A company that has become big needs a new ethos. Google as a company will stick around for a long, long time, but it is not at all a given that Google will continue to be on the bleeding edge. Will Google Wave end up being the last bleeding edge product Google gave to the world?
Staying open is your best bet to sta on the cutting edge for as long as possible.
I believe this is the way forward to making IT more accessible to everyone for nothing. IT is nolonger a luxury but a necessity for our well being. Thank you Google.. :)
Call us when you open your search ranking algorithm, or the design for your servers. Until then this cherry-picked openness sounds a little bit hypocritical.
To quote the Register:
"The company claims to perform all kinds of magic to ensure that its data centers are the most energy-efficient computing houses around, saving Google millions of dollars per year on electricity. Yet the super-secretive ad broker continues to reveal precious little about these data center tweaks.
If Google is actually successful at lowering power consumption, then the secrecy makes sense. It sees the tweaks as a competitive edge over companies such as Microsoft and Yahoo!, which also consume immense volumes of gear and power.
At what point will Google decide that all service providers should have a chance to benefit from its knowledge for the betterment of mankind?"
I liked the philosophy of openness. I have always wondered where does one draw the line between the openness in a corporate environment - and your post here made me realize that it is a fine balancing act - and it keeps changing with the conditions in the market.
Ultimately, there are things which can be opened and some which can't. Most companies just hoard everything. Its refreshing to see Google open up so many things.
I tend to agree about Google's servers and their search algorithms being closed, it's not very nice.
I think that's how they survive for now though, if they released those informations, Microsoft would trample them.
They'll probably release some of that information once they have more other competitive products or when it's getting less risky to release it in general.
In the end, I think those principle Google is trying to define are challenged by reality. The current reality is that law is not in favor of those principles so Google has to do compromises.
Google will not reveal its secret sauce for the same reason Coke will not, KFC will not. It makes market sense why they will not. I say keep up the good work Google.
This post is a response to this Google open treatise by Scott Cleland, Chairman of Netcompetition.org.
Google's Open Double Standard -- Fact-Checking Google's Treatise on "The meaning of open"
Google posted its treatise on "The meaning of open" designed to redefine the word "open" in Google's image. It is an important read because it is a bay window view into the altruistic way that Google yearns for the world to perceive it.
Like most all of Google's PR, however, Google's Treatise on "The meaning of open" may be "the truth" as Google sees it, but it is certainly not "the whole truth and nothing but the truth." I. Google's Open Double Standard
Simply, Google is for "open" wherever it does not have a monopoly or dominant market position, however where it does, as in AdWords, AdSense and search advertising syndication, it is closed, to ensure that its dominance remains impregnable to competitors.
In the height of irony, Google has cleverly flipped a concept that was originally designed to be a sword of competition to a closed monopoly, and applied it as a political/PR shield to protect Google's closed monopoly from competition.
Google admits: "Open systems are chaotic and profitable, but only for those who understand them well and move faster than everyone else." [bold emphasis added] Google de facto admits here that open systems are only profitable for the one that better understands and is faster than "everyone else" i.e the open-opoly winner of the open race. Now light bulbs should be going on in readers heads why Google: Has a master plan to "Make the Web faster;" Serially releases betaware forcing open sourcers to orbit around Google's monopoly center of gravity; and Serially releases more new products and services than anyone (that just happen to uniquely integrate with one another and depend on underlying data and private information that only Google has.)
See Precurorblog for the rest of this critique: http://www.precursorblog.com/content/googles-open-double-standard-fact-checking-googles-treatise-the-meaning-open
Google is the only company that gives me hope for a better future.
In an age when corporate greed is normally allowed to make the company decisions, and most business goals are designed to screw the consumer as much as possible, Google manages to arguably produce more useful products for the public than any other company, give them all away for free to the people, be environmentally responsible in the process, and still make the huge profits necessary to insure they'll be able to keep doing it.
Intelligence, vision, and forward-thinking is something this country has undervalued and lacked in many industries and disciplines and powerful seats for far too long. The corporate engine of greed that has been allowed to drive things for so long is going to run out of gas, and I'm going to be thanking Google when I'm no longer a slave trapped on its train.
And to Lode and others that complain Google's servers and search algorithms or whatever arn't open; He clearly said, they arn't there yet. But there is some information publicly available about both if you look for it.
Well i believe that Google has contributed to being Open, but as it means to do business it has to with hold some information.
Its Search Algorithms if made public Google's gonna lose its monopoly if not all may be a large part of it.
Its server design and other secrets which seem elusive i agree should be made public but that would mean that Google's gonna have to part with something very close to it, and if google wants to have a strong stand in the market for coming years it has to conserve this information.
I have hosted my small site just for learning and fun on Google Sites, integrated it with Google Analytics and Used the Google Apps Standard Version to set up Email and other functions and all that for FREE. When i use these services i feel that google has done a terrific job here otherwise how can someone use all of these as a part of practical education. I have learnt a lot from google and will continue to do so but there is something we all know is happening and will happen in the future..
