Google, an integral part of our Web life, is hardly making any dent in the most exciting field of social networking. Totally out-shined in this sphere by FaceBook (FB), Twitter, and even Linkedin, Google seems to be scrambling for new ideas to make a mark in this space. Both FB and Twitter have a minuscule of resources Google has. Whether its brainpower or pocket depth, Google outguns these two companies put together and then some. Harvard folks call it disruptive innovation but the term has become so cliched these days that I shudder using it. Also, I am not sure if FB and Twitter are disrupting Google because they don't compete directly (search business I mean). Yet, the amorphous nature of the new economy makes companies like Sony and Microsoft work closely on a few things while being at each others neck's in other areas (example: gaming consoles). Apple and Google shared a lovely relationship before Android was born and caused a bitter divorce. Friends in the morning are foes at night and so on.
Google has a miserable presence in the social networking space. First, there was Orkut, then there was Wave, now its Buzz. Through all these avatars, Google failed to build a viable social network. While Orkut could only get popular amongst a certain section in a certain demographic, Wave totally failed to take off, with Buzz being a stillborn. FB has more than 400 million active users, of whom 50% or above log in, any given day and spend