|
|
|
|
|
|
by throwawaylinux
1522 days ago
|
|
|
> Doing that once, yeah, doing that over and over, no so much. What do you mean? It's always good move to kill a product that loses money for the company. Why do they start so many new products that are losers? That's a different question. Possibly the incentives for starting new products are poorly calibrated, which is the common narrative. But possibly they aren't and they are quite happy to make a mountain of shit, including doing almost the same thing over and over, for the small chance of a diamond. That's entirely consistent with the rest of the start-up industry. |
|
|
> What do you mean? It's always good move to kill a product that loses money for the company.
Look at the Ars Technica article I was responding to. Google has failed at chat apps repeatedly for a long time, to the point where it's an embarrassment AND they've created a self-reinforcing vicious cycle of failure. The smart decision for users is to avoid any Google chat app like the plague, because it will inevitably be killed, which means those apps will also fail for lack of users.
A business doesn't have infinite tries to get something right. Eventually they burn up all their credibility. They should kill them all, and stop developing new ones, completely exiting the space.