←back to thread

FAQ on Leaving Google

(social.clawhammer.net)
462 points mrled | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.338s | source
Show context
thrtythreeforty ◴[] No.39035233[source]
The author also published [1] an email he wrote at the beginning of his tenure. It is amazing how alien and out of place early Google sounds in today's corporate environment. They have completely eroded the perception that Google is this kind of place:

> Google is the opposite: it's like a giant grad-school. Half the programmers have PhD's, and everyone treats the place like a giant research playground [...] Every once in a while, a manager skims over the bubbling activity, looking for products to "reap" from the creative harvest. The programmers completely drive the company, it's really amazing. I kept waiting for people to walk up to me and ask me if I had declared my major yet. They not only encourage personal experimentation and innovation, they demand it. Every programmer is required to spend 20% of their time working on random personal projects. If you get overloaded by a crisis, then that 20% personal time accrues anyway. Nearly every Google technology you know (maps, earth, gmail) started out as somebody's 20% project, I think.

Even if this was only half-true back then, there's very little you could do to convince me that it's true at all now. This culture and the public perception of it has been squandered.

[1]: https://social.clawhammer.net/blog/posts/2005-09-25-FirstWee...

replies(6): >>39035428 #>>39035523 #>>39035569 #>>39035617 #>>39035738 #>>39046460 #
sjwhevvvvvsj ◴[] No.39035738[source]
Both Maps and Earth were acquisitions. MOST Google products are.

The only two real big success products to come from Google that are still around are Search and Gmail. Maybe you can count Scholar but it’s really just a type of search.

Workspace was assembled from various acquisitions, YouTube they bought, Cloud is just a Jack Ma-esque “copy whatever Bezos is doing” initiative.

Most home grown Google products have either failed or been killed in the cradle. G+, Stadia, etc etc

20% was always a myth.

replies(6): >>39035852 #>>39036708 #>>39036792 #>>39037838 #>>39038129 #>>39045661 #
United857 ◴[] No.39035852[source]
Google Chrome seems like a success as well.
replies(2): >>39035950 #>>39037822 #
linkgoron ◴[] No.39035950[source]
Also forked from something Apple made (Webkit)
replies(4): >>39036019 #>>39036418 #>>39036726 #>>39037459 #
cmrdporcupine ◴[] No.39037459[source]
The original genius in Chrome was not the renderer built out of webkit. It was:

1. The V8 JavaScript engine, which blew away everything else. 2. The sandboxed, multiprocess, threading model.

Those were the two things emphasized in the original Chrome "comic" at launch, if I recall:

https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

replies(1): >>39037938 #
1. thanksgiving ◴[] No.39037938[source]
Kind of easy to forget the true innovation of Google chrome these days. I will try to remember this again any time I see an aww snap on my web browser because it would have been all tabs all windows dead at once before Google chrome.

Firefox only declared it completed electrolysis in 2018, nearly a decade after this comic.