Google's Rasmussen on Google Maps 134
jbp1337 writes "During a presentation at Sydney University last week, the lead engineer behind Google Maps, Lars Rasmussen offered an interesting insight into how it all came together. Rasmussen is working on a number of AJAX applications that provide a rich desktop-like interface to the end-user from within the Web browser. Other interesting things include a Linux port of Google Earth, the company is opening a new engineering center in Sydney, and Google's design philosophy is based on end-user loyalty - not money. On the rumor of a Web-based office suite from Google, Rasmussen said he is unaware of one 'but there are 3000 people that work for Google'."
It's the same thing (Score:4, Insightful)
When you sell ad space alongside your applications, end-user loyalty is money.
Suggestion: walk soft, carry big stick (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Google Maps Release Worse Than Beta? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:a bit of a "plug" for google in the submission (Score:4, Insightful)
Which makes them money. Google is "all about" making money, just like every other for-profit company on Earth. They choose to do so by creating loyalty in the users of their products, which drives ad sales. In the case of Google, much like television networks, their "customers" are the advertisers, not the actual end users of their products.
Re:Google Maps Release Worse Than Beta? (Score:1, Insightful)
Google Earth for Linux!
How can you fail to miss that? Finally! GE for linux! Rock on! Wheeeeee!!!
Marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
*Everything* Google do is a way to make people look at more adverts. Providing services for users just makes more users look at them. Perhaps this is why they are the largest advertising agency in the world?
Re:Gmail as a web-based word processor (Score:1, Insightful)
Terminal computing ain't going anywhere, not for a long time.
Re:a bit of a "plug" for google in the submission (Score:4, Insightful)
Technology vs Ethics (Score:4, Insightful)
What about ethicists? How many of the people at Google are in charge of considering the impact of what they do, or do they all just assume the spread of knowledge is unconditionally good? (It hasn't necessarily worked out that way in atomic energy, for example. And even less auspicious technological advances like reverse-indexing the phone book have had mixed results sociologically. Not to mention search engines themselves, which haven't been 100% positive in their privacy impact.)
Knowledge is not Wisdom. The Ability to do something is not the Right to do it. Were it so, terrorism would be utterly defensible because it pretty uniformly involves the use of knowledge and ability to take some action that serves the selfish or thoughtless need of the person doing it. What stands between terrorism and righteous/respected power is not ability but ethics--not the knowledge of how to do something, but the wisdom to know when not to do something.
Note that I have not called the Google folks terrorists nor said they shouldn't do what they do. I'm just tired of seeing stories about what Google can do, and I'm interested in seeing more stories about how Google itself decides what is good and bad for it to actually do. Is it really mere lack of engineers that is holding them back from doing arbitrary things? Or do they factor in issues of privacy, security, morality, etc. into their basic design. I'd love to see some stories about that because in stories like this one here, it always seems to be a lacking element. Is profit motive and national law all that the world needs to adjust in order to assure that our collective sensibilities are not violated? If something is not illegal, is that an invitation for Google to do it (ready supply of engineers permitting, of course)?
I don't think they only need engineers. I think they also need ethicists. What I don't know is whether they think that.
Re:Gmail as a web-based word processor (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Gmail as a web-based word processor (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Technology vs Ethics (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would Google have Ethicists 'in charge' of considering the impact of what it does? Ethicists function best when they are able to independently comment on the actions of such corporate entities in a forum conducive to public review and consideration. A forum where an open debate of the pros and cons of actions can be proposed by a plurality of Ethicists and concerned observers. Having an Ethicist in a position where their self interest is coincident with the business interests of their employer seems like a situation designed to marginalize the ability of the Ethicist to affect change.
Dan
Re:Suggestion: walk soft, carry big stick (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Suggestion: walk soft, carry big stick (Score:2, Insightful)
Compare with the current situation of Google vs. Microsoft. Microsoft can't force Google to stop selling search, because Google's search service is already free (supported by ads). All Microsoft can do is bring competing services to the market, but that's not a slam-dunk. When MS bundled IE with Windows that really cut into Netscape's browser market share, because most people would not bother to get a web browser if they already had one.
So, trying to compare history with the present, I guess the scariest thing Microsoft could do would be to ship IE with a bunch of links already pointing to Microsoft services. Don't they already do that? And isn't Google still doing well?
Google became the #1 search engine because they returned better results than the competition, and PEOPLE SWITCHED. The browser wars history shows us that people don't usually switch browsers, but Google shows that people do switch web services if one is better.
So all Google has to do is keep offering really good services and there is little Microsoft can do to hurt them. If Google keeps offering the best services, and pioneers new ones to get first-mover advantage, they will keep winning.
Re:Gmail as a web-based word processor (Score:1, Insightful)
For those of us using reliable hardware, that's not a real benefit. I could've written this reply in any of a dozen text editors or word processors on my system, spell checked it, and saved it to my hard drive, a CD, a flash drive, a floppy disk, my work's network or my hosting company's servers. All of which I trust more than google's servers.
Possibly. Or they can cancel your account and delete all your data at their whim. From gmail Terms of Use: Google may at any time and for any reason terminate the Services, terminate this Agreement, or suspend or terminate your account. In the event of termination, your account will be disabled and you may not be granted access to your account or any files or other content contained in your account although residual copies of information may remain in our system.
Re:pretty, but that's it; no real feature innovati (Score:2, Insightful)