Why Google is so Incredibly Undervalued | Hacker News Reader

Why Google is so Incredibly Undervalued

plus.google.com

11 pointsishener6 comments

This is utter bullshit. The author uses sweeping generalizations, claiming that the iPhone, Facebook and Twitter are "shiny things" which people waste their time fooling around with. But Google is this holy, beautiful tool which has forever changed the history of mankind?

Is this the same Google that posts fun "doodles" for various holidays? Is this the same Google which also sells "shiny" toys that directly compete with Apples? And as for Twitter and Facebook, haven't these social networks been used in numerous protests and as tools empowering free-speech around the world?

The truth is that all of these new services and technologies are both frivolous and meaningful. The truth about FB/Twitter/Apple/Google is that they are all somewhere in between a total time-waste and the savior of humanity. But this nuanced answer seems too subtle for this author to grasp.

>> No one comes close to Google's reliability and ability to scale.

Absolutely not true. Google AppEngine (one of the core technologies the link refers to) has issues almost every week, not even close to the stability and reliability of AWS, for example.

I think there are a lot of exaggerations in this.

> In the last decade Google invented the web.

> They built an amazing cloud infrastructure that if it's not 'running' the internet today, there's a good change it will in the future

What is this referring to? App Engine?

> No one comes close to Google's reliability and ability to scale. Anyone can fail but Google.

App engine, gmail, google voice have all failed in the past year.

> Google is a leader in website optimizations.

Google are great at optimisation but mozilla and the webkit team are almost on equal footing. They are definitely not "light years ahead".

Even so, I agree with the sentiment. I think google is a great company and some of the more lesser known stuff they do is really exciting. I remember the journal earlier this year about Google's advances in distributed databases. Those kinds of things is what this article should referencing.

"wasted their time fooling around with Facebook and iPhones"

Is the author oblivious to how the average user has changed how the interact with the Internet because of Facebook and the iPhone?

I'm glad he gets off on making an algorithm 10% faster but if people don't use your technology then it means shit.

Google invented the internet?

The article states "the web". And yeah, Google re-invented it (I certainly agree that the whole post is overflowing with hyperbole... it reads like a very weak attempt at marketing - or maybe it's just trolling?), because it changed the way people use it (the web). If you remember how it was in times of altavista, lycos and yahoo you have to agree that introduction of searches that actually yield relevant, fresh results most of the time was something BIG.

The rest of this post is much less convincing (did I mention I suspect trolling?) - I find it telling that the author mentioned a few companies but not Amazon, for example. With a certain dose of goodwill it can be read as an appeal to companies to focus on "real" stuff more than frontends and marketing, but... I'm not sure if I have that much of good will.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com