As for my 'thinking' on Google, here's the way I see it. I see people giving money to Dell. I see people giving money to HP. I see people giving money to Adobe and Microsoft ($deity only knows why). I even see people giving money to Apple.
When was the last time I saw someone buy something from Google? I've met two or three people with Android phones. yeah, so Google gets what - a $10 royalty? Don't spend it all at once!
Which then raises the question: who/where/when/what on earth is paying for all this 'free' stuff that Google gives away? Surely it must be the advertising!
And if advertising is really the only thing they have bringing home the bacon, eventually the bean counters from advertising are going to run the company (if they don't already). Google maps is awesome, but I never once paid for the privilege... how did they afford to put all those cars on the road eh?
What I see is things like Google buying youtube, and then making it worse by slapping ads on it. I view Google as a modern day King Midas. But they don't turn things to gold, what they touch gets covered in advertising instead.
Secondly, I have noted several instances where Google has been very 'cavalier' (to be generous) with the truth
(no we're not sniffing your wifi. Okay, we're sniffing your wifi, but only accidentally. Okay, we're doing it systematically and deliberately, but we're not storing it. Okay, we're storing it, but nothing important. Okay we're sniffing your passwords, are you happy now?!?!?!)
also privacy (Eric saying he doesn't believe in it - has he been snorting the Zuckerman again?), or even lives
(see also: Chinese dissidents being sold up the river to Beijing by Google)
Google was bending over big time for the oppressive regime, until China tried to hack them, when they suddenly grew a backbone and started standing up to them. That's not character. That's not 'not being evil'.
===
NB: me saying Google is not perfect is not the same as saying that some other company is perfect. what I was saying originally is that not only is it unfair to compare Google to Apple because of Apple's unusually good current results, but also they are different kinds of companies, working in mostly different markets (fundamentally Google is an internet based advertising company, and Apple is a media/hardware company - comparing them is like comparing a biotech stock with Walmart, it just doesn't make sense. Moreover, one of the primary differences in their financial results is that Google is in a saturated market, but Apple is not. It is hard to be a 'growth stock' in a saturated market where you already have a massive monopoly.