In some countries Google knows more about the people than its government and the network is spreading and if CHROME gets the success than i am sure that the next closest connection of humans after the PLACENTA would be GOOGLE.
"Simply, Google is for "open" wherever it does not have a monopoly or dominant market position, however where it does, as in AdWords, AdSense and search advertising syndication, it is closed"
Make sense, but Gmail is still closed, why not open source the Gmail?
It seems to me that Google only wants everyone else to be open.
They help software pirates post cracks for the software application my company creates. They scan books and put them online for free.
Type "Photoshop Crack" into Google and you will get hundreds of results. Surely they could easily block this obvious and illegal abuse of intellectual property.
So it's okay to give away my intellectual property, but page rank is secret.
I like Google, but this is hypocrisy of the highest order.
It is always this way. When something good is happening, there are always pessimists who look for something that is not there.
Guys, tell Google how to better things, instead of saying this is not there, this is not free, and so on and on...
Appreciate Google for at least giving whatever they've given for free. They've done a really good job. Look at Microsoft / Yahoo! and then compare them with Google. I've been using Google since 10 years, and it has given me everything I need for free. It is a one stop shop.
Look at the positives, thank Google for whatever they have given us till now, and move on.
Ah, "The meaning of open". I must admit, i'm a little confused by the term, as you use it.
Do you mean "open" as in the Android Market, where users can not download the client or can not access it if their Android phone or device doesn't come with it pre-installed - i assume that means the manufacturers paid Google for that right, ot that you mean to get money from them in the future?
Or do you mean "open" as in sending C&D letters to developers that make your products better and more useful?
Interesting comments. Apparently if you give a starving man a loaf of bread, he expects a feast.
Google is doing more for openness than 99% of other companies. Yes, those who follow RMS's mantra definitely serve a purpose, and have a point. But until the rest of the giant software companies (M$?) catch on, shouldn't we congratulate Google for what it is doing, instead of just asking for more?
Google incorporated in a private corporation engaged in free enterprise.
ReplyDeleteGoogle Inc. is Not a person can disappear in 5-10 years.
Witness Netscape, Sun Micro, Peoplesoft and DEC.
Gongle inc. competes in the free market, marketplace like all other companies.
Liberty and Freedom in a Free world will win in the end.
A company that has become big needs a new ethos. Google as a company will stick around for a long, long time, but it is not at all a given that Google will continue to be on the bleeding edge. Will Google Wave end up being the last bleeding edge product Google gave to the world?
ReplyDeleteStaying open is your best bet to sta on the cutting edge for as long as possible.
I believe this is the way forward to making IT more accessible to everyone for nothing. IT is nolonger a luxury but a necessity for our well being. Thank you Google.. :)
ReplyDeleteCall us when you open your search ranking algorithm, or the design for your servers. Until then this cherry-picked openness sounds a little bit hypocritical.
ReplyDeleteTo quote the Register:
"The company claims to perform all kinds of magic to ensure that its data centers are the most energy-efficient computing houses around, saving Google millions of dollars per year on electricity. Yet the super-secretive ad broker continues to reveal precious little about these data center tweaks.
If Google is actually successful at lowering power consumption, then the secrecy makes sense. It sees the tweaks as a competitive edge over companies such as Microsoft and Yahoo!, which also consume immense volumes of gear and power.
At what point will Google decide that all service providers should have a chance to benefit from its knowledge for the betterment of mankind?"
Great post Jonathan.
ReplyDeleteI liked the philosophy of openness. I have always wondered where does one draw the line between the openness in a corporate environment - and your post here made me realize that it is a fine balancing act - and it keeps changing with the conditions in the market.
Ultimately, there are things which can be opened and some which can't. Most companies just hoard everything. Its refreshing to see Google open up so many things.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree about Google's servers and their search algorithms being closed, it's not very nice.
ReplyDeleteI think that's how they survive for now though, if they released those informations, Microsoft would trample them.
They'll probably release some of that information once they have more other competitive products or when it's getting less risky to release it in general.
In the end, I think those principle Google is trying to define are challenged by reality. The current reality is that law is not in favor of those principles so Google has to do compromises.
Google will not reveal its secret sauce for the same reason Coke will not, KFC will not. It makes market sense why they will not. I say keep up the good work Google.
ReplyDeleteThis post is a response to this Google open treatise by Scott Cleland, Chairman of Netcompetition.org.
ReplyDeleteGoogle's Open Double Standard -- Fact-Checking Google's Treatise on "The meaning of open"
Google posted its treatise on "The meaning of open" designed to redefine the word "open" in Google's image. It is an important read because it is a bay window view into the altruistic way that Google yearns for the world to perceive it.
Like most all of Google's PR, however, Google's Treatise on "The meaning of open" may be "the truth" as Google sees it, but it is certainly not "the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
I. Google's Open Double Standard
Simply, Google is for "open" wherever it does not have a monopoly or dominant market position, however where it does, as in AdWords, AdSense and search advertising syndication, it is closed, to ensure that its dominance remains impregnable to competitors.
In the height of irony, Google has cleverly flipped a concept that was originally designed to be a sword of competition to a closed monopoly, and applied it as a political/PR shield to protect Google's closed monopoly from competition.
Google admits: "Open systems are chaotic and profitable, but only for those who understand them well and move faster than everyone else." [bold emphasis added]
Google de facto admits here that open systems are only profitable for the one that better understands and is faster than "everyone else" i.e the open-opoly winner of the open race.
Now light bulbs should be going on in readers heads why Google:
Has a master plan to "Make the Web faster;"
Serially releases betaware forcing open sourcers to orbit around Google's monopoly center of gravity; and
Serially releases more new products and services than anyone (that just happen to uniquely integrate with one another and depend on underlying data and private information that only Google has.)
See Precurorblog for the rest of this critique: http://www.precursorblog.com/content/googles-open-double-standard-fact-checking-googles-treatise-the-meaning-open
Google is the only company that gives me hope for a better future.
ReplyDeleteIn an age when corporate greed is normally allowed to make the company decisions, and most business goals are designed to screw the consumer as much as possible, Google manages to arguably produce more useful products for the public than any other company, give them all away for free to the people, be environmentally responsible in the process, and still make the huge profits necessary to insure they'll be able to keep doing it.
Intelligence, vision, and forward-thinking is something this country has undervalued and lacked in many industries and disciplines and powerful seats for far too long. The corporate engine of greed that has been allowed to drive things for so long is going to run out of gas, and I'm going to be thanking Google when I'm no longer a slave trapped on its train.
And to Lode and others that complain Google's servers and search algorithms or whatever arn't open; He clearly said, they arn't there yet. But there is some information publicly available about both if you look for it.
Free Free Free Free
ReplyDeleteOpen Open Open Open
Free and Open is good for world.
Used google daily for years and cost Not a single penny.
Google works free and will work in future.
.
ReplyDeleteWell i believe that Google has contributed to being Open, but as it means to do business it has to with hold some information.
ReplyDeleteIts Search Algorithms if made public Google's gonna lose its monopoly if not all may be a large part of it.
Its server design and other secrets which seem elusive i agree should be made public but that would mean that Google's gonna have to part with something very close to it, and if google wants to have a strong stand in the market for coming years it has to conserve this information.
I have hosted my small site just for learning and fun on Google Sites, integrated it with Google Analytics and Used the Google Apps Standard Version to set up Email and other functions and all that for FREE. When i use these services i feel that google has done a terrific job here otherwise how can someone use all of these as a part of practical education. I have learnt a lot from google and will continue to do so but there is something we all know is happening and will happen in the future..
In some countries Google knows more about the people than its government and the network is spreading and if CHROME gets the success than i am sure that the next closest connection of humans after the PLACENTA would be GOOGLE.
http://www.pratyay.co.cc
info@pratyay.co.cc
"Simply, Google is for "open" wherever it does not have a monopoly or dominant market position, however where it does, as in AdWords, AdSense and search advertising syndication, it is closed"
ReplyDeleteMake sense, but Gmail is still closed, why not open source the Gmail?
It seems to me that Google only wants everyone else to be open.
ReplyDeleteThey help software pirates post cracks for the software application my company creates. They scan books and put them online for free.
Type "Photoshop Crack" into Google and you will get hundreds of results. Surely they could easily block this obvious and illegal abuse of intellectual property.
So it's okay to give away my intellectual property, but page rank is secret.
I like Google, but this is hypocrisy of the highest order.
It is always this way. When something good is happening, there are always pessimists who look for something that is not there.
ReplyDeleteGuys, tell Google how to better things, instead of saying this is not there, this is not free, and so on and on...
Appreciate Google for at least giving whatever they've given for free. They've done a really good job. Look at Microsoft / Yahoo! and then compare them with Google. I've been using Google since 10 years, and it has given me everything I need for free. It is a one stop shop.
Look at the positives, thank Google for whatever they have given us till now, and move on.
Ah, "The meaning of open". I must admit, i'm a little confused by the term, as you use it.
ReplyDeleteDo you mean "open" as in the Android Market, where users can not download the client or can not access it if their Android phone or device doesn't come with it pre-installed - i assume that means the manufacturers paid Google for that right, ot that you mean to get money from them in the future?
Or do you mean "open" as in sending C&D letters to developers that make your products better and more useful?
Interesting comments. Apparently if you give a starving man a loaf of bread, he expects a feast.
ReplyDeleteGoogle is doing more for openness than 99% of other companies. Yes, those who follow RMS's mantra definitely serve a purpose, and have a point. But until the rest of the giant software companies (M$?) catch on, shouldn't we congratulate Google for what it is doing, instead of just asking for more?