned and engineers are moved to look for another big thing or to support other big thing
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
- Support shiny thing -> it’s not incentivised, valued, or promotion-worthy
I don’t think it’s a necessarily a value judgement on support or maintenance being easy (it’s not, necessarily) - it’s just not Google’s current culture/process to value this work.
If Google switched to incentivising (something like) cumulative user engagement or happiness, it would both incentivise longer-term thinking (as growth in users and also growth in engagement over time would be valued) and also probably help solve their reputation for poor customer service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nreal Air is one. Others are launching too. Without the AR parts it is lighter. Works well as plain monitor without any support software. Only slight problem I have with this is it heats up a bit.
I've seen a few adverts for the Nreal Air, and it does look interesting. For $380 though I'd like to try them once before buying (and I don't trust the impartiality of any YouTube review people). Do you know if it's possible to try them anywhere?
Innovators dilemma. You were early to market, you did all the work, and no one wanted the product. What do you do? Keep going? Or give up from exhaustion? This is the unfortunate situation with many who tackle new spaces like Mobile, VR and AR. Google will no doubt re-enter the space, but only after it's been validated. And that's totally fine. Expect Google to produce quality hardware and software at a time when the…
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would having the feeling of watching a movie alone in a dark room while actually sitting on an airplane not be a form of virtual reality?
I've seen many of these clever VR headsets do extra stuff that I don't care about, like allow you to look around a virtual cinema or see other virtual people who might want to virtually watch a movie with me or some nonsense. I don't want any of that. As the adjacent commenter surmised, I just want a television strapped to my head. I don't want other tourists in my peripheral vision, or screaming babies in my ears. A…
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
The same mindset can be seen everywhere, even in opensource: -Build shiny new replacement -> HN front page, exposure, kudos -Fix bugs in existing thing -> No recognition Rewriting is so much more fun than hunting after obscure issues
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
And to make working on new stuff a bit less incentivized, promotions to higher levels need to see at least some realized growth and not just getting v0 out these days as far as I know.
At this point, I think issue is not about products Google build, it is about how Google put their incentives in place. - Build new shiny thing -> promoted - Support shiny thing -> it's not difficult, everyone can do it This type of culture is influencing future direction of Google products, they put together awesome team, solve problem and get from 0 to 1, then team moves on, others don't have incentive to make 1 to…
This is a meme that people love and there's some truth to it, but also a number of ways in which it's inaccurate. Sure you can get promoted for launching a new thing, but you can also get promoted for fixing a first pass implementation, for scaling something from a small user base to a large user base, and so on, as long as you can show the "impact" of the change – whether that's revenue, savings, productivity, impro…
Which is far easier if the thing is brand new and didn't exist yesterday, then attribution is straightforward, and we're to square one.