On the other hand, AWS announced something as minor as that they were discontinuing one form of accessing publicly available S3 urls that was deprecated in 2010 for the newer one. After a vocal outcry from the internet about how many websites that it would break, they backtracked:
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-s3-path-deprecation-...
On the otherhand, how many Urls were broken when Google discontinued it's link shorterning service?
Google has shown time and time again that it can't be relied upon for any important infrastructure.
Yes, it's true that Google capriciously kills products for various business reasons without any regard for customer sentiment. My counter-point to that is that GCP products exist under different conditions, specifically legal and business realities. They have contractual obligations to corporations with very large legal departments. There is also the business reality that if they're going to compete with AWS and Azure then to be competitive they have to behave in similar ways. If they piss on customer sentiment as they have with their b2c services, they'll fail and I think this is very clear to them.
That's not to say that they aren't already failing. As I mentioned up thread, their support is laughably bad and when pressed about that fact, they don't seem to actually acknowledge how that could be a problem.
At worst, they'll sell off or divest the business entirely. They'll expose themselves to tremendous liability if they attempt to wind it down like their other properties.