or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by anantksundaram

This is what I would have guessed, from the descriptions that DroidFTW linked to. But what do I know...
Oh please, SolipsismX. Give me a tad more credit than that. I am not at all trying to be cute-sy or contentious, as I've repeatedly said. Also, I have pointed out that I actually admire Google (unless, of course, you think I am lying -- although, I would have no reason to). My questions are motivated by a sense of befuddlement that I've had over the years about why everyone thinks Google is such an innovative company. People look at you like you must be daft (no, I am...
Thanks. That was a very helpful link. But I am confused now: Are you saying Google is 'agile' while Apple is 'waterfall'? Or the other way around? How do you know this?
Are there empirical measures/results that show this? (Not Page's thesis, but actual evidence assessed/analyzed by credible third parties). Measures of vague terms such as 'targeted', 'precise', the fact that it could have avoided a 'lifetime of searching'? Again, I am not trying to be contentious, but none of what you guys have said so far has gone beyond the cliches I've heard time and again.
Why don't you enlighten us, instead of throwing out jargon?
1) A product/service, to quote you, that is the result of "...(as usual) it's only after Apple shows them how to arrange the parts that others follow suit" is innovative? Seriously? 2) No, they're not. They're useful improvements. 3) It was a massive marketing innovation. 4) You're just avoiding the question. This is at least the second time, in a conversation that we've had in this Forum (the last time, recall, it was about network externalities).
No, I am simply pointing out that you're no different from the folks about whom you're complaining.
It would help, for starters, if you answered the question I asked you about Google's innovations. Add: Just so you know, I don't hate Google at all. I think it's a fabulous -- but somewhat overrated for their 'innovation' -- company. They've created a lot of value for their shareholders, but also have disintermediated a lot businesses (e.g., print media; musicians and their income).
That's not a persuasive argument. Not by far. I am truly curious as to why everyone thinks Google's search and mail are so amazing. Surely, there must be something that sets it apart? Or was it dumb luck or network externalities or design (white space) or being at the right place at the right time? With mail, was it conversations (which would be not much more than the equivalent of $0.99 pricing in iTunes)? Seriously, I am willing to be persuaded. But an appeal to 'it's...
You're repeating yourself. Please tell us how? (Know that I like Google Search and Google Mail). Ads?!
New Posts  All Forums: