James Whittaker: Why I left Google
March 19 2012
Clues, smoke, not necessarily fire, but interesting to see what's apparently happening at Google.
First, an ex-Googler (who apparently has rejoined Microsoft), James Whittaker, wrote a lengthy note on why he decided to leave Google. Very blunt:
The Google I was passionate about was a technology company that empowered its employees to innovate. The Google I left was an advertising company with a single corporate-mandated focus. ...Which then raises the question of whether Google Enterprise is still one of those key arrows. On Friday, Google's Vice President of Google Apps, Dave Girouard, announced that he is leaving to start his own firm. Which, every individual has their motivations, but at a time when the market for cloud-based email and collaboration is growing, I would think it would be a great time to be captain of the ship.
As the trappings of entrepreneurship were dismantled, derisive talk of the “old Google” and its feeble attempts at competing with Facebook surfaced to justify a “new Google” that promised “more wood behind fewer arrows.”
I don't know Girouard. I tried, several years ago, to network with him, but never heard back from him. Maybe that whole priority inbox doesn't quite work as advertised. Or maybe the broader issue, as the GigaOM story I linked above cites:
Last fall, market researcher Gartner estimated that Google Apps for Business represented less than 1 percent of Google’s overall revenue and there is some doubt as to whether the enterprise apps business remains a priority for the company.
Yes, this post is pure conjecture. But we have all been at this long enough to know how to read certain tea leaves. It will be interesting to watch where Google goes from here.
Meanwhile, Seeking Alpha says IBM is poised to become the biggest cloud player in the market. Nice plug for IBM Docs in there as well.
Post a Comment
- 2
Vaughan Rivett http://www.vaughanrivett.co.nz | 3/19/2012 2:56:53 PM
@TimB I too thought that it was odd that he was going back to Microsoft. When was the last time that Microsoft has any standout innovation. The early 90's?
- 3
Henning Heinz | 3/19/2012 4:20:50 PM
I don't think Google ever considered Apps for Business a "key arrow".
The key arrow is: Whatever you do, you can do it with Google. Google Apps for Business is just a small piece in this puzzle.
But even if Apps for Business does not have focus it will automatically get the improvements Google is putting in their ad based services.
Personally I once loved Google for its simplicity, lean design and innovation.
Now many of Googles offerings just aren't simple anymore. They are adding new buttons and dropdowns everywhere. Many of their applications look ugly and innovations are already made elsewhere. The last point is not always a problem though. If you are big enough you can just buy innovation.
- 4
Hubert Wagner | 3/19/2012 4:53:18 PM
To understand Google I can recommend "In the Plex: How Google Thinks, Works, and Shapes Our Lives" by Steven Levy ({ Link } a very interesting read.
- 5
Gwen Jenkins | 3/19/2012 7:11:54 PM
I don't know that it's suspect. Microsoft's offer was probably attractive for other reasons, and came up the winner when Google's commitment to innovation was no longer part of the equation.
- 6
Stuart McIntyre http://blog.collaborationmatters.com | 3/20/2012 3:10:54 AM
Interesting post Ed, I too had read James Whittaker's post and wondered what strands were possible to pull from the personal thoughts and intents of an individual to give us more insight about Google itself.
The issue is that one quickly goes from reasonable conjecture and opinion into the realms of raising FUD about a competitor, something that we as a community have always been quick to criticize others for. Given that IBM as a whole is doing so well right now, I think we need to be careful not to slip into this pattern.
That said, I find Google an interesting beast. Given their income and profitability curve, I think they are at an inflection point. As with Apple, they are doing well by focusing on the consumer space and winning corporate and enterprise business by association (and almost by accident). Do they need to focus on this space to reach the next level of their corporate goals, or can they continue to capture corporate $$s by attracting individuals within those organizations into consumer-targeted platforms like Google+ with the hope/expectation that their organisations will follow? I have a feeling that the latter will prevail... Where that leaves the traditional enterprise IT vendors like IBM and Microsoft only time will tell.
- 7
Nathan | 4/25/2012 2:34:34 AM
Quite a few people left my own department and joined up with Google.
I'm not sure how their corporate culture has changed, but I think they do offer valuable services that I would pay for if they ever went to that model.
Google voice, google phones, google mail, google docs, google search engine, google chrome, and the only thing that hasn't caught on with me is Google Plus. Everyone's still on facebook, so I got no incentive to join and be active until more people are on it.
I will be interesting to see how they move though...if they quit being as innovative and focus mainly on ads, I wonder if they'll one day just be just another services company than the market leader.....and if they'll outsource to IBM? haha.
You could very well be right, but that is a lot of conjecture from a sample size of 2. To me, the most suspect thing about Whittaker's piece was speaking wistfully about being free to innovate, and then going back to Microsoft(?).