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

Google and Ambient Computing

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 106 posts

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#11

Post by username90 »

codingslave wrote: post #6
ydnaclementine wrote: post #3

It seems like google has the unfortunate culture of just releasing a bunch of new services, not maintaining them, and allowing them to die. (Remember all of their chat apps?) I think I’ve read it’s due to google’s promotion process and needing to “release” something to move upward. I expect the majority of these service to no longer be around in 5 years.

They can't innovate, despite all of their "talent"

Google is good at innovating in computer science and computer engineering. Google is not particularly good at innovating product ideas. This makes sense given how they find and hire talent.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#13

Post by magashna »

phkahler wrote: post #9

Google is failing to organize the world's information in a way that is useful to me. I wanted to look up how to split a NURBS surface in half. You know, the math behind computing the new point and weights. All I got was a bunch of stuff from CAD vendors talking about how to manipulate NURBS in their own tools. Since then, I've seen more of this trend. It's hard to find information about how anything works now because…

May be better to select by org type (site:.edu) or remove what might be obvious commercial results (-buy -"free download")

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#14

Post by gambler »

A handful of oligopolies coercing me to use overcomplicated always-connected gadgets that are orchestrated by "AI" that I don't control, can't train, and whose main objective is to manipulate my behavior and siphon as much of my private info to its corporate master as possible. All of this to solve "problems" that I never had, while a choir of corporate shills drones on and on that problems I actually have are not real or not important.

I'll take 80s dystopian cyberpunk over this crap any time of the day.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#15

Post by magashna »

mey wrote: post #5
ydnaclementine wrote: post #3

It seems like google has the unfortunate culture of just releasing a bunch of new services, not maintaining them, and allowing them to die. (Remember all of their chat apps?) I think I’ve read it’s due to google’s promotion process and needing to “release” something to move upward. I expect the majority of these service to no longer be around in 5 years.

https://killedbygoogle.com/ I am rather curious about Stradia's longevity.

I'm still very pessimistic about the network resources that they expect the average user to have. The recent hubbub was about places that have data caps. I'm still not convinced that the latency is there for an enjoyable experience. I'll be incredibly surprised if it isn't a complete flop.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#16

Post by icandoit »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #10
icandoit wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that they have a "take the flag, but dont hold the ground if it isn't worth it" approach. Learn lots and fail fast. Smaller companies can find a niche for themselves in "we are basically X that google used to do". Let someone else make the market and create your marketing, right? Maximizing profits (and innovation) over time may mean closing something profitable now, and focusing on new potential profits. That…

Yeah, great. Except for the users who Google got hooked on a given service, who then have troubles finding alternatives as Google tends to suck the oxygen out from the room whenever they release something.

They can't find someone to take their money in exchange for a useful service.

That isn't a Google problem. That's our opportunity. I can't think of a single company known for riding Google's coat tails. Why aren't people responding to the enormous wealth of Google by emulating them? We don't have to be beholden to a few huge tech companies there is space for so many more players.

I try to see things I can do when other people tell me a story about who is to blame for something. It's all a matter of framing.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#17

Post by icandoit »

username90 wrote: post #11
codingslave wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't innovate, despite all of their "talent"

Google is good at innovating in computer science and computer engineering. Google is not particularly good at innovating product ideas. This makes sense given how they find and hire talent.

But they are innovating. New products all the time.

They just aren't staying around to collect the (relative to Google) meager profits. I wish more companies knew when to call it quits.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#18

Post by jacquesm »

phkahler wrote: post #9

Google is failing to organize the world's information in a way that is useful to me. I wanted to look up how to split a NURBS surface in half. You know, the math behind computing the new point and weights. All I got was a bunch of stuff from CAD vendors talking about how to manipulate NURBS in their own tools. Since then, I've seen more of this trend. It's hard to find information about how anything works now because…

Yesterday I wrote a blog post about an interesting company, I couldn't find the URL even though I knew exactly what they did and where they were located. It took forver - and DuckDuckGo - to finally find the website. I'd forgotten their name and had put of writing that blog post for long enough that it had slipped my mind.

That isn't the first time this happens either. It's extremely frustrating to not be able to locate a page that you know is out there.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#19

Post by mindgam3 »

> So the devices aren’t the center of the system, you are. That’s our vision for ambient computing.

The vision is correct but the naming is off. Something like “embodied computing” would convey the key difference better than “ambient”, namely that the user is at the center. And yes this is a fancypants way of saying wearables.

But this is a nice attempt from google to paint the future as an extension of something it is good at (managing lots of ambient cloud-like things) while downplaying that what we’re really talking about is wearables (not really a strong suit for Big G).

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#20

Post by jacquesm »

icandoit wrote: post #8
ydnaclementine wrote: post #3

It seems like google has the unfortunate culture of just releasing a bunch of new services, not maintaining them, and allowing them to die. (Remember all of their chat apps?) I think I’ve read it’s due to google’s promotion process and needing to “release” something to move upward. I expect the majority of these service to no longer be around in 5 years.

I like that they have a "take the flag, but dont hold the ground if it isn't worth it" approach. Learn lots and fail fast. Smaller companies can find a niche for themselves in "we are basically X that google used to do". Let someone else make the market and create your marketing, right? Maximizing profits (and innovation) over time may mean closing something profitable now, and focusing on new potential profits. That…

I hate it. It means that I'll never be able to trust some new service they launch because (1) if I adopt it it will likely get killed and (2) even if they don't they are going to let it suffer a slow death.

I'm more than happy to wait for years if I have to in case something develops accidental mass market traction in which case Google will likely support it long term.

I wonder if Google realizes how much this works against them, without 'early adopters' you don't have much chance of success, even at Google's scale. Burn your early adopters often enough and you'll end up with unused new services.

Post reply on HN