What does this mean? Yes, I understand the English, but I mean deeper: What are you trying to say? And, why does it matter?
Who cares about "losing the trust of the users". What matters is that 99% of "professional workers" don't have a choice what mail/chat/calendar/word processor they use. Their IT department decided for them. And, if they do have a choice, what do they use instead?
> Oh well. Sundar is why we can't have nice things.
Most of Google is now mature products. Run it like a business -- maximize profits. It seems logical to me.
> Who cares about "losing the trust of the users". What matters is that 99% of "professional workers" don't have a choice what mail/chat/calendar/word processor they use. Their IT department decided for them. And, if they do have a choice, what do they use instead?
That's true until is isn't. Complacency's impact is subtle, but no company is actually invincible forever.
> Most of Google is now mature products. Run it like a business -- maximize profits. It seems logical to me.
It is logical if all you want is to extract maximum short-term value from what was already built. To me, the logical conclusion of this path is irrelevance in the long term.
What does this mean? Yes, I understand the English, but I mean deeper: What are you trying to say? And, why does it matter?
Who cares about "losing the trust of the users". What matters is that 99% of "professional workers" don't have a choice what mail/chat/calendar/word processor they use. Their IT department decided for them. And, if they do have a choice, what do they use instead?
> Oh well. Sundar is why we can't have nice things.
Most of Google is now mature products. Run it like a business -- maximize profits. It seems logical to me.