TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Why Does Google Kill So Many Products?

56 pointsby rckrdalmost 2 years ago

24 comments

Hnaomyiphalmost 2 years ago
Promotions being highly dependent on shipping new products rather than long term support of existing products. You don’t climb that type-a ladder by improving the code of the 30th chat app.<p>Their desperate desire to find another money printing machine to replace their soon to be regulated to death ads monopoly. If it’s not instantly printing money, they don’t want to continue to support it.<p>Ruth and Sundar need to be fired or else Google&#x2F;Alphabet will suffer the same exact fate as every other company that focuses on cost cutting over innovation and supporting future innovations.
评论 #36358845 未加载
评论 #36359052 未加载
评论 #36358311 未加载
评论 #36359034 未加载
评论 #36359006 未加载
评论 #36358660 未加载
评论 #36359716 未加载
评论 #36395612 未加载
评论 #36358838 未加载
评论 #36358548 未加载
评论 #36358482 未加载
AbrahamParangialmost 2 years ago
Microsoft and Apple are platform companies. Each product is intended to reinforce and expand the platform, and you see this reflected in that both companies have a diverse mixture of revenue sources. I think we can understand these companies as fundamentally having a strategy where the goal is to reinforce the value prop of &quot;building on Microsoft&quot; or &quot;living on Apple&quot;.<p>Google, however, is much more of a one-hit-wonder from a revenue perspective. While Google has had many societally impactful products, they mostly do not move the needle on revenue. Google&#x27;s revenue is 80% ads and 75% <i>of that ad revenue</i> is from search ads.<p>I think the implication of this is that because Google doesn&#x27;t make money from their interlocking services but rather from their near-monopoly on search ads, the incentives for them to <i>actually</i> behave like Microsoft and Apple (where you can trust long term support) just aren&#x27;t there.
评论 #36358831 未加载
评论 #36358664 未加载
评论 #36358581 未加载
ddktoalmost 2 years ago
It is interesting to consider this from a Stage-Gate vs Lean Startup perspective. These two product development processes can be seen as antithetical, but if you read the original sources (Winning at New Products and The Lean Startup), you find that they are both trying to achieve the exact same thing: delivering successful new products to market at minimal cost.<p>The differences between the two processes is a function of their environment. If you are working in a company with separate functional departments and a strong, existing brand, you need a step by step process to align everyone and get customer insight before launch. Stage-Gate answers this need and products that get killed die before they are formally launched (thus protecting the brand).<p>If you are a small team doing everything with an unknown brand, the most reliable way to get market feedback earlier is to just put something on the market. The Lean Startup comes from this perspective - if there isn’t enough traction, kill the product and invent a new brand.<p>(Of course, these processes can be adapted to other environments, but these are their native soil, so to speak.)<p>Google seems to be managing its product initiative like startups: they incentivize new product launches, and don’t hesitate to kill products that are already on the market. Perhaps we are better off adjust our expectation of the google brand: it’s just a VC brand (like a16z), not a product brand.
评论 #36359311 未加载
DistractionRectalmost 2 years ago
It seems to be a self fulfilling prophecy now.<p>Between the expectation that products won&#x27;t last, and the possibility of getting randomly locked out of one&#x27;s account with no recourse (other than screaming loudly on Twitter or HN), Google services seem to be considered a major liability.<p>I&#x27;ve also said this on before on HN, but I typically don&#x27;t hear about new Google services until they&#x27;re shuttering - for an advertising I&#x27;ve always found it ironic how poorly they advertise most of their products.
paulgbalmost 2 years ago
&gt; Separate enterprise from consumer more clearly (Gsuite&#x2F;Google Cloud).<p>Yes, this. I&#x27;m great with experimentation, but please give us an indication of what services are experiments vs. what we can rely on as critical infrastructure. A lot of us were blindsided by Google Domains because of this!
ubermanalmost 2 years ago
My view is that many&#x2F;most of these products would be successes at smaller companies but at Alphabet they are not hockey stick style game changes. When your product is lost in accounting rounding errors it can be hard to justify it to the bean counters. For years now, I just have assumed that these products are black swan attempts to find a new needle mover and that nothing they productize paid or free should be relied on.
harridalmost 2 years ago
Another side of the coin: Why does Google create so many products?
