|Larry Page Says Google Biggest Threat Is Google|
Larry Page Says Google Biggest Threat Is Google [bits.blogs.nytimes.com]
|Google faces antitrust inquiries and competition from all corners. But its biggest threat is Google itself, Larry Page, its chief executive and co-founder, said Tuesday. |
“There are basically no companies that have good slow decisions,” Mr. Page said in a rare public appearance at Google’s Zeitgeist conference in Paradise Valley, Ariz. “There are only companies that have good fast decisions. As companies get bigger, they slow down decision making, and that’s a big problem.”
It’s a problem he has tried to address since he took over as chief executive from Eric E. Schmidt in April.
“He’s in there doing that, forcing the choice and forcing the resolution,” Mr. Schmidt, now Google’s chairman, said at the conference.
Mr. Page is also working on integrating all of Google’s products and improving their user interfaces, he said.
you don't say? wow how long did it take you to finally figure that one out smart guy. sheesh.
There are only companies that have good fast decisions
what you mean like google? where every thing is a watch out knee jerk reaction that has a 50/50 chance of blowing up in your face...yea thats working out great for you goog ( BUZZZZZZ )
So, maybe the will lead them to see that they do one thing and do it well.....SEARCH.
To what extent is Google heading down the same path which AOL and Yahoo took? I mean with all of the social apps, etc. I realize that these additional paths are revenue streams but why potentially soil a good name like Google by firing blanks with things such as Places, etc.?
Don't Follow, Lead.
I think that's good leadership. A lot better than the old guard nonsense spouted by the likes of Diller, Whitman, and Semel who were behind companies at the peak of the Industry, when it didn't take much effort to steer those companies through their relatively calm business environment. They all failed when the going required actual talent. I didn't know what to expect from Page, we never hear much about him. But so far he's doing pretty good.
I agree that Google's UI needs help. Even one of their most popular products, GMAIL, lacks an intuitive UI. It has to be learned.
"integrating all G products"
Another www is just a click away.
Resistance is futile.
I agree, but I don't know that we have reached the ... quite yet. I think we're still rising up that bell curve.
I feel there's still a lot of undiscovered utilities and growth for the internet as a whole.
We all should work on forward thinking robed in the mystique of our own histories to chart the next way.
|improving their user interfaces |
Yes do that, and no interface is permanently good or liked the all the users at same time. And seriously, they are not doing this by producing plus-buttons or sleazy G+ interface.
Perhaps they need more and more skills in content presentation. And now the user-agents or browsers are nicer to help in that.
|As companies get bigger, they slow down decision making |
Then use the robots to make fast and accurate decisions as humans may not do so whether the multitude is a huge or a few.
Whatsoever, making fast and accurate decisions is never the misery when detailed-reasoning and correct understanding of statistics is involved.
This is the smartest thing I've heard him say since "let start Google".
What was that saying, something along the lines of its better to make a wrong decision than no decision at all?
Well it look like they have made a few wrong decisions, that could cost them dearly.
|But its biggest threat is Google itself, Larry Page, its chief executive and co-founder, said Tuesday. |
It's ONLY short term threat is forgetting that pure search rankings made them darlings of the industry and cluttered rankings full of places, maps, affiliate offers and now +you's (not to mention too big a hunger for personal data) are making them the exact opposite.
Google has the potential to become a great product once again but they seem blinded by the "gotta add more stuff and get more personal info" mentality.
My advice - When you're atop MT Everest stop trying to climb higher by stacking stuff in a pile. It will eventually fall and the drop is massive. Google is the Mt Everest of search, nobody else is even half way up the mountain, but it's just a matter of time until they fall leaving some other company #1 if they don't knock it off. Having SO MANY DIFFERENT PRODUCTS is great, but keep them separate already. A good foundation would be to start each at ground level.
Given that no one offers less cluttered rankings of any value, I do not see the threat.
Also, the clutter is from a webmaster POV. You search for "hotels in [city]" and get links to hotel websites accompanied by a map showing exactly where they are, and link to reviews: you think "its pushed the organic SERPS down". The average users thinks: "useful".
It is true that Google faces the same problems that other big companies have faced, but knowing you have the problem does not mean you can successfully solve it. I can think of more companies that have failed to solve it, than have succeeded.
Page is right. Like the Terminator, the biggest threat to the Terminator is the Terminator. Make sense? The big difference is that the Terminator had a finish line or an objective. Google's objective is to grow and there is no end to that.
I know he's not acknowledging the fact that Google is essentially "off and running". I think of it as Google being as big and as embedded in global society to the point it's getting beyond comprehension. Not yet, but getting there. The success causing scrutiny from governments. That's what he's saying. Their success has lead to a virtual monopoly which ultimately will hinder their future growth. Even if they are not being devious, their competitors will certainly try to make those claims against them.
|The success causing scrutiny from governments. |
|Even if they are not being devious, their competitors will certainly try to make those claims against them. |
They are doing great and amazing, we are big-fans.
And there shouldn't be obstacles to prevent anyone who is doing genius.
|“It’s very important to us that people know we’re acting in their interest and we’re trustworthy, both as stewards of information access and for their own personal data,” he said. |
I wonder how many people think they are succeeding in this?
|And there shouldn't be obstacles to prevent anyone who is doing genius. |
It's perfectly possible to be an evil genius.
Governments are just learning the power that an algo holds over the globe. Just now that reality is hitting home. It's why as Page say, it's Google vs Google. I can't think of a more scary industry to have a monopoly on. Controlling the flow of information. That's massive. 97% market share in mobile search.
Yes, Page is right. But in a way he's way wrong. The biggest threat to Goodle (other than gaining more market share) is the government. That's the threat whether he believes that or not. It's the domino effect. A dominant company, creates loyalty, leading to a monopoly, leading to government intervention. So in theory, if Google wasn't so good at what they do, then they wouldn't be having these hearing with governments.
basically no companies that have good slow decisions,
unfortunately Larry that is not readily believable - for a company that has expressed an interest in getting into the Telco business - this is a shockingly naive view.
If you want to build infrastructure and local plant in particular you are talking about very large projcts which run over multiple decades.
And I am sure gogle does a considderable amount of planning for where to put its DC's the board does not meet for 10 mins and stick a pin in the map.
|Governments are just learning the power that an algo holds over the globe. Just now that reality is hitting home. |
I suspect that this may only be the tip of the iceberg. When the penny really starts to drop with politicians who up until now have not been "getting" it could gather much more momentum.