I remember about 8 or 9 years ago, when Google was really growing, I was having a lot of trouble with Yahoo's email system. Buttons weren't working. They were pioneering a new look I didn't happen to like. It was slow, and plastered in moving ads. And their radio system, still my favorite I've used, disappeared. It was getting a little glitchy, so I decided to try out the Empire's offering: Gmail.
What hooked me to Gmail wasn't the interface or the design, which I can get side-tracked with. What really endeared me to the system was the service. When Yahoo refused to allow me to download, forward, or otherwise save my old messages unless I paid them, Gmail went in and got them for me. All kinds of features other servers wanted payment for, Gmail would do for free. Google could provide almost any digital service I could want, somehow for free. The economics of this still escapes me, but it's valuable to a penny-pincher or the poor. It was very egalitarian. Sure, they were a monolithic economic empire, which was bad, but they provided. Which was nice.
They are still a monolithic empire, but the Google of today is moving ever faster away from that service-first mentality. Examples abound over the last few years. When Plus came out, with it's horrible name and unproven support, they began cancelling other services which already had their built-up user-base, like Buzz and Reader. Almost as if they were trying to force people into something else. Not by adapting them together, not by slowly merging and supporting the features of each, but by taking away the other platform. Today, G-Calendar has quit sending SMS notifications. Because most people have smartphones. And those who don't just better get one! There will be a "fresher and faster version of Drive soon. Get it now or make sure you are ready for it later." That sounds like a threat. So far, this new fresh and fast Drive loses, or makes more difficult, functionality I have come to rely on.
Perhaps it's easy to forget in that monolithic techie tower of theirs, further and further away from their humble beginnings, is that only most people have smartphones. Only some people are fed up with Facebook. There still are the poor, there still are the Luddites. There's still a bunch of people who do not want, and cannot get, calendar notifications through their apps. People will not respond to coercion when there are options. Instead, we'll just go somewhere else because we cannot rely on Google anymore; hoping that there is someone else out there we can rely on.
That's what it really comes down to. reliability. The Google of Yesterday was reliable. The Google of Today is trying so hard to be on the bleeding edge, so hard to be as fancy and easy-to-use (and useless) as Apple, their reliability is suffering. With Google, one of the only things you can rely on is that, someday, they'll get tired of a project and cancel it, leaving you without mobile notifications, or encouraging you to use someone else's online calendar program. Either way, they will be hacking off another collection of their user-base like an unwanted toe.
Why would you become part of that user-base?
The thing that frustrates me most about this is the wasting potential. I am less and less of a fan of Google stuff, but I still see Google as having the best position to make great tools. Apple is so invested in form, they are useless to me. Plus they are the 1% -- They really don't need more money. Worst of all, Apple is committed to taking away user freedom in favor of corporate control, just a little bit each day so we don't notice what we've lost. They are primary drivers in trends that take control away from their users like we're naughty children. They neurotically close up their systems, and have been forcing people toward Apple-only homes since their inception. Even their customer support is autocratic. Microsoft has two-decades experience making the most frustrating systems I've used. Google at least has some intact open-source principles and community driven development. Anyone can design apps for Drive, Gmail, Android, Chrome, et cetera. Once, they had lab features, to make your system a little customized. Once, they listened.
Perhaps I am naive, but I still believe that, as a majority, Google still believes in humanitarian ideals. Their Company Philosophy is written with it; their old, often ridiculed motto "Don't Be Evil" is still around. Perhaps its only my imagination. They don't make software like they used to, 'tis true, but I find it still better than most. For a little re-invigoration, that philosophy should be looked over again every other month or so and their software could improve again.
My ember-like optimism, but I also believe that Google has gotten to where it is because of that "Don't Be Evil" motto. If the company is able to reclaim an image as good-natured, it will inspire loyalty. And the best way to be perceived as good, is to be good. Just not-being-evil isn't quite good enough, we need goodness--especially in the corrupted wealthy world. Evil still prevails when the good do nothing; we need corporations which say: "enough! we will do good." To be as revolutionary as the American constitution was in its day.
Remember: "Evil prevails when the good do nothing."
Be good.
No comments:
Post a Comment