LarsAlereonalmost 2 years ago
I think the biggest issue is that other organizations signal the impending death of a product long before they shut it down. You stop seeing updates or hearing them talk about the product and eventually start to consider other options, and they usually wait to actually kill it until there&#x27;s almost no one left. It seems like Google actively maintains and tries to attract users right up until they announce the servers are going dark in 30 days.
pinewurstalmost 2 years ago
Because most weren&#x27;t very good to begin with, only created to get the originators promoted (usually far past their level of competence).
etchalonalmost 2 years ago
Short answer - Google pretends they&#x27;re a company they&#x27;re not. When they release products in new markets, often markets their culture isn&#x27;t aligned to, the products struggle. That struggle gives leadership a reason to kill the product.<p>I&#x27;m personally amazed Pixel phones haven&#x27;t been killed yet and can&#x27;t shake the feeling that will happen any day now.
评论 #36363770 未加载
neogodlessalmost 2 years ago
Chapter 6 of <i>The Psychology of Money</i> is called <i>Tails, You Win</i>. Just happen to be reading it. The summary is a variant of &quot;lots of small bets&quot; - some will fail, some will do OK, but it&#x27;s the very few that do exceptional that will matter to your overall success.<p>Google is no special snowflake in this regard, but they hit it big early, and they still have the resources to keep trying things (and hoping for another big win). Lots of consumer-facing useful things that sometimes get popular, but rarely give Google whatever is it they want. And unless it really matters to their bottom line, they probably aren&#x27;t going to stand behind it long-term.<p>That being said, it&#x27;s more than fair as a consumer not to trust their (little) bets.
purerandomnessalmost 2 years ago
Hustle culture.<p>They ship little bets and see what sticks.
steelegbralmost 2 years ago
It&#x27;s a real problem they need to get on top of as an organisation. Unceremoniously pulling the plug on services like IoT Core on tight timescales doesn&#x27;t scream &quot;reliable, sustainable platform I can pitch to my bosses&quot;.<p>Even with sizeable discounts and professional services funds for migration, I wouldn&#x27;t consider a move to Google Cloud until they calm this down. This is coming from someone that once worked for a Google Cloud Partner.
ravenstinealmost 2 years ago
Being high on your own supply for well over 15 years tends to do that. Consequently, it also comes from believing you can do everything, which for most companies doesn&#x27;t work out. Gigantic organizations also devolve into several chains of sucking-up, with multiple levels of people sucking up to each other.
rainbowmmmalmost 2 years ago
The author mentioned that &quot;Any roads that lead to search (browser, mail, maps, mobile, docs) must be commoditized and owned by Google&quot;.<p>Can someone help me understand how mail and docs are the roads that lead to search?
pcurvealmost 2 years ago
They don&#x27;t create many new ones anymore.<p>They&#x27;re just to big (and expensive) to be doing mass incubation.<p>It&#x27;s much more cost effective for them to simply buy-up and buy-out others.
sys_64738almost 2 years ago
They killed Google Reader ten years ago which was the last straw for me. GOOG became the devil from that point forward.
bigbacaloaalmost 2 years ago
Maybe they have understood the sunk cost fallacy and actually taken steps to avoid it.
评论 #36359449 未加载
luxuryballsalmost 2 years ago
to answer the question in the headline frankly, it’s called the shotgun approach, if it doesn’t stick don’t keep shooting it against the wall
MangoCoffeealmost 2 years ago
Microsoft VB6 apps still run on Windows 11&#x2F;10
评论 #36358492 未加载
rewgsalmost 2 years ago
Our entire company runs on Google products. I really, <i>really</i> like Google Workspace as a platform for a small-medium non-tech company such as the one I work for, where I&#x27;m one of two developers. But them killing Domains (where all our domains are registered, of course) is the last straw for me trusting Google to follow through with <i>anything.</i> Domains is so...boring, I guess?...that I never expected them to pull the rug out from under it. I kinda don&#x27;t really care where my domains are registered, but the fact that Google already offers a suite of <i>everything</i> meant that going with Google Domains was the obvious choice. As I see it, <i>that&#x27;s</i> the value proposition: they do it all, and it&#x27;s all reasonably integrated, so just go all-in on Google services. But that only works if you trust all those services to stay around. With each product that&#x27;s killed, that value proposition plummets exponentially.<p>The pros of Google Workspace&#x2F;Cloud:<p>- Everything (for us) can be Google: from general business stuff like email&#x2F;calendar&#x2F;etc to storage (Drive and&#x2F;or Cloud Storage) to automating tons of it via their Cloud API (or Google Apps Script, when that&#x27;s the right tool for the job).<p>- Everyone at my company, especially the non-technical folks (i.e. the majority of people in my company) &quot;gets&quot; Gmail, Calendar, Meet, Drive, etc. It&#x27;s ubiquitous, and so selling administration, billing etc on &quot;let&#x27;s just go all-in on Google&quot; is easy.<p>- We don&#x27;t need S3 storage, but we do need a <i>lot</i> of (mostly hot) storage, with easy collaboration. Because user accounts pool Drive storage company-wide, we mostly use that for our cloud storage needs. So, 99% of our storage needs are effectively free, because we&#x27;re paying for those user accounts anyway. This saves us thousands upon thousands of dollars per year, and that&#x27;s not even accounting for the employee time needed to integrate and work with S3(-compatible) storage.<p>- The Cloud API is pretty solid, the documentation is generally good, and it&#x27;s language-agnostic, making hiring that much easier as we expand the team and automate more processes.<p>- It&#x27;s all good enough, and rightly or wrongly, it doesn&#x27;t have the Microsoft &quot;smell&quot; -- a lot of my non-technical peers are in my experience quite resistant to Microsoft-anything, even though they arguably have a much better track record of not killing products.<p>The cons:<p>- I don&#x27;t trust Google anymore. I expect them to kill or radically alter any of these core products at a moment&#x27;s notice.<p>That one con completely obliterates all of the above very compelling pros.<p>There&#x27;s honestly nothing else quite like Google Workspace. AWS is massively beyond our needs or budget. Microsoft 365 is perfectly fine for mail&#x2F;calendar&#x2F;Office&#x2F;etc but not for the Google Cloud side of things (I sure as hell am not touching Azure, and their 365 API documentation is a mess).<p>The only other option is to roll our own set of modular services, which is something we&#x27;ve looked into quite a bit, but there&#x27;s always a show-stopper somewhere, not least of which is the thought of someone else eventually inheriting this stuff if&#x2F;when I move on. At the end of the day, rolling it yourself and maintaining it simply requires more chops <i>and</i> time on the part of the employee(s), and I shudder at the thought of essentially building a cathedral that others allow to rot once I leave, one big reason being that the middle of the venn diagram of &quot;the skillset of people who would find themselves applying for my position&quot; and &quot;Linux sysadmin chops&quot; don&#x27;t really overlap at all.<p>Philosophically, I prefer moving the monetary cost from closed-source platforms to the salaries of developers collaborating on open-source products; but for our company&#x27;s particular use-case, we&#x27;re ultimately <i>not</i> a tech company, we&#x27;re a media company, with a lot of tech-focus, yes, but not in terms of building products -- rather, we simply do as all companies in 2023 probably <i>should</i> do, and leverage as much automation as possible to keep things efficient, organized, scalable...generally, keep it on the up-and-up.<p>I&#x27;m sure that I&#x27;m not alone in feeling this way. There is a vast, <i>vast</i> I-dare-say &quot;silent majority&quot; of companies out there that are in this weird middle ground -- too small for AWS, not tech-focused-enough to build it themselves, but still need a solid suite of...<i>everything</i> required to run a business, and the tools to automate processes as needed. I know that Google Workspace is in the &quot;enterprise&quot; side of things and thus is less likely to be killed off, but...also, who knows? Google is so obviously completely aimless that I truly do not trust them anymore, and yet I don&#x27;t see a truly viable alternative.
ChrisArchitectalmost 2 years ago
(2022)
brycewrayalmost 2 years ago
(2022)
NoMoreNicksLeftalmost 2 years ago
Because fuck you.