←back to thread

20 years of Google Scholar

(blog.google)
418 points thepuppet33r | 3 comments | 18 Nov 24 18:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.626s | source
Show context
GeoAtreides ◴[18 Nov 24 20:25 UTC] No.42176534[source]▶
oh no

they remembered google scholar exists

it's a great product and I don't trust google at all not to break it or mess with it

replies(2): >>42177573 #>>42192333 #
crazygringo ◴[18 Nov 24 21:58 UTC] No.42177573[source]▶
Google employs a lot of people from academia. Scholar is used and loved by a lot of people within Google. It's been around for two decades. I really don't think it's going anywhere.
replies(1): >>42177696 #
1. dekhn ◴[18 Nov 24 22:14 UTC] No.42177696[source]▶
Reader was used and loved by a LOT of people WITHIN google, but it was shut down (and the leadership that loved it even made arguments in front of the company why it "had to be shut down").

AFAICT Scholar remains because Anurag built up massive cred in the early years (he was a critically important search engineer) with Larry Page and kept his infra costs and headcount really small, while also taking advantage of search infra).

replies(1): >>42179157 #
2. crazygringo ◴[19 Nov 24 01:13 UTC] No.42179157[source]▶
If it matters, they cited declining usage of Reader as a reason for shutting it down.

It seems like Scholar has an overall upward trend, although their methodology notes make it hard to compare some periods directly:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F0...

I'm basically assuming this is the rate of growth of graduate school, and no competing products have had any real effect?

replies(1): >>42179209 #
3. dekhn ◴[19 Nov 24 01:20 UTC] No.42179209[source]▶
Reader usage was declining because the application was not being developed. The other reason they mentioned is that it would have required a lot of work to rewrite the app to be consistent with the new user data policies being put into place.