Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by amanne 4685 days ago
It's curious to see Google pull this.

From http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/meaning-of-open.html

"At Google we believe that open systems win. They lead to more innovation, value, and freedom of choice for consumers, and a vibrant, profitable, and competitive ecosystem for businesses. Many companies will claim roughly the same thing since they know that declaring themselves to be open is both good for their brand and completely without risk. After all, in our industry there is no clear definition of what open really means. It is a Rashomon-like term: highly subjective and vitally important."

..

"To understand our position in more detail, it helps to start with the assertion that open systems win. This is counter-intuitive to the traditionally trained MBA who is taught to generate a sustainable competitive advantage by creating a closed system, making it popular, then milking it through the product life cycle. The conventional wisdom goes that companies should lock in customers to lock out competitors."

...

"To understand our position in more detail, it helps to start with the assertion that open systems win. This is counter-intuitive to the traditionally trained MBA who is taught to generate a sustainable competitive advantage by creating a closed system, making it popular, then milking it through the product life cycle. The conventional wisdom goes that companies should lock in customers to lock out competitors. There are different tactical approaches — razor companies make the razor cheap and the blades expensive, while the old IBM made the mainframes expensive and the software ... expensive too. Either way, a well-managed closed system can deliver plenty of profits. They can also deliver well-designed products in the short run — the iPod and iPhone being the obvious examples — but eventually innovation in a closed system tends towards being incremental at best (is a four blade razor really that much better than a three blade one?) because the whole point is to preserve the status quo. Complacency is the hallmark of any closed system. If you don't have to work that hard to keep your customers, you won't."

...

"In other words, Google's future depends on the Internet staying an open system, and our advocacy of open will grow the web for everyone - including Google."

The entire thing is a good read.

1 comments

I'm all in agreement on the hypocrisy of Google's "open" bullshit train but isn't the central issue here that the gd brand mark for YouTube is simply not free to use?

I think Google is within their rights to put whatever limits they want in that area, even unreasonable ones.

And while 2/3 of HN is happy to swallow the open kool aid, last I checked MS wore big boy pants and surely they can do better than crying about their big unfair rival on their blog.