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

Why I Left Google

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 322 posts

Re: Why I Left Google

#51

Post by pvarangot »

DanI-S wrote: post #38
AmericanOP wrote: post #21

Google should focus on their product- the search bar. Google Plus Me should mean I can find anything of mine via the search bar. If I want to find a file on my computer, I should be able to search for it using google.com instead of spotlight. I should be able to do this even if I'm not on my normal machine. It's not just desktop files. If I want to show my dad pictures of my trip to Cabo, I shouldn't have to log into…

I don't think Google /want/ you to have any files on your computer. They could have built Dropbox a long time ago, but that's not the direction they want the world to go. They chose Google Docs instead. Whether they're correct or not is still up for debate. Dropbox are doing pretty well.

> I don't think Google /want/ you to have any files on your computer.

Oh, yes they want. They also want to be your computer.

Re: Why I Left Google

#53

Post by pvarangot »

brudgers wrote: post #11
pessimist wrote: post #8

Valid reasons to quit Google, but then he joins Microsoft?

Microsoft is unlikely to shut down MS Research. http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/research/default.aspx [edit] If I have my James Whittaker's straight, he worked at Microsoft before going to Google. If I don't, he probably didn't.

Google Research is alive and kicking: http://research.google.com/pubs/papers.html

I think you mistook Google Labs with Google Research, Google Labs was sort of a playground for engineers more than a research division. Google Research is as serious as an academic division is inside a big company.

I'm not in any way affiliated with any of both, though I know people who interned/work at both. In fact I would take Microsoft Research over Google Research if I had to choose a "favorite" one... but I'm just clearing a common misconception with the Google Labs closure and people thinking Google closed their entire research division.

Re: Why I Left Google

#54

Post by brown9-2 »

anon808 wrote: post #39
yanw wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't seem that genuine posted on a corporate blog.

is it a corporate blog, or a personal blog part of the msdn developer community? I honestly don't know, but it doesn't look like a "Microsoft" blog.

The latter, although obviously hosted on a MS flagship property.

Re: Why I Left Google

#55

Post by rickmb »

paul wrote: post #50

I also miss the old Google. I think it's a mistake to blame this on ads though. I don't believe that the G+ crusade is being driving by advertising (though I'm sure it looks that way to people who assume that everything is about ads).

Really? Please enlighten me, what is Google+ (or Facebook for that matter) about if it isn't about advertising?

Because as far as I know, every service that isn't about being so great people would pay for it is about advertising and nothing else.

Re: Why I Left Google

#56

Post by CurtHagenlocher »

As a Microsoft employee, I wish this hadn't been posted to a Microsoft-branded website. Other than that, I thought it was an interesting perspective and I loved the money quote:

"I couldn’t even get my own teenage daughter to look at Google+ twice, “social isn’t a product,” she told me after I gave her a demo, “social is people and the people are on Facebook.”"

Re: Why I Left Google

#57

Post by cinquemb »

I thought google used to be a company of innovation (and still had potential to become better) and now that they find themselves competing with Facebook just brings them down from where they started.

Rant:

A company with so much money, and still no idea what to do with it. Here's a hint, use all that brainpower you waste optimizing advertising machines and make something that solves a problem that many people face using technology? maybe seek to reach out to a new audience? maybe quit sucking on the corporate tit that thinks advertising works in its current form? It's barely working for fb and thats because they dont care about user privacy (facebook actually sounds like a legal phishing company for advertisers, and i rather be shot than to put any of their API's on any site i create). Whatever, sheeps will be sheeps. And google isn't immune it seems.

Re: Why I Left Google

#58

Post by talentdeficit »

talmand wrote: post #24

Is it me or does several of his complaints about the overly-aggressive targeted marketing apply to Facebook as well? He must really hate Facebook then. Personally, I think all this targeted stuff is not as good as stated by the people selling it. I can understand that he felt the need to leave because something changed for him and his attitude towards his employer. But I seem to remember the big statement someone mad…

for the most part, facebook can only target you when you're on facebook. google now targets you across their properties some of which have significant lock in. it's not as easy to escape google being creepy as it is to escape facebook being creepy.

Re: Why I Left Google

#59

Post by cpeterso »

davemel37 wrote: post #33

I think Google+ 's mistake, like the author, has to do with a changing doctrine, but i think it has more to do with a branding issue than an innovation or technology issue. (it could be both, but i would argue perception comes before reality when it comes to success) I think "Google+ is a dud," has less to do with whether social is broken, but rather with human perception and branding. Much the way Google owned the c…

Sounds like you've read Ries and Trout's classic marketing books (Marketing Warfare and Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind). They should be required reading for startup hackers.

Re: Why I Left Google

#60

Post by Steko »

G+'s problem at it's root is that it's a FB clone. They copied the core functionality and tacked on a few specs that make it, literally, FB+1. The problem is no one is going to move their whole social network for FB+1 or FB+2. Google needed to build a product an order of magnitude better to win social.

There are plenty of colas that are +1 better then Coke but to take away Coke's base you'd need to be Coke+100.

The obvious solution is to stop trying to make a FB clone and do something else to get your ad demographics. I think they should stick with their core advantages and innovate in the vein of their own Adsense product:

(1) Users sign up with Google and volunteer their demographics.

(2) While signed in, Google tailors searches to them.

(3) Google gives the user a tiny percentage of the increased ad revenue. It's peanuts for most people so make it Google Play credit.

(4) If you're not signed in everything is anonymous.

Test run the whole thing on a smaller scale with Android users that already have Google accounts and (for many) credit card info on file.

Nielson families give up a lot of personal data about their viewing habits. This is rewarded with free cable, internet and cell phone service, heck they may even be paid. Even people that just take an hourlong phone survey about tv or radio are rewarded with $50+ checks. The reason market research companies pay this is because the data is extremely valuable to them and their clients. Obviously every web company wants to get that data "for free" like they do now but the giant tracking databases and all the personnel behind that certainly aren't free and create an adversarial relationship that can dilute your brand.

Post reply on HN