Google is the new Yahoo | Hacker News Reader

Google is the new Yahoo

elgan.com

20 pointseloop12 comments

>Personally, I've spent thousands of hours lovely crafting publication-quality opinion pieces. This is what I do for a living, and I gave my time and labor over to Google+ for free.

> Now, Google is going to flush all my work down the toilet.

This is hyperbolic. Unless I'm misunderstanding, the thing this person does is write words and words are easily transported to some other publishing platform.

Publishing words also involves a bit of typesetting; not much, but some. It may need to be re-done on a new platform.

Exporting a large body of work is not trivial if you don't know how to do it programatically. Heck, even a blog migration from Blogger to Wordpress isn't flawless, for me it failed to import comments correctly so I lost those.

So, while I agree with your overall sentiment, I can't avoid feeling a bit of pain on behalf of the authors that need to move their work now.

Google is not Yahoo. It never was. It's like a mad scientist, trying a lot of different things and then shutting them down if they don't work.

But I agree, Google+ sucked. Also, if you are content creator, you really should post on your own website first, and then republish the content on sites like Medium, Google+ etc.

Why would you want to republish on medium & Co. if you have your own website?

That is a discipline called content syndication, in which one as an author publishes the majority or the total piece of text into other places with the objective of reaching new public.

The easiest task is syndicate over other platforms like medium were you can find more people instead of just waiting to people to arrive via google.

Google is leading in artificial intelligence, self driving cars, nsa wiretapping, and has ambitious investments in a variety of companies through GV.

It’s not Yahoo. It’s not even close.

JP Morgan Chase seems more like Yahoo. Trying to buy their way out of becoming obsolete as their industry transforms.

There are tons of things to complain about Google, but bashing a company just because they close some of their services is rather lame in my opinion. Companies innovate, and it is good to recognize you fail bringing significant value to the market, close what does not work and move on to the next. Staying relevant is difficult enough.

Seems kind of hyperbolic, I very much doubt Google doesn't innovate anymore. Just Kubernetes kills that argument.

Hell, killing off apps is certainly much more about innovation that otherwise. Why would you think that supporting legacy apps means innovation? They can certainly handle it better, but Google tends to be pretty aggressive in how it develops software.

Catchy headline, sure, but the article is just complaints about Google killing its own products. Frankly, almost all of those products are things I wasn't interested in, anyway.

Google does so many other interesting, aggressive things that I think the comparison falls flat beyond that first, shallow point.

I appreciate pruning away mediocre products.

> Google told us Google+ was the future of Google. So we jumped in and engaged.

We did?

Hyperbolic argument.

If you only posted content to Google+ you placed all of your eggs in a single basket.

Being successful in innovation is admitting when things are not taking off and letting products die, no matter how big they are.

Without having the numbers, really hard to justify any argument here.

Unfortunate because I'd be interested in that type of article because it differs so much from how I see it.

> I recently got rid of my MacBook Pro and bought a high-end Pixelbook. And I was leaning toward buying a Pixel 3. But now I'm off the fence. I'll be buying iPhones from now on.

Mobile is the new '90s desktop market

Reply on news.ycombinator.com