[vincent_s]

Google isn't dead because it still has a massive user base, generating more money than ever. Many people think Google is the internet, and Android and Chrome users have Google as their default search engine. Google even pays Apple billions to be the default on their devices. So from a business perspective, Google is thriving and will continue to do so for years.

However, the quality of Google's search results has declined, which is widely acknowledged by tech-savvy users and even the general public. As an SEO expert, I've observed that while Google has always battled spam, they've recently shifted their focus away from website content and towards other factors like brand recognition and user engagement metrics. This change likely stems from their anticipation of AI-generated content.

Consequently, a poorly written article on a well-known site like Forbes can outrank a well-researched piece on a lesser-known blog. Google has also started using AI for ranking, despite previously stating they wouldn't.

As a result, alternative search engines like Bing and DuckDuckGo have become viable options. However, Bing hasn't significantly improved; Google has simply gotten worse. People are likely to leave Google as soon as a clearly superior alternative emerges.

An ideal Google alternative would be like ChatGPT but with less abstraction and more factual accuracy. While ChatGPT provides direct answers, it's a 50/50 chance whether the information is true or made up. A real competitor would offer ChatGPT-like functionality with a stronger emphasis on facts and sources, providing up-to-date knowledge on any topic.

[kolinko]

> Google isn't dead because it still has a massive user base, generating more money than ever.

Do you remember when iPhone was introduced and Nokia/Symbian was still the king?

This is exactly the reasoning line that Symbian/Nokia devs kept repeating when iPhone was released. I remember arguing with them endlessly. It took around 4 years for the company to collapse completely.

[sliken]

Nokia lacked vision. They had a widget much like the original iphone, with better resolution (800x480 vs 480x320), had an app store, and has a user friendly GUI. Rather ironically Nokia wouldn't add a WAN chip to their WIFI nokia 770/800/810 until it was too late. Nokia had an app store when apple was still pushing "weblets" or whatever they called the web based apps.

Pretty surprising from a big phone company.

Then a microsoft exec took over, forced a migration to windows mobile, sold a bunch of phone, orphaned those phones, and brought a new generation of incompatible windows phones. Not to mention the famous burning barn memo. Pretty much the entire market dropped windows mobile.

Similarly Balmer's microsoft lacked vision and was doubling down on windows laptops+desktops running microsoft office at the cost of mobile, at the cost of cloud, and a late start on web based apps. They did of course turn things around and started playing nice with others, offering cloud services, supporting linux and android, etc.

[sillyfluke]

Although I'm sure the Nokia backstory might be appreciated by casual readers of your comment who weren't aware, I suggest you read the parent's comment in good faith and realize that he's essentially arguing that Google currently is exhibiting a lack of vision similar to Nokia. In an attempt to take my own advise I'll simply note that it's unclear from your comment whether you're actually agreeing with the parent or trying to provide a counterargument of sorts.

[kolinko]

Did you try to develop for Symbian and push anything to their store? The experience was so terrible, that it was easier to build for a jailbroken iPhone, pre-appstore, than for Nokia. Nokia App Store - that was introduced a year after iPhone's App Store - https://www.datamation.com/mobile/nokia-unveils-online-app-s... . As for a user friendly GUI - you must be kidding here.

Before iPhone, devs had to ship apps through web, or strike deals with mobile operators - which were crazily terrible - I remember a story of one operator who had a deal where they literally took all the money, and it was up to a developer to figure out their business model.

As for Elop bringing in Windows Phone 7: my understanding was always that this was literally the reason he was brought over to Nokia -- because they were in such a deep hole. He was brought 3 years after the iPhone, when Nokia/Symbian was already on a downhill slope.

At that time it was reported as a potentially saving move for both MS and Nokia, because their platforms were struggling - https://www.informationweek.com/it-leadership/nokia-to-embra... -- "In July, Nokia reported a 40% slump in second quarter profits, as it has struggled to maintain its lead in the booming smartphone market. Mr Kallasvuo has been facing increasing pressure to quit this year after Nokia issued two profits warnings and its share price fell by more than 40% between March and June."

As for the lack of vision though, I agree. And that is what's happening with Google right now. They are introducing AI chaotically left and right, and there is no serious vision behind it all. I expect Apple will show how it should be done, once again - but I may stand corrected after Monday's WWDC :)

[dahauns]

Well, as long as Google doesn't do something similarly stupid (like, say, announcing discontinuation of their search and suite or whatever and that they will offer a great new Bing/O365 integration experience in a year), they will be fine.

[kolinko]

Nokia did the „stupid” things only when their business was already collapsing due to Symbian, not the other way around.

Took them around 4 years from iPhone’s premiere to get to that point. And I remember people saying that Symbian’s user base is too big to fail even weeks before the WP announcements and later up until the burning rig memo.

Ditto Blackberry, although blackberry had a shorter history at that time.

[dahauns]

We will never know how it would have played out (and yeah, there were no small amounts of stupid things beforehand), but the actual collapse was induced by pouring gasoline on the burning platform.

[kolinko]

What else could they have done? Their Symbian efforts failed on every front, and their software engineering seemed broken to the core (looking at it from an outside engineer who tried building apps for Symbian, but also as a device user). It was a company that understood hardware/firmware like no other, but the software part was not there - kind of like car producers and their infotainment systems nowadays.

[rpastuszak]

> Google even pays Apple billions to be the default on their devices.

ca 20 billions per year, just to keep their search engine as a default. https://untested.sonnet.io/Defaults+Matter%2C+Don't+Assume+C...