Ex-Google employee says Google+ has ruined the company - Polidicks

[IMG]http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2012/03/14/technology/microsoft-google-rant/google-hq.cnn.top.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE]Angry rants about the demise of corporate culture aren't reserved only for ex-Goldman Sachs employees. Microsoft-turned-Google engineer James Whittaker -- now once again a Microsoft employee -- fired off a scathing blast Tuesday on a Microsoft blog about why he left Google. "My last three months working for Google was a whirlwind of desperation," wrote Whittaker, who headed an engineering team for social network Google+. "The Google I was passionate about was a technology company that empowered its employees to innovate. The Google I left was an advertising company with a single corporate-mandated focus." Whittaker, who joined Google in 2009 and left last month, described a corporate culture clearly divided into two eras: "Before Google+," and "After." "After" is pretty terrible, in his view. Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) once gave its engineers the time and resources to be creative. That experimental approach yielded several home-run hits like Chrome and Gmail. But Google fell behind in one key area: competing with Facebook. That turned into corporate priority No. 1 when Larry Page took over as the company's CEO. "Social" became Google's battle cry, and anything that didn't support Google+ was viewed as a distraction. "Suddenly, 20% meant half-assed," wrote Whittaker, referring to Google's famous policy of letting employees spend a fifth of their time on projects other than their core job. "The trappings of entrepreneurship were dismantled." Whittaker is not the first ex-Googler to express that line of criticism. Several high-level employees have left after complaining that the "start-up spirit" of Google has been replaced by a more mature but staid culture focused on the bottom line. The interesting thing about Whittaker's take is that it was posted not on his personal blog, but on an official blog of Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500), Google's arch nemesis. Spokesmen from Microsoft and Google declined to comment. The battle between Microsoft and Google has heated up recently, as the Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission begin to investigate Google for potential antitrust violations. Microsoft, with its Bing search engine, has doubled its share of the search market since its June 2010 founding, but has been unsuccessful at taking market share away from Google. Microsoft is increasingly willing to call out Google for what it sees as illicit behavior. A year ago, the software company released a long list of gripes about Google's monopolistic actions, and last month it said Google was violating Internet Explorer users' privacy. Despite his misgivings about what Google cast aside to make Google+ a reality, Whittaker thinks that the social network was worth a shot. If it had worked -- if Google had dramatically changed the social Web for the better -- it would have been a heroic gamble. But it didn't. It's too early to write Google+ off, but the site is developing a reputation as a ghost town. Google says 90 million people have signed up, but analysts and anecdotal evidence show that fairly few have turned into heavy users. "Google was the rich kid who, after having discovered he wasn't invited to the party, built his own party in retaliation," Whittaker wrote. "The fact that no one came to Google's party became the elephant in the room."[/QUOTE] [url]http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/14/technology/microsoft-google-rant/[/url] This actually makes sense if you think about, Facebook is considered the best advertising platform by far. Google makes all of it's money from ads, their number one product being the search engine. But some advertisers are now feeling there is no need to put an ad on Google, so they are facing an existential threat (at least for search). And since people never leave Facebook anymore (they listen to their music there, they talk there, they put their pics there, use it as their email/im, etc) one day Google will see itself being in trouble. If Facebook adds a search engine...nice knowing you Google.

Google will forever remain king, Facebook can't take that away.

[QUOTE=Crimptor;35151752]Google will forever remain king, Facebook can't take that away.[/QUOTE] Websites and companies rise and fall, you can't tell what's going to happen in the future.

I'm pretty sure Yahoo, Bing, and various other websites pretty much [I]dedicated[/I] to being search engines have proved that Google will be the one to stay.

All of this "Social" bullshit is a fad and more of an excuse to record more of what you do online. G+ is a great social network, but I don't think it should be integrated with Google.

[QUOTE=DemonDog;35151774]I'm pretty sure Yahoo, Bing, and various other websites pretty much [I]dedicated[/I] to being search engines have proved that Google will be the one to stay.[/QUOTE] So what happens when ad revenue for Google search drop significantly? Facebook just keeps growing and getting more and more into people's everyday life. If one day most advertisers see Google ads as a waste a time, Google will become a [I]much[/I] smaller company if you catch my drift.

I personally hate Facebook. The only reason I use it is for homework purposes.

The problem with Google+ is the same as with everything google offers: It's cluttered as fuck and has way too many functions, and nothing works properly.

[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;35151772]Websites and companies rise and fall, you can't tell what's going to happen in the future.[/QUOTE] Google has been around for 14 years, I think it's safe to say they won't being going anywhere any time soon.

[QUOTE=Sharker;35151822]Google has been around for 14 years, I think it's safe to say they won't being going anywhere any time soon.[/QUOTE]No it's not safe. The opposite actually. As a site gets older it has a higher chance of dying. While google isn't going to die, you can't deny there is a chance it could get reduced in size.

