Comments on: Throwing Mud Against the Wall http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/06/21/throwing-mud-against-the-wall/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:20:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Mark Federman http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/06/21/throwing-mud-against-the-wall/#comment-5891 Mark Federman Mon, 26 Jun 2006 11:03:16 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/06/21/throwing-mud-against-the-wall/#comment-5891 In a world in which "consumers become producers" Google's approach of trying things out in public and going with what works makes perfect sense. Besides, other companies have always done this with test markets, focus groups and the like, except that the products have always been much closer to launch before they see even the glimmer of the light of day. Google's approach makes sense in the UCaPP world: develop applications "in public," and obtain a reading of their usefulness early on in the cycle. In a world in which “consumers become producers” Google’s approach of trying things out in public and going with what works makes perfect sense. Besides, other companies have always done this with test markets, focus groups and the like, except that the products have always been much closer to launch before they see even the glimmer of the light of day. Google’s approach makes sense in the UCaPP world: develop applications “in public,” and obtain a reading of their usefulness early on in the cycle.

]]> By: Josh http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/06/21/throwing-mud-against-the-wall/#comment-5371 Josh Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:55:13 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/06/21/throwing-mud-against-the-wall/#comment-5371 Rob, I completely agree. I think what the 'finance' types are complaining about stems from the initial infatuation with all-things google. I think some of the band-wagon jumpers jumped on when the stock took off with the idea that whatever Google touched would automatically turn to gold because, well, it was google. Now that that isn't happening, they are worried about the multiples Google received, because it might not be as sure a thing as they once thought. I always thought that IBM Labs was a brilliant way for a company with that kind of resources to get really bleading edge. My only worry with Google is that a lot of their new 'mud' is not really unique, there are quite a few competitors, and with some exceptions, the market (of users) seems to prefer the solo up-and-comers (Flickr, MySpace, Craigslist)... Rob,

I completely agree. I think what the ‘finance’ types are complaining about stems from the initial infatuation with all-things google. I think some of the band-wagon jumpers jumped on when the stock took off with the idea that whatever Google touched would automatically turn to gold because, well, it was google. Now that that isn’t happening, they are worried about the multiples Google received, because it might not be as sure a thing as they once thought.

I always thought that IBM Labs was a brilliant way for a company with that kind of resources to get really bleading edge. My only worry with Google is that a lot of their new ‘mud’ is not really unique, there are quite a few competitors, and with some exceptions, the market (of users) seems to prefer the solo up-and-comers (Flickr, MySpace, Craigslist)…

]]>