Is Google Too Smart For Its Own Good? 194
An anonymous reader writes in with a piece in Fortune speculating on what's next for Google. The writer believes that a supersaturated solution of very smart people, plus stock that may have run out of upside, will yield what he calls Son of Google — a large wave of innovative companies created by Google graduates. And a Google less intent on hiring, and less able to hire, the very smartest people around. Could happen.
Perhaps... (Score:5, Insightful)
Online service providers (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure that online service providers are going to be naturally monolithic in the way that, say, hardware manufacturers or pre-web software companies are. I find it easy to imagine that Google's core business could be wiped out in a year by a new upstart with a better technology. Microsoft are lucky in that they have established lock-in - it will be superceded by something else over the long term rather than replaced by superior products of the same ilk. Google doesn't have any lock-in, and I think the nature of online serices is such that companies that try to establish it aren't going to be successful.
Re: Is Google Too Smart For Its Own Good? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Perhaps... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Complaint? About spinoff's? (Score:3, Insightful)
AFAIK they still happily throw out 99.9%+ of all candidates tagged as potentials by their headhunters leaving only what they like. The "cannot hire" is when the candidates start to turn them down. This happened to Yahoo and their other major competitors very long ago. In fact as far as yahoo goes many people turn it down even before reading the job description to the end (for plenty of reasons).
This is yet to happen to Google. I have yet to see a person who has been selected for an interview, had an offer and turned it down. At least in Europe.
Frankly, this problem exists only in the feverish hallucinations of the media and analysts.
Maybe, but (Score:4, Insightful)
people.
The kind of people who will form their own companies will do so irrespective of whether they work for google first.
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Which wally thought that the primary motivation for programmers was making money?
Pretty much every study of programmers motivations i have ever read has shown them to be intrinsically motivated by the opportunity to solve puzzles, and to be able to hang out with birds of similar feather. The fact is that money isn't that much of a motivator for coders, provided there is sufficient to buy toys. The latest laptop. A 30" lcd into which to plug said laptop. A plasma telly and an xbox 360 on which to play halo.
Starting up a company is risky, there is a bucket load of work to do that isn't coding, and you have to stop talking to all the other coders who you like chatting with at work. Wtf?
Someone has NO CLUE how coders think. And this made it to the front page of slashdot how, exactly?
You don't graduate FROM google... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Innovative projects (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Google's success. (Score:3, Insightful)
You people make it sound like they fell into a pile of money, or the managed their way into the market which is absolute rubbish.
Re:Google's success. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Google's success. (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone else could have come up with the text ads earlier. They didn't. Google got there first.
Luck?! (Score:3, Insightful)
A little off-topic, but in an interview the golfer Bernard Langer was once told that he was extremely lucky to sink a particularly difficult put.
He responded 'The more I practise, the luckier I get!'.
I don't believe the successes of Google or Microsoft are down to luck. Neither do I think that Warren Buffett is a lucky investor.
Being opportunistic and taking a calculated risk sounds more like it.
Google too smart for it's own good (Score:3, Insightful)
If Google is "too smart for it's own good", I suppose same people would say "Microsoft is too dumb for its own bad".
Then suddenly it all makes sense. Right? Nope. But still good 'nuf for Slashdot, start the presses!
Re:Poor Google! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Google's success. (Score:2, Insightful)
Someone else would have written that thesis, and would have leapt on the chance. They might still write a thesis, but they'll find that the gulf has been filled. They lose out, because they're unlucky enough to have come to it too late.
Re:Maybe, but (Score:3, Insightful)
No the content of his post was insightful, if you're not able to ignore some minor spelling mistake (maybe it was late in his timezone, or he was in a hurry, etc), go away.
Your post isn't insightful at all, the GP is right there are many different type of intelligence and being labelled smart doesn't mean that you have all these skills, only a few specialised.