SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Google's constant product shutdowns are damaging its brand
We are 91 days into the year, and so far, Google is racking up an unprecedented body count. If we just take the official shutdown dates that have already occurred in 2019, a Google-branded product, feature, or service has died, on average, about every nine days.
Some of these product shutdowns have transition plans, and some of them (like Google+) represent Google completely abandoning a user base. The specifics aren't crucial, though. What matters is that every single one of these actions has a negative consequence for Google's brand, and the near-constant stream of shutdown announcements makes Google seem more unstable and untrustworthy than it has ever been. Yes, there was the one time Google killed Google Wave nine years ago or when it took Google Reader away six years ago, but things were never this bad.
For a while there has been a subset of people concerned about Google's privacy and antitrust issues, but now Google is eroding trust that its existing customers have in the company. That's a huge problem. Google has significantly harmed its brand over the last few months, and I'm not even sure the company realizes it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday April 03 2019, @08:24PM (3 children)
While that may be, and probably is true; I think the problem with Google abandoning products because they create shiny new products is not caused by that.
I think the problem is due to a cultural problem within Google. People like to start new projects. It's fun. A green field with no buildings on it. Develop it how you would like.
Most paid programmers spend most of their lives maintaining existing code.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by arslan on Thursday April 04 2019, @02:16AM (2 children)
Yea, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Empowering your employees to be bold and start new things and fail fast is actually a pretty good strategy for a company like Google. Agree it is probably not a good approach for all organizations.
If you really want to innovate internally, you really have to actually do stuff than just talking about it and presenting powerpoints and going through analysis paralysis. You can also sit and "absorb", i.e. buy, the innovative startups as an option as well if you have the piggy bank for it. Google's probably doing both.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday April 04 2019, @12:33PM
TFA is about brand and they screwed up the brand. Start up with another brand, then "buy/transfer" to Google if it is successful. That is one reason why parent companies (alphabet) exist.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday April 04 2019, @04:00PM
> Yea, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing.
It can be bad without some control. It might be okay in a startup. But Google isn't a startup anymore.
If you let millennials run wild creating new things that largely overlap with existing things, you're doing it wrong.
The end result is the discontinuation of products the company is bored with, and then the resulting damage to the Google brand that results.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.