[EvilEy3]

> At any rate, the point is that a guy who used software used by a large portion of Google's engineering team because it was superior to the in-house solution

Do you seriously believe that they couldn't come up with something better than mediocre package manager?

[gamblor956]

Based on Google's track record the past few years, Yes, I seriously believe that Google could not come up with a better package manager. They've taken 6 shots at a basic messaging application and they still haven't gotten that right. 4 attempts at a payment application. Stadia. Wear. Nest (post-acquistion). The had 1 shot with Stadia to do it right and they fucked it up so badly that it's impacting Google's ability to sell other services to prospective business partners because prospective clients rightly doubt Google's ability to launch and maintain a product.

The real question is: knowing Google's track record of almost complete failure for the past few years, why would you believe in Google?

[EvilEy3]

And again, do you seriously believe that any of this has to do with engineering and not lack of business vision?

[gamblor956]

Based on the bugginess of Maps, Duo, Hangouts, Wear, Stadia, and other products, I would say that the poor engineering is almost as much a factor of these failures as the lack of business vision. After all, the product doesn't need to work well for the PM to get promoted. It just needs to exist.

Google is run by the engineers. You don't get to blame the MBAs for its failures.

[EvilEy3]

> Based on the bugginess of Maps, Duo, Hangouts, Wear, Stadia, and other products

What are your sources?