What I mean is every year Facebook adds a new feature that makes you not have to leave the site to do something else. Lots of people have replaced email with FB, music services with FB, they read their news on Facebook (social reader), etc Facebook is always thinking of new ways to make you use their site/services. For example there was rumors of Facebook wanting to be involved in bills or something like that IIRC, and Facebook's messaging app is meant to replace SMS since it's free. [editline]15th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sharker;35151822]Google has been around for 14 years, I think it's safe to say they won't being going anywhere any time soon.[/QUOTE] Did you even read? [editline]15th March 2012[/editline] Ok let me simplify this: Name a website, and consider the site's purpose. Facebook is probably thinking of their own version for their site. Example: Yahoo Answers, imagine Facebook makes a Facebook Answers. An example that [I]already[/I] happened: FB Social Reader lets you read news articles from Yahoo, MSN, and more without ever leaving FB.

Posted on a Microsoft blog. OK, yeah I'm sure that's credible.

[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;35152105]Posted on a Microsoft blog. OK, yeah I'm sure that's credible.[/QUOTE] He's not the only one to say this you know, numerous other Google employees have.

[QUOTE=Sharker;35151822]Google has been around for 14 years, I think it's safe to say they won't being going anywhere any time soon.[/QUOTE] Kodak was around for over 110 years

Why dont Google and Facebook just join together? Then they can finally be closer to ruling the world.

FYI, this is a comment made on CNet, which, if true, would say a lot about this former employee and how much he actually cares about Google: [quote]This is typical of Microsofties who wants a fast promotion. The guy left Microsoft at Architect level (Principal Level 65), spend 2 years at Google, and rejoin Microsoft at Partner Level 67. He probably never had any plans to stay in Google for long. The problem is internal Microsoft promotion velocity at Level 65+ are limited and requires business justification to create the promotion headcount, so most Microsofties leave Microsoft for a couple of years and rejoin at 2 levels above. The guy didn’t go to Google for any of the Google+, he’s strictly a corporate ladder climber without the requisite political skills to win an internal promotion within Microsoft. It’s a pity companies like Google don’t recognize such these motives and hire them in the first place.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Sharker;35151822]Google has been around for 14 years, I think it's safe to say they won't being going anywhere any time soon.[/QUOTE] Many previously successful companies have gone under. Just because your an older, well established company doesn't mean anything as to whether or not your future is secure. Like somebody already mentioned, Kodak ran into issues, all of the major US car companies faced issues, etc.

[QUOTE=Crimptor;35151752]Google will forever remain king, Facebook can't take that away.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't be so sure your future kids will know what Google is.

[QUOTE=CanadianBill;35151800]I personally hate Facebook. The only reason I use it is for [B]homework purposes.[/B][/QUOTE] What.

[QUOTE=Askaris;35152563]What.[/QUOTE] probably in a sociology class

[QUOTE=inconspicious;35151790]All of this "Social" bullshit is a fad and more of an excuse to record more of what you do online. G+ is a great social network, but I don't think it should be integrated with Google.[/QUOTE] [i]all[/i] of google's products are basically that. 99% of google's revenue comes from advertisements, they're the largest advertising company in the world.

The problem with G+ is that Facebook simply [I]is[/I] social networking, nothing can replace it.

As much as I like Google and the services it provides (except G+), I don't think its future success is guaranteed; most people never envisioned the titan that was AOL going down.

[QUOTE=Scot;35153053]The problem with G+ is that Facebook simply [I]is[/I] social networking, nothing can replace it.[/QUOTE] Despite the fact that it's horrible in almost every way if we forget the basic social interactions it was intended to provide in the first place.

Google possess multiple ways to earn money, from ads, to their recently renamed Google Play (basically the Android Market, Google Books/Movies/Music in one). Realistically, Google has some really successful products, and some really bad ones (remember that social networking service before Google+?) but overall Google is a company with increasingly leading innovation over the years. But as I see it, it seems to not increase as much anymore. In some cases, I see some declines.

that would imply anyone cared about google+

[QUOTE=Within;35153313]Despite the fact that it's horrible in almost every way if we forget the basic social interactions it was intended to provide in the first place.[/QUOTE] This. It's really buggy. And the mobile apps are even buggier. You should take a look at the ratings for the facebook app on the app store and google play. And the website itself is almost just as bad

[QUOTE=Askaris;35152563]What.[/QUOTE] Well, one of my teachers. He thinks it's more easy to create a Facebook group and post our homework and stuffs we talk about in class there than send out a mail to everyone. I just think his lazy, the school gave me an email to use for school work so why can't the teacher do it?

I wouldn't say that G+ ruined Google, but I don't think it's very successful... It's not bad. It's just late to the party, like the Zune. It does everything it's competition already could, and the features it DOES have exclusively aren't too significant.

[QUOTE=ica|kvantum;35153813]Well, one of my teachers. He thinks it's more easy to create a Facebook group and post our homework and stuffs we talk about in class there than send out a mail to everyone. I just think his lazy, the school gave me an email to use for school work so why can't the teacher do it?[/QUOTE] Mass sending an email to everyone, SO HARD.