Google, Facebook and the Silicon Valley paradox

The paradox of Silicon Valley is cloud and social media companies want us to use the products they won’t use themselves.

One of the great advertising campaigns of the 1980s featured entrepreneur and Remington Shaver CEO Victor Kiam telling the world “I liked the product so much I bought the company”.

The modern equivalent of Victor Kiam’s slogan is “eating your own dogfood” where businesses use their own products in day to day operations. It’s a great way of discovering weaknesses in your offerings.

One of the paradoxes of modern tech companies is how they don’t always eat their own dogfood when it comes to their business philosphies – they expect their customers to take risks and do things they deem unacceptable in their own businesses and social lives.

The best example of this are the social media services where founders and senior executives take great pains to hide their personal information, a phenomenon well illustrated by Mark Zuckerberg buying his neighbours’ houses to guarantee his privacy.

Just as noteworthy  are the policies of Google’s IT department, for past five years most tech evangelists – including myself – have been expounding the benefits of business trends like cloud computing and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies.

Now it turns out that Google doesn’t trust BYOD, Windows computers or the Cloud, as the company’s Chief Information Officer, Ben Fried tells All Things D of his reasoning of banning file storage service Dropbox;

The important thing to understand about Dropbox,” Fried said, “is that when your users use it in a corporate context, your corporate data is being held in someone else’s data center.”

This is exactly the objection made by IT departments around the world about using Google’s services. It certainly doesn’t help those Google resellers trying to sell cloud based applications.

Fried’s view of BYOD also echoes that of many conservative IT managers;

“We still want to buy you a corporate laptop, get the benefits of our corporate discounts, and so on. But even more importantly: Control,” Fried said. “We make sure we know how secure that machine is that we know and control, when it was patched, who else is using that computer, things like that that’s really important to us. I don’t believe in BYOD when it comes to the laptop yet.”

Despite these restrictions on Google’s users, Fried doesn’t see himself or his department as being controlling types.

“But the important part,” Fried said, “is that we view our role as empowerment, and not standard-setting or constraining or dictating or something like that. We define our role as an IT department in helping people get their work done better than they could without us. Empowerment means allowing people to develop the ways in which they can work best.”

Fine words indeed when you don’t let people use their own equipment or ask for a business case before you can use Microsoft Office or Apple iWork.

That Google doesn’t give its staff access to many cloud services while Facebook’s managers restrict their information on social media shows the paradox of Silicon Valley – they want us to use the products they won’t use themselves.

Back in the 1980s, Victor Kiam liked what he saw so much that he bought the company. You’d have to wonder if Victor would buy Google or Facebook today.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

Crumbling cookies

Internet cookies are dying, what will replace them?

On the last ABC radio spot we looked at how our data is being tracked, in the following 702 Sydney program with Linda Mottram we looked at the role of Internet cookies and online privacy.

Cookies – tiny text files that store visitors’ details on websites – have long been the mainstay of online commerce as they track the behaviour of web surfers.

For media companies, Cookies have become a key way of identifying and understanding their readers making these web tracking tools an essential part of an already revenue challenged online news model.

Cookies also present security and privacy risks as, like all Big Data, the information held within them can be cross-referenced with other sources to create a picture of and often identify an internet users.

These online data crumbs often follow us around the web as advertising platforms and other services, particularly social media sites, monitor our behaviour and the European Union’s Directive on Privacy and Electronic Communications is the first step by regulators to crack down on the use of cookies.

Similar moves are afoot in the US as regulators start to formulate rules around the use of Cookies, in an Australian context, the National Privacy Principles apply however they are of limited protection as most cookies are not considered to be ‘identifiable data’, the same get out used by US government agencies to monitor citizens’ communications.

Generally these rules promise to be so cumbersome for online services Google is looking at getting rid of cookies altogether .

Ditching cookies gives Google a great deal of power with its existing ways of tracking users and ties into Eric Scmidt’s stated aim of making the company’s Google Plus service an identity service that verifies we are who we say we are online.

Whether Google does succeed in becoming the web’s definitive identity service remains to be seen, we are though in a time where the questions of what is acceptable in tracking our online behaviour are being examined.

For the media companies and advertising, putting the control of online analytics in the hands of one or two companies may also add another level of middle man in a market where margins are already thin if not non-existent.

It may well be that we look back on the time when we were worried about  internet cookies tracking us as being a more innocent time.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

Who will win the race for wearable computers?

The race for computers that work in glasses is hotting up and there’s no guarantee Google will be the winner.

The news that wearable technology company Recon has secured funding from Intel and shipped fifty thousand devices reminds us that it’s not just Google who are in the market developing glasses that work as computers.

Other companies competing with Google include Glass Up, an Italian startup that’s teamed with Australian company Nubis to provide a wearable device that’s controlled by a smart phone app.

It’s tempting to think that the battle for wearable technology will be won by Google as they are biggest and best funded company, but history shows us size and incumbency don’t always guarantee success.

Google themselves have failed many times when they’ve tried to enter new markets, regardless of the money and resources they’ve thrown at the market.

The best recent example of this is Microsoft’s forays into smartphones and tablet computers during the Windows XP period – A decade ago it was obvious to everyone that Windows based phones and tablets would dominate those markets.

As it turned out the clunky and awkward to use devices scared customers away and it was Apple and Steve Jobs who ended up being the dominant players.

So it may well be that a company we’ve written off – maybe Microsoft – who might end up being the leader in wearable computers, although it’s more likely an upstart like Recon or Glass Up will eventually be the leader.

It may even be that glasses don’t work out as wearable computers at all.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

Microsoft’s continued evolution

Microsoft are evolving to a changed market, but can they evolve quickly enough to beat their competitors?

Today’s investor briefing by software giant Microsoft shows the company’s evolution as their markets shift.

Microsoft Chief Operating Officer Kevin Turner broke out the key numbers for the company’s revenues which illustrate just how the company’s business model is changing.

Over half of Microsoft’s revenues are coming  from enterprise customers and of the product lines, Office unit makes up just under a third, Server and Tools slightly more than a quarter while Windows has fallen to 25 percent.

Despite the decline in Widows’ revenues, there’s no doubt about Microsoft’s determination to drive the PC upgrade cycle through the retirement of Windows XP as Turner explained.

We have a giant XP install base. But guess what? We’ve made so much progress on that XP install base. It’s down to 21 percent worldwide, and we have plans to get that number to 13 percent by April when the end-of-life of XP happens.

A big part of the change is the shift to the cloud with Turner claiming two hundred percent growth in Microsoft’s Azure services.

Despite the change in Microsoft’s focus, the threats remain with Apple releasing both iOS7 and their new range of iPhones along with Google making their QuickOffice mobile app free to iOS and Android users.

While Microsoft are steering their ship around, the incumbents in other sectors are protecting their positions. In an evolving world, survival is not guaranteed.

Similar posts:

Google’s lost Docs mojo

Has Microsoft seen off Google’s threat to their office suite dominance?

Last week I spent the day at Xero’s Australian convention speaking to various cloud service companies, bookkeepers and accountants.

One of the notable organisations missing in the conversations was Google – two or three years ago, Google Apps would have been at the front and centre of conversations about cloud services and integration. Yesterday the company was barely mentioned.

Part of the reduced buzz around Google Apps at XeroCon is due to Xero’s closer relationship with Microsoft, but it also betrays how Google Docs is no longer the smartest, newest product on the block.

“We tried to eat their dog food, but our staff rebelled,” one manager of a marketing agency who worked with Google told me. “We thought we’d go Google Apps for all the work we were doing with them but we just found the products lacked the functions we needed.”

The main problem for business users are Google Docs’ slimmed down feature. While most people don’t use 95% of the tools included in Microsoft Word or Excel, each person uses a different 5% and find something critical missing from the cloud based challenger.

For writers, Google Docs’ lack of a word count function is a deal breaker. Speakers find the Presentation function far too basic concerned to the Microsoft Powerpoint or Apple Keynote packages.

In the cloud computing industry, Application Program Interfaces (APIs) are all important as these allow other services to plug into data and enhance value for users. Over the last two years, Microsoft have done a good job in cultivating their developer community while Google have taken theirs for granted.

Most importantly though is that Google seems to have lost focus on their productivity suite, it may be another example of the company’s corporate attention deficit disorder, or it may be be that Microsoft have seen off another challenge to their dominance in that sector.

If it is the latter, then Microsoft have done a good job with Office 365 in seeing off the threat that Google posed.

Despite the company’s challenges in the post-PC, post- Gates era it would be dangerous to write Microsoft off.

Similar posts:

On running late

Is chronic lateness a trait shared by the entire tech industry?

Business Insider’s unathorised biography of Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is both enlightening and scary while giving some insight into the psyche of the tech industry.

Nicholas Carlson’s story tells the warts and all tale to date of a gifted, focused and difficult to work with lady who’s been given the opportunity to lead one of the Dot Com era’s great successes back into relevance. It’s a very good read.

Two things jump out in the story; Mayer’s desire to surround herself with talented people and her chronic lateness.

When asked why she decided to work at a scrappy startup called Google, which see saw as only having a two percent chance of success, Mayer tells her ‘Laura Beckman story’ of her school friend who chose to spend a season on the bench of her school varsity volleyball team rather than play in the juniors.

Just as Laura became a better volleyball player by training with the best team, Mayer figured she’d learn so much more from the smart folk at Google. It was a bet that paid off spectacularly.

Chronic lateness is something else Mayer picked up from Google. Anyone whose dealt with the company is used to spending time sitting around their funky reception areas or meeting rooms waiting for a way behind schedule Googler.

To be fair to Google, chronic lateness is a trait common in the tech industry – it’s a sector that struggles with the concept of sticking to a schedule.

One of the worst examples I came across was at IBM where I arrived quarter of an hour before a conference was due to start. There was no-one there.

At the appointed time, a couple of people wandered in. Twenty minutes later I was about to leave when the organiser showed up, “no problem – a few people are running late,” he said.

The conference kicked off 45 minutes late to a full room. As people casually strolled in I realised that starting nearly an hour late was normal.

It would drive me nuts. Which is one reason among many that I’ll never get a job working with Marissa Mayer, Google or IBM.

A few weeks ago, I had to explain the chronic lateness of techies to an event organiser who was planning on using a technical speaker for closing keynote.

“Don’t do it,” I begged and went on to describe how they were likely to take 45 minutes to deliver a twenty minute locknote – assuming they showed up on time.

The event organiser decided to look for a motivational speaker instead.

Recently I had exactly this situation with a telco executive who managed to blow through their alloted twenty minutes, a ten minute Q&A and the closing thanks.

After two days the audience was gasping for a beer and keeping them from the bar for nearly an hour past the scheduled finish time on a Friday afternoon was a cruel and unusual punishment.

This was by no means the first time I’d encountered a telco executive running chronically over time having even seen one dragged from the stage by an MC when it became apparent their 15 minute presentation was going to take at least an hour.

It’s something I personally can’t understand as time is our greatest, and most precious, asset and wasting other people’s is a sign of arrogance and disrespect.

Whether Marissa Mayer can deliver returns to Yahoo!’s long suffering investors and board members remains to be seen, one hopes they haven’t set a timetable for those results.

Similar posts:

Fighting in the sandbox

The walled gardens of the mobile phone industry aren’t good for users.

The current spat between Microsoft and Google over the Windows Phone YouTube app illustrates the value, and hindrance, of the internet’s walled gardens.

Google’s locking Microsoft Phone users out of YouTube shows the strength of these online empires and when coupled with control of the mobile phone platforms, as Google has with Android, it makes it hard for outsiders to compete.

In one respect, this is corporate karma coming back to bite Microsoft who ruthessly exploited their market position with Windows, MS-DOS and Office through the 1990s and early 2000s.

That doesn’t change the problems facing Microsoft Windows Phone users who want the same access to internet services enjoyed by Android and iPhone owners.

Being locked out of a service because of the product you choose to use is in many ways the antithesis of the internet and challenges the underpinnings of the online economy.

All internet and mobile phone users need to watch how this spat between Microsoft and Google develops, captive markets aren’t good for anyone.

Similar posts: