Incredibly bad track record of supporting products that don't grow. I'm not saying this to defend Google, I'm still (perhaps unreasonably) angry because of Reader, it's just that there is a pattern and AI isn't likely to fit that for a long while.
My main issue with Google is that internal politic affects users all the time. See the debacle of anything built on top of Android and being treated as a second citizen.
You can’t trust a company which can’t shield users from its internal politics. It means nothing is aligned correctly for users to be taken seriously.
Bus factor et al. is literally CS 101.
No, Reader was killed because it:
- was free
- didn't contribute to revenue growth from ads
It is for a company where the promotion culture rewards new initiatives and products and doesn't reward people maintaining products. Which was most certainly the company culture around the time reader was killed.
This isn't some minor consumer play, like a random tablet or Stadia. Anyone who has paying attention would have noticed that AI has been an important, consistent, long term strategic interest of Google's for a very long time. They've been killing off the fail/minor products to invest in this.
I think we all acknowledge this.
The question is seldom "why" they kill it (I'd argue ultimately it doesn't matter), it's about how fast and what they offer as a migration path for those who boarded the train.
That also means the minute Gemini stops looking like a growing product it's gone from this world, where Microsoft backed alternatives have a fighting chance to get some leeway to recover or pivot.
Microsoft bought FoxBase in 1992. FoxPro never took the world by storm but it had a dedicated group of devs and ISVs who used it and it solved their needs. The last version was released in 2004, long after Microsoft had released.Net and C# and SQL Server. Microsoft officially ended support for it in 2015.
Google? If the product doesn't become an instant #1 or #2 in its market and doesn't directly contribute to their bottom line in a way which can be itemised in their earnings call, it's gone in less than 3 years guaranteed.
Like how many different instant messengers did they make at the same time only to abandon them all instead of just making one and supporting it?
That's irrelevant to me as a user if I've already invested my time into the product.
To an extent all companies do it. Google just does it much more, to a degree that I tend to ignore most Google's launches because of this uncertainty.
I'm sorry.
After Reader, it was Currents, Google TV, Picasa, Google Now, Spaces, Chromecast Audio,Inbox, GCM, Nest, Fusion Tables, Google Cloud Print, Google Play Music, Google Bookmarks, Chrome Apps, G Suite....
Reader keeps coming up because after Reader, Google's motto turned into "Do be Evil"
Have you seen Google Bard anywhere recently? Me neither :)
Now I'm not sure if are you arguing that a name change is not supporting a product or that Gemini is a different product with a different feature set?
With that being said, I am extremely bullish on Google AI for a long time. I imagine they land at being the best and cheapest for the foreseeable future.
[1] https://policies.google.com/terms/generative-ai
[2] https://policies.google.com/terms/generative-ai/use-policy
https://www.xda-developers.com/google-developer-account-ban-...
If their fraud AI is wrong there is now human to talk to.
That day I learned an important lesson: pimpin' ain't easy.
Gemini: Yes, there is a potential risk of your Google account being suspended if your SaaS is used to process inappropriate content, even if you use Gemini to reject the request. While Gemini can help you filter and identify harmful content, it's not a foolproof solution.
Here are some additional measures you can take to protect your account:
* Content moderation: Implement a robust content moderation system to filter out inappropriate content before it reaches Gemini. This can include keyword-based filtering, machine learning models, and human review.
...
* Regularly review usage: Monitor your usage of Gemini to identify any suspicious activity.
* Follow Google's terms of service: Make sure that your use of Gemini complies with Google's terms of service.
By taking these steps, you can minimize the risk of your account being suspended and ensure that your SaaS is used responsibly.
---
In a follow up question I asked about how to implement robust content moderation and it suggested humans reviewing each message...
As an attacker, instead of DDoSing a service we could just upload a bunch of NSFW text so Google kills their infra for us.
Other providers, like OpenAI, at least provide a free moderation API. Google has a moderation API, that after the free 50k requests it is more expensive than Gemini 1.5 flash (Moderation API costs $0.0005/100 characters vs Gemini 1.5 flash $0.000001875/100 characters).
> Google is one of the leaders in AI and are home to incredibly talented developers. But they also have an incredibly bad track record of supporting their products.
This is why we've stayed with Anthropic. Every single person I work with on my current project is sore at Google for discontinuing one product or another - and not a single one of them mentioned Reader.We do run some non-customer facing assets in Google Cloud. But the website and API are on AWS.
https://www.reddit.com/r/googlecloud/comments/wpq0eg/what_is...
The top comment in that page is:
> CLI is the new name for the SDK.The reasoning and strategy was explained in great detail in this podcast:
> https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5mZWVkYnVybmVyLmNvbS9HY3BQb2RjYXN0/episode/NTI5ZTM5ODAtYjYzOC00ODQxLWI3NDAtODJiMTQyMDMxNThj?ep=14
So I click that link, and I'm greeted with: > Google Podcasts is no longer available
> Listen to podcasts and build your library in the YouTube Music app.
This is why AWS and Anthropic are getting our money. We can not trust that Google projects will survive as long as our business needs.Eh... I don't know about that. Their tech graveyard isn't as populous as Google's, but it's hardly empty. A few that come to mind: ATL, MFC, Silverlight, UWP.
I can write something with Microsoft tech and expect it with reasonable likelihood to work in 10 years (even their service-based stuff), but can't say the same about anything from Google.
That alone stops me/my org buying stuff from Google.
And even if C++/CX and C++/WinRT aren't that great, with worse tooling than MFC and in maintenance mode, you can easilly create an application with them today.
Hardly the same can be told of most Google technologies.
I don't know about that: my wife built her first SME on Google Workspace / GSuite / Google Apps for domain (this thing changed names so many times I lost track). She's now running her second company on Google tools, again.
All she needs is a browser. At one point I switched her from Windows to OS X. Then from OS X to Ubuntu.
Now I just installed Debian GNU/Linux on her desktop: she fires up a browser and opens up Google's GMail / GSuite / spreadsheets and does everything from there.
She's a happy paying customer of Google products since a great many years and there's actually phone support for paying customers.
I honestly don't have many bad things to say. It works fine. 2FA is top notch.
It's a much better experience than being stuck in the Windows "Updating... 35%" "here's an ad on your taskbar" "you're computer is now slow for no reason" world.
I don't think they'l pull the plug on GSuite: it's powering millions and millions of paying SMEs around the world.
The challenge is trust.
Google is one of the leaders in AI and are home to incredibly talented developers. But they also have an incredibly bad track record of supporting their products.
It's hard to justify committing developers and money to a product when there's a good chance you'll just have to pivot again once they get bored. Say what you will about Microsoft, but at least I can rely on their obsession with supporting outdated products.