[ydnaclementine]

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.

[icandoit]

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. Thats great.

[jacquesm]

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.

[greggman2]

I found it fun to use cassettes, laser discs, CDs, DVDs, mini discs, mp3 players even though I no longer use any of them. Also found it fun to go Atari -> Amiga -> DOS PC -> Windows. And Atari 2600 -> NES -> SNES+Genesis -> PS1 etc..

I agree it sucks when support ends but I enjoy it checking it out while it exists.

[pixelbath]

One major difference is that I can still use all those things you listed (and in many cases, do). I can't continue using Google Reader or Google Code.

There are alternatives, of course, but the burden is on me to migrate. When I'm forced to keep migrating away from Google products, I find it less and less appealing to continue using more of their products.

[gowld]

Why is Google the only acceptable vendor?

[TeMPOraL]

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.

[icandoit]

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.

[yellow_postit]

Ad companies like Google tend to be winner take most markets. Thats why you see it referred to as the duopoly of Google and FB, together they have ~60% of the digital ad market.

[joshuamorton]

This doesn't address the question:

Why didn't something pop up and eat up the success left in the wake of a market Google left, like reader or inbox or wave?

[ryukafalz]

I would guess because those products weren't profitable on their own. They were propped up by Google's massive advertising business.

[mey]

https://killedbygoogle.com/

I am rather curious about Stradia's longevity.

[magashna]

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.

[uoaei]

Every time something like this comes up, I imagine a bunch of giddy "world-changers" sitting behind Mac Pros with Retina displays and T3 lines, building something that works great under those conditions, and then convincing each other that they've helped people over $16 microbrews.

I know this is a caricature but it's how I get my kicks.

To wit, the conditions that the engineers inhabit in their lives has basically zero resemblance with the technology experience of the vast majority of people. Designing websites for 4K screens only, expecting <20ms latency over home lines when everyone else in the house is streaming video to their own personal devices, etc. One thing we can do collectively as an industry is put in place guidelines which steer development to minimalism and attention to the resources available to the median user.

[zorked]

Most tech-company engineers have exactly the same infrastructure at home as everybody else. Comcast and the like, also mad about data caps, latency and DNS hijacking.

[uoaei]

Most tech-company engineers don't live in bad parts of town nor in the countryside, so I have a hard time believing that.

[VRay]

The latency is interesting, most people can't see it or feel it if it's under 100ms or so. There's already a button press -> screen change latency of ~100 ms in most AAA games except for twitchy shooters

If you're more of a hardcore player, you may feel the extra latency as all your reflexes being off. It's harder to make jumps, perform combos, line up shots, etc.

In my case, I absolutely can't stand network streaming latency. Even 50ms is completely unacceptable to me outside of turn-based games, and I go out of my way to look into the input lag for any new monitor or TV I buy. BUT you might be different, you should give it a shot.

[whazor]

Stadia will be a free gaming service next year. If they launch a free to play game, people will switch internet provider for it.

[J5892]

I would happily switch my internet provider for it.

I would switch my internet provider for literally anything.

The problem is I live in the country's main technological hub (the bay area), and I fucking can't. It's infuriating.

[Arelius]

I think anyone that would and more importantly can switch to better internet for a free to play game already have.

In many places in the US people already have the best internet that can be provided to their home, and it's not good enough.

[extesy]

> people will switch internet provider for it.

Ha-ha, I wish I could switch over from Comcast.

[codingslave]

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

[dmix]

Innovation usually takes a much longer timeline than just launching something and killing it with a year or two when it’s not sufficiently Google scale.

The world would have a lot less great products if this is how it was always done.

This is why startups continue to be the primary innovation source. They are willing to go through the hard grind to find product/market fit over multiple years.

Most of the products purchased by the big guys are at least 5-7yrs old (WhatsApp, YouTube, Waze, Looker, etc). There are some rare exceptions like Instagram and Android which were both 2yrs old at acquisition.

[v7p1Qbt1im]

Isn‘t that exactly what X is doing though? Waymo started as a project in 2009 I believe. It wasn‘t anything commercial until recently.

[sch6y]

That's because that talent isn't allowed to own anything. Imagine you know what to do and how to do it. You go to YC, present your idea and ask for some funding. And imagine they'd tell you that "Yea, we can pay you this fixed salary and see if your idea works. No, we get 100% rights. No, we won't share profits, but we'll up your salary if things go well. No, we can't tell you by how much." Who in their right mind agree on these terms? That's why employees don't share any really interesting ideas: they go to YC, get money and retain 93%. Google has the right people, but it's not really interested in any changes because ads work really well. Afaik, they even cancelled the 20% time.

[username90]

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.

[icandoit]

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.

[username90]

They create products but lack the leadership needed to follow through when the initial exciting moments are over. I'd say that if you can't follow through on your innovations then you aren't good at innovating. They can do it on the tech side, lots of successful projects there.