As someone who worked in Google Cloud's partnerships team, the way the Early Access Program, not to mention the Alpha --> Beta --> GA launch process for AI products, works, is really dysfunctional. Inevitably what happens is that a few strategic customers or partners get exceptionally early (Alpha) access and work directly with the product team to refine things, fix bugs and iron out kinks. This is great and the way market driven product development should work.

The issues arise with the subsequent stagegate graduation processes, requirements and launches to less restricted markets. It's inconsistent, the QoS pre-GA customers receive is often spotty and the products come with no SLAs, and -- just like Gmail on the consumer side -- things frequently stay in EAP/Beta phase for years with no reliable timeline for launch. ... and then often they're killed before they get to GA, even though they may have been being used by EAP customers for upwards of 1-2 years.

I drafted a new EAP model a few years ago when Google's Cloud AI & Industry Solutions org was in the process of productizing things like the retail recommendation engine and Manufacturing Data Engine, and had all the buy-ins from stakeholders on the GTM side ... but the CAIIS GM never signed off. Subsequently, both the GM & VP Product of that org have been forced out.

In my opinion, this is something Microsoft does very well and Google desperately needs to learn. If they pick up anything from their hyperscaler competitors it should be 1) how to successfully become a market driven engineering company from MSFT and 2) how to never kill products (and not punish employees for only doing KTLO work) from AMZN.

So tactical, wow. Meanwhile OpenAI and others will eat their lunch again.

Agreed. OpenAI also doesn't need to grock with Shareholders fearing a GDPR like-fine. Sadly the larger you are the bigger the pain is from small mistakes.