NYT On Yahoo's US Gains & Google's Endless Betas
We’ve had nearly a year of full-blown search wars, but the New York Times notes in
Search Sites Play a Game of Constant Catch-Up that despite new releases and “me too” matching of
products, Google has still increased its share of searches worldwide from 44 percent in November 2003 to 47 percent in November 2004.
So all’s great for Google? Not at all. Yahoo had a gain too, from 25 to 27 percent. And in the US, it was much more dramatic. Google rose from 37 percent to only 38
percent. Yahoo leaped from 29 percent to 35 percent, not that far behind Google’s share.
What’s behind the gains? The article has lots of quotes from me commenting on how Yahoo shows a desire to define a project, deliver on it and move on. In contrast, I remark
how Google delivers something in beta form, then moves on to something else without seeming to finish the job.
Whether this operational style is behind Yahoo’s growth or if there are other factors, I don’t know. Google responds that it’s hard to say it’s dropped the ball on any
major releases. With respect, I beg to differ:
The reality is that Google seems to have no distinction between what makes a “beta” product versus a “final” product. Even the story notes that some of the beta products
from Google have been upgraded with new features over time. Any of those times would have been a time to take them out of beta.
How about this roadmap to follow:
As for point releases, these needn’t be labeled for the general public. Froogle doesn’t have to be called Froogle 2, for example. But it is useful to use the terminology
for those who are commenting on the changes. It lets us say things like “the second release of Froogle” and know there are substantial alterations that have happened.
Google Groups is a classic example of this. Google Groups was a final product. A new Google Groups 2 came out in limited beta. Then it was deemed good enough to replace the
original Google Groups. That happened — but what DIDN’T happen was removing the name beta from what really
was a final product.
Believe me, I love that Google has a fun, creative process — something I did mention as part of my interview for the NYT story but which didn’t make the cut. That’s
probably because I was much more negative about being frustrated by the lack of completion Google has shown.
At this point, Google is well overdue for an operational pause. Don’t roll out anything new until you bring stuff out of beta or declare it dead and no longer supported.
Then please give me a wealth of new, fun, exciting and technologically disruptive things in the way you do so well — as well as a firm timeline as to when those things will
either receive official, final support or get rolled back out from public view.
More more on this topic, also see More On The Endless Betas Of Google and if you’re a Search Engine Watch
member, my
Breaking Out Of Google’s Beta Limbo that charts when major Google services were launched
and how they they were (or still are) in beta.