0
35

[–] Techttz 0 points 35 points (+35|-0) ago 

Well no shit, it's been that way as long as I can remember.

0
22

[–] rob_white 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

That's true, although they do seem far more corporate than they were and much less exciting.

I remember when they could do no wrong, using that sentiment to force Google+ on people was the big turning point.

1
9

[–] Techttz 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

Just another yahoo, either they change their ways or will go the way of old yahoo.

0
3

[–] llagerlof 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Google philosophy nº 6: "You can make money without doing evil."

0
8

[–] Techttz 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Yeah, remember when they removed that philosophy. Do no evil.

0
0

[–] lord_nougat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Your memory loss symptoms appear to be getting worse. Increase the dosage!

0
0

[–] thisissparta 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Since when is he an Ex-googler.... 7 years ago?

1
19

[–] Traveler 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago 

It sucks, but I feel lucky to have seen Google before they went to corporate shithole. They aren't exactly circling the toilet like Yahoo and Microsoft, but I can see it coming.

0
1

[–] rob_white 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It's the circle of life for companies, the rise, the steady state where things get stale and then the downward turn which includes the hunt for growth in less than customer friendly areas. This can take many years, I remember where Microsoft was loved, they changed everything and made computing so much cheaper, eventually the growth stops and they leverage other areas to make money.

Google has a long way to go yet before it starts the downward swing but you are right, it's coming, here's a bell weather: blocking of ad-block in chrome and youtube. If they do that, it's a good sign things will get worse.

0
1

[–] Traveler 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Google's decline started around the time they realized they were going to get bullied by Microsoft and other companies if they didn't lobby up in Washington DC, and started hiring politicians to represent their interests and sales managers instead of creatives. It was a sad decline but eventually all the conspiracy nuts who sounded crazy early on became correct.

0
1

[–] Fagtardicus 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

actually, they started that nosedive when they fused youtube to google+

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
3

[–] thisissparta 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

duckDuckgo

0
0

[–] lord_nougat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I'm pretty sure it'll be hooli.

0
0

[–] IAmYourDad 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Apple? Or maybe Tesla?

0
18

[–] myriadic 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

a company focused on technological innovation to one obsessed with advertising


Whittaker, who is now partner development manager at Microsoft

Oh, the irony...Windows 10 anyone?

0
8

[–] rob_white 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Windows 10 anyone

I was thinking the same, he leaves one company and says they are not innovating to go to Microsoft who just copied Google with the data mining and advertising stuff.

0
7

[–] Al_Rubyx 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Which makes me doubt the whole story somewhat. As bad as Google is right now Microsoft is worse when it comes to data mining.

0
2

[–] Tommstein 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

When was Microsoft ever focused on technological innovation?

0
0

[–] myriadic 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I can't think of any, which if why I find it ironic. (and the windows 10 part was about advertising, since Windows 10 gets your information to advertise to you)

2
16

[–] dabork 2 points 16 points (+18|-2) ago 

Lol "ad company", that's part time shit.

Google is first and foremost a data mine. Period. That's by far their most valuable asset as a company and the number one priority in their relationship with you and the government that rules over you. They harvest data, that's what they do best and that's what they get paid to do. All this other shit is just icing on the cake to keep you happy and trusting because if people don't trust you they won't barf their data all over your servers. That's why Google tries very hard to keep itself in a good public light. Your surveillance tools only work if people use them.

[–] [deleted] 8 points 3 points (+11|-8) ago 

[Deleted]

0
19

[–] SteelKidney 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 

Data mining is a means to an end. That end is ad revenue.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

7
-3

[–] dabork 7 points -3 points (+4|-7) ago 

Just keep telling yourself that.

0
13

[–] Azriel777 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

I miss the old google, their web search actually worked much better back then. Once when I looked up something it would be filled with what I was actually looking for, now? now it is random shit, half the time it doesn't even even show what I was looking for and why the hell is it pulling up information that is five fucking years old? I want my searched to give me relevent new data less than a year old, not something over five years. On top of this, google used to come up with amazing things almost monthly, from gmail, to google maps, to google drive..etc. Now? nothing really. It all went to shit when the CEO changed and they went from a cool geek fun place, to bullshit corporate culture. Google is still a ok company, but their magic is definitely gone.

4
1

[–] InCahoots 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

Are you kidding me? It's always gotten better. I can't remember the last time I went to the 2nd page of search results. In the early days, you had to go for pages and pages.

Your timeline is also wrong. Innovations don't come monthly. If you knew what you were talking about even slightly you would also know that they have tons of products that have flopped and even more that have never seen the public.

Gmail: 2004

Maps: 2005

Drive: 2012

0
8

[–] gruix 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

I really feel that Google results are less relevant now than a few years ago, mostly because they try to be "smart" and I mostly search for very precise, technical stuff. So for example they add heuristics or replace my query words by synonyms, yet I need only results for the exact terms I type, so I add +"quote" or toggle "verbatim search" every time. Interestingly, it's impossible to select "verbatim" and "only past year" at the same time...

1
3

[–] Azriel777 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

No, I am not kidding you. I want information that is new, not old shit which google LOVES to bring up. Depends on what you are looking for I guess. I should have explained the monthly thing better. I just used the big stuff as good things that came out of google. When I meant monthly, I was talking about google labs which DID have new stuff coming out monthly, this was side projects that google let their employees work on. Some good, some not so good, all were interesting. Google used to allow employees to work on side projects if they wanted too, but when the new ceo came in, he pretty much killed that.

0
0

[–] whisky_cat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So you miss Altavista - because I do.

0
7

[–] Deathstalker 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Innovative Google died when they dropped Google Labs for Google Plus.

0
5

[–] Absolem 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Why is it so hard for them to admit that Google+ is a total failure?

0
2

[–] peacegnome 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

all they need to do is fix it, the concepts are great, but the product is completely broken. There are hundreds of pages of users telling them exactly what to fix, but either they are ignored, or they say that the problem is intentional. Some things do get fixed, but they really miss the boat on them.

For example, in a G+ album you were not able to add or remove photos, couldn't change the title, or who the album was visible to (that's right, if you wanted to add someone to the album you had to make a new post), etc.

0
0

[–] Absolem 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

That's a good analysis. I didn't really use it. I never really saw the point. I don't know why they thought there was demand for ANOTHER social media platform. What even differentiates it from Facebook?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] heliumday 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Google's vice president of social business Vic Gundotra defended Google+ at the recent South by Southwest conference, noting that the social site could improve all of Google's services and offered a more private alternative to Facebook, with better sharing options and less intrusive advertising.

"You can think of Google+ as Google 2.0. It's the next generation of Google," Gundotra said. "The old Google was siloed; your identity and how you share with your family was different across each product."

This is valid, but leveraging your other products to nag/force people into google+ is fucked. I'd sooner leave your other products behind than use that.

load more comments ▼ (15 remaining)