As a young company about twelve or so years ago, with only a few scores of employees, Google had this corporate mantra: Don't Do Evil. The company was kind of cool in those days, as it generously embraced open source codes.
The Google search engine was powerful and it was free. In fact, one of my friends joked that if you wanted to search Microsoft website for anything, you were better off using Google Search, rather than the Bing search engine developed by Microsoft. He meant it! That was how advanced the Google search program was. Computer programmers also loved Google for its participation in open-source initiatives and its readiness to share codes and enhance integration with its tools. Now, it's beginning to seem that those good old days of Google conscience are slowly ebbing away in the face of growing pains and the reality of a competitive tech world. Or was Google kind of naïve to start with?
Obviously, Google is the classical textbook break-through company; the envy of virtually any high tech enterprise. The company now has over 30,000 employees, from the few dozens of twelve years ago, and its core corporate mission seems to be undergoing some transition. At least, that is what it looks like, looking in from outside. One thing is sure: these days many companies and a few international organizations are going after Google, accusing the company of not being friendly in its operations, if not being outright ruthless. Basically, folks are accusing Google of not being true to its proclaimed mantra. The Authors Guild, the European Union (EU) and even Microsoft are examples entities that are going after the search engine giant.
But why is everyone hating on Google? One thing is certain, the more an enterprise moves into the turf of other companies, the more fights it will generate. Back then, Google was just a search engine company, although a good one at such. Now, the company is getting into all sorts of enterprise; apparently to ensure its long-term survival. Who knows, this search engine stuff may not be paying Google's bills after all.
My first inkling of Google's expansionism was a few years ago, when I was trying to help a friend apply for the Nigerian visa. I was surprised to discover that the application software being used by the Nigerian government to process the payment for the visa was actually owned by Google. I thought that such a relatively simple web application program could have been sourced (by the Nigerian government) from a Nigerian company. Google is sure dabbling into other things as well. We have the Google mail (or Gmail), the Google mobile phone operating system (Android), Google browser (Chrome), Google maps, Google Docs, Google+ (its social media app). Moreover, the company now wants to start manufacturing its own phone (courtesy of the Motorola acquisition) and perhaps its own desktop computers. I also learned that Chromebooks is coming. The idea is that Google is more likely to collide with competitors as it takes on the other tech giants like Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, and even Facebook.
It is of course noted that a few of these new Google products are below the industry standard, reminiscent of the "Jack of all Trades" syndrome. Most notable of this is its social network (Google+). Although Google's CEO, Larry Page, touts this product as a robust competitor in the arena of social networks, objective data suggests otherwise. In fact, Google+ is rated below these other social networks: Facebook, Tumblr, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Pinterest. Specifically, from a recent New York Times article, for every 405 minutes a visitor spends on Facebook, we only have 3 minutes for Google+. The main problem of course is that Google+ is not significantly differentiated from the other competing programs that folks already use (Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, Twitter), thereby providing no incentives for customers to switch.
The need for survival might actually be at the heart of the new wave of radical business moves by Google. One of the fights that the company is nursing is the complaint filed by Microsoft with the EU antitrust authorities accusing Google and Motorola Mobility of charging too much for use of its patents. However, the issue that has received the most attention in recent weeks is Google's new data-sharing policy. Basically, the company is saying that the information it collects from users of its services, which include YouTube, Gmail, Google Maps, Google+, and Google Docs, will be compiled into a single dossier for Google's use. It is believed this integrated data will help Google to properly customize paid advertisements. This policy, which came to effect on the first of March this year, has ruffled many legislative feathers. The French data protection authority felt that the policy appears to violate EU law. A request to Google by the EU that the adoption of the policy be delayed pending further investigation was flatly ignored by Google. The proposed data security policy has also been criticized by privacy advocates in the United States, who are asking their Congress to look into the policy. Google is accused of putting advertisers' interest ahead of the interests of the users. Google is also being investigated in Brussels for its dominant position in internet search. The privacy policies of Google services, particularly its street-view mapping features, have also been the subject of investigation in some EU countries.
It does seem that Google is growing too big for conscience. A new mantra to match might just be on its way. But more seriously, can Google end up the way Yahoo and AOL did?
No comments:
Post a Comment