Death of Google

http://dotnet.sys-con.com/read/603827.htm

So a few days (or weeks?) ago I elegantly posted on the return of the Microsoft juggernaut. Today I present to you the reasons behind Google's eventual downfall if no changes take place.


Let's re-re-rewind to late 1999. It's a fantastic time. Companies are brimming with creativity and inventing a slew of weird and wonderful technologies to make all of our lives much easier. Investors notice and start throwing their money into anything and everything that could very well be the 'next big thing'. As every single idea is great, everybody's value increases, people make millions, everybody's happy! But wait a minute, what about the business side of things? An idea is nothing without a solid plan to market it, sell it, and turn it into something profitable. Oops, seems like everybody forgot about basic business and economic groundrules. So in 2000, everybody crashed down to earth. Majority of people ended up living back like it was 1995 while a few were worse off, possibly even bankrupt due to their lack of judgement.

Fast forward to 2008. We have this fantastic company known as Google. It's brimming with creativity and inventing (or buying out) a slew of weird and wonderful technologies to make all of our lives much easier. Investors notice and start throwing their money into anything and everything that they create (or buy out). It's a wonderful world for an upstart. But wait, Google ain't no upstart, it's almost 10 years old. Know who else is 10 years old? DaimlerChrysler. Now when you think of DaimlerChrysler, what do you see? I see a company full of old, intelligent, gentle, well-mannered men making very high quality but humble cars. They have a long term vision of what they do and stick to a plan.

What about Google? Do you see an army of youthful employees, enjoying the free cafeteria on the ground floor, playing rounds of Halo 3 during work hours, and going for the odd free massage every day or so? Does that sound like an upstart dot-com or a mature well-established company?

And herein lie's Google's dilemma. It's been forever stuck in the upstart dot-com mode for so long that it's effects are clearly apparent in the products that it puts out. Few examples:
#1 = Google News search engine. Sure you can use programming code to fully customize it, but does the majority of the population know even what a 'dir' DOS command is? I want to simply organize a series of news articles by date, newest to oldest, no simple way of doing so.
#2 = Google's Blogger. For basic text entries like all of mine, Blogger's quite fantastic. But it doesn't have a spell checker (so 2006). Google also provides services such as AdSense and YouTube, so you think they'd all be tightly integrated right? Wrong. The process to include AdSense SHOULD be a one-click operation, but instead I had to *READ PARAGRAPHS* of text (when was the last time you did that... other than just now?) to set it up. In terms of YouTube...
#3 = YouTube. For goodness sake, when are they going to have a feature where I can upload my webcam feed directly to YouTube to streamline vlog workflows? I want to start vlogging, but to store the video on my HD is too much work for me (yes i'm lazy).


Google is growing exponentially, releasing great new products on a day-to-day basis. This makes for an overly bloated company that cannot contain itself. Technical support is horribad. Usage of advanced features requires a PH.D (Google programmers need to dumb themselves down to our level). All of this does not bode very well for a powerful company like Google. Much like Microsoft's downfall that took place in early 2000's, I think we're long overdue for the same correction to take place in Google.


Plus then I can buy Google stock at a rediculously low price.