The IBM-ification of Google?

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Product shutdowns, risk-taking, and trust

  • Some defend Google’s “launch many, kill many” strategy as normal risk-taking; unprofitable or low-priority products should be cut.
  • Others say the pain is that widely loved, low-maintenance products (e.g., RSS reader, chat apps, Stadia) were killed for strategic or ad reasons, not lack of quality.
  • Repeated shutdowns are seen as eroding trust, especially for hardware tied to cloud services and for enterprise buyers who expect decade-long support.
  • A proposed alternative: keep old products running in “zombie” mode with minimal updates to preserve trust, though critics note this has real opportunity cost.

Innovation vs stagnation

  • Some argue Google remains on the frontier in AI, self‑driving, quantum, custom hardware, etc., and that its bets have driven massive market cap.
  • Others perceive stagnation in user-facing products like Gmail and Search: shallow or annoying changes (AI inbox, AI Overviews) instead of long‑requested usability improvements.
  • Debate over Gemini: some call it “pretty good” and fast/efficient; others see it as clearly behind competing LLMs and more copycat than category‑defining.

YouTube, shorts, and user sentiment

  • Many dislike Shorts and “unavoidable” engagement features, calling them anti-user and emblematic of enshittification.
  • Workarounds exist (history off, third-party apps, new settings), but often don’t fully remove Shorts.
  • At the same time, YouTube is described as uniquely valuable; people “hate it but still use it” due to unmatched content and network effects.
  • Some insist broad sentiment toward YouTube remains positive, with users caring more about creators than platform knobs.

Google Cloud, Railway, and enterprise reliability

  • The Railway GCP account-ban incident is widely discussed as a trust crisis: a large startup’s account was auto-suspended, apparently without effective safeguards.
  • Clarifications in-thread: Railway had reps and phone contacts, and support did help restore service, but not fast enough to prevent major impact.
  • Some blame Railway for not having the right enterprise relationship; others reject this as victim-blaming, arguing automated bans for big accounts are unacceptable.
  • Comparison with other clouds: Microsoft praised for responsive account management, AWS for strong technical support, Google’s account teams often seen as weak or revolving.
  • Hetzner is cited as cheaper but also prone to sudden, unexplained terminations; “getting Hetznered” is a known risk.

Google vs IBM and industry trajectory

  • Some call the IBM comparison inapt: IBM is seen as a services-heavy, legacy player; Google still drives core innovation that powers its ad business.
  • Others say the analogy fits in a different sense: a shift from bold product leadership to safe, incremental moves and “enterprise” behavior.
  • Broader debate on whether big tech is now “too entrenched to die” versus historical patterns that even giants eventually decline.

Internal culture and hiring

  • Several comments describe a perceived influx of middle managers and weaker hiring standards, especially post‑2020.
  • Support and direct customer interaction are said to be culturally undervalued inside Google, with automation prioritized over hands-on help.