Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, October 14, 2011

postheadericon Does Google Have What It Takes To Be A Platform, Rather Than A Product, Company?

Nearly seven years ago, I wrote about the idea that there was a "battle of the Internet itself," and that if Google really wanted to win, had to get out of being a simple product the company to become a true platform company I had a much more open configuration, which has done more to encourage developers to build on top of him. Over the years, sometimes I repeated this. And while Google has done some things at the margin, however, has always seemed reluctant to be a real platform. There are certainly people in Google for that, and I think I hear a lot of them at any time I raise this question. But the company has a history of problems really open to outside developers.



So it's really interesting to see what "internal," said Steve Yegge Google employee who, by accident, made public through Google +. This is a detailed and honest attitude of society on some things, but Google is not a hit, but to force Google to change. It's getting tons of attention, and Yegge thrown, but he allowed others to keep pace with a redrawn version. He also noted that Google PR was careful not to put pressure on him to end the message, noting that employees are free to express their opinions.

Some were reading as "attack" an insider on Google, but I see nothing. Looks like a call to action of someone who believes that the company does not ship to be a platform. Yegge spend much time talking (very open) about your previous work experience in the Amazon, Jeff Bezos, and how they got the "we need to be a platform for" religion important time for nearly a decade, and actually forced the company to all focus on what the number one job. While criticizing Yegge many problems with Amazon, which recognizes that this vision has put Amazon in a good position (with others who have clearly passed "the" platform: Facebook, Apple, and, almost by accident, Microsoft).



The core of the message, which is what many people focus on where Google is criticized + Yegge, and how it was designed as a platform form, while its main competitor, Facebook, has clearly taken a platform significantly.

Google is an excellent example of our inability to understand the platforms of the highest levels of management (top of Larry, Sergey, Eric, Vic, Hello Hello) to the working sheet below (hey yo). Not everyone can accept. The golden rule of the platforms is that you eat your own dog food. Google + platform is a pathetic afterthought. We did not have the API at any time of its release, and the last time I checked, we had an API call miserable. One of the team members left and told me when he got up and asked, "So the API Stalker" She has all sad and said, "Yes." I mean, I was joking, but ... API not only call flow is to offer someone. So I guess the joke was on me.



Microsoft has known about the rule of dog food at least twenty years. He was part of their culture from one generation now. Do not eat the food of the people and dog food to its developers. This is simply stealing your long-term value of the platform of short-term success. The platforms are all thinking long term.

Google is a reflex, a study in short-term thinking, based on the misconception that Facebook is successful because it built a great product. But that's not why they are successful. Facebook is successful because it has built a complete range of products, allowing people to do other work. While Facebook is different for everyone. Some people spend all their time in Mafia Wars. Some spend all their time in Farmville. There are hundreds or perhaps thousands of times the quality of different wells available, so there's something for everyone.



Google + Our team took a look at the after-sales said. "Wow, it seems that some games that we will contract with someone, uh, write some games for us." Do you begin to see how incredibly wrong that thought is today? The problem is that we try to anticipate what people want and deliver it to them.


This sounds incredibly real part. I know that when Google launched +, I liked it as a program, but asked people about the API, because she needed to better integrate into my workflow - ". Some time later, "and said he would And while I still come to spend time with Goolge +, which has largely become an afterthought for me because it only lives in his world hand, rather than integrate well. There are still some features I want, but until the developers have the opportunity to dive and be useful ... just do not feel like a necessity. " / Aa>
But it is a lesson in this, beyond the platforms ITIS Google said. And to return to the issue of a copy of the burden of worship - a I talked about several times. People seem to think that it is easy for companies (especially large firms) to "copy" of your competitors. In fact, Google, many people think that it is so easy that there are antitrust investigations in progress. However, Google + and the points raised Yegge reminds us once again that the copy of the database "characteristics" of a product may be possible to recreate it really works and what makes it hard for success. is very easy to copy the superficial. It is difficult to copy the soul.

0 comments: