Google ain't all that
the journal of Michael Werneburg
twenty-seven years and one million words
At the prompting of a personal correspondance, I'm adding an entry on my thoughts about Google. I realize I'm not the first to say some of this (by some years).
I'm beginning to think that Google just got lucky the first time 'round with the success of their search. Honestly, their stuff all kinda sucks! Take a step back and
consider:
-that Google mail (perpetually in 'beta' is both clumsy to use and on a trademarked name 'gmail' that they don't own(!)) those tags have always been a bullshit copout on not using folders.
-that Google mail, for all of its glory, is still only at less than 40% the user base of Yahoo! Mail, who have long held a funny attitude towards their user mailboxes (they deleted all of my mail a few years back without notice)
-that google apps hasn't matured at all since the first release, and is still awful for editing spreadsheets etc
-that Google Apps is essentially just a reworking of loathsome Sharepoint but without any of the file-level controls that the otherwise godawful Sharepoint does offer. Meanwhile Dropbox (which our little firm uses to
communicate with our accountant, BTW) is now up to 1.5 million users.
-that Google maps shows you just about anything but what you're looking for if you actually use it to search for something rather than scrolling around the globe looking for stuff
-that it's impossible to sort out (or find explained) how the Google search algorithm actually works, but if you check one of those tools that tests your relevancy on all the big search engines, all the others are in agreement except for Google, which seems to cough up a lot of second-hand blog stuff "hey, so-and-so's got some great content". (Have you tried the 'I'm feeling lucky' tool of late? If you punch in a search to the location bar in Firefox that's what you get, and it's
increasingly slanted away from the good ol' days when Google's search algorithm gave you the most useful results in the first try).
-no one can sort out what Google is doing with the OS's they've released -- why do they need to explain the difference between the two, for instance (and yet the press mutters, "well I guess it's good that
they're competing with MS?")
-Google Earth serves no "must have" need, despite the whizz-bang element and the enormous potential that Google talked up upon release.
-The new Google Wave service ... I still don't even understand let alone see the value it adds for me.
-Google's book search service resulted in a lawsuit of unparalleled size in the history of publishing -- they owe money to each and every author and publisher whose work they've republished (without permission) AND at
the same time ... now have the rights to publish what they want of those works in favour of whatever the hell it is they're trying to do
As for the sitemap stuff. Yes, it's a confusing and nonsensical ordeal (e.g. after all this time, they're indexing much more of my site than I
told them to, but aren't listing everything they've indexed).
I've been reading the suspicions about Google since Chrome came out (I find it curious that they released that after Firefox 3.0 eliminated the speed gaps between Firefox and the webkit browsers). I don't think it's
yet time to fear Google, because I don't think they're "doing evil" (I will if Cheney goes off to work for them). But I don't think they do things as well as they (and everyone else) thinks they do.