walkman - 12:17 am on Sep 11, 2011 (gmt 0)
Alyssa, I read that a while back and he does look like a decent guy. But I read it totally differently. In "search quality" probably there's no real task to do, "like we need to write code for a Q&A section so you do ..." so they might go to investigate certain spam reports or try to devise a new way to rank sites (signals) on their own. I think quite a few of them can hit the make /break button for individual sites but getting major changes live might require a committee of members.
UI changes are a totally different animal, Google will test to death even a shade of blue to make extra cash, let alone a major UI change that was announced with a major media campaign [wired.com...]
Yes, itís true that a team at Google couldnít decide between two blues, so theyíre testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. I had a recent debate over whether a border should be 3, 4 or 5 pixels wide, and was asked to prove my case. I canít operate in an environment like that. Iíve grown tired of debating such minuscule design decisions. There are more exciting design problems in this world to tackle.
I canít fault Google for this reliance on data. And I canít exactly point to financial failure or a shrinking number of users to prove it has done anything wrong. Billions of shareholder dollars are at stake. The company has millions of users around the world to please. Thatís no easy task.
^ personal, non-profit blog so I hope it's Ok as link