from: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Q4.06/600D65E6-A31E-45CA-AFC5-42BC253F5337.html

"Also, in the 90s it seemed like Apple was releasing many technologies and products that were "one off". They shipped, got no marketing, no follow through, and were abandoned, like Newton Bookmaker, Virtual User, Apple Dylan, The Macintosh TV, and others. It really seemed random."

Isn't google doing the same thing by creating many new things and seeing what sticks? Just being innovative isn't enough. You need to follow through, dot the ï's so to speak.

Possbily – but sometimes 'following through' is the same as 'throwing good money after bad'. After all, an MP3 player from Apple was pretty random – they followed through on that one though. I expect Google will do the same if something really does stick (like GMail).

But following through also applies to things which aren't successful. Brilliant ideas can get lost if you only use popularity as a measurement of success. The size and the fragmented nature of Google can bury a lot of good opportunities.

True. But that approach is impractical when combined with a philosophy of 'try many things' and finite resources. If they followed through on everything they'd have to keep a team busy finishing that taxi finder labs project. I think the very nature of 'see what sticks' and 20% time is that people start a lot of things and work continues on the ones that either 'stick' (== become popular) or are of interest to Googlers (20% time).

You're right though, some potentially good opportunities can fall through the cracks – it's the trade off you get for having the resources available to start more new projects...

Sometimes only by following through with something will it become a success.

Absolutely. I've been involved in a number of projects that have received luke warm responses right up until the final release, when everyone loved it.

I think that's where Google (and Yahoo!) are currently struggling – how do you know what's a good project that just needs to be finished properly, and what's a waste of everyone's time and money?

I'll say this though Walter, you're dead right. Google need to finish at least *some* of their services. 90% of what they release is perpetually in Beta!

If Google's the new Apple, then what's Google's iPod?

Please don't quote from Roughly Drafted. It's plain BS.

Who is Walter?

Google's iPod is search. People thought search was a done deal just like the mp3 market. But the iPod is apple's come-back but search is Google's first and biggest hit.

If your mission statement is 'To organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful' then you are almost obliged to follow through on everything which organizes information somehow.

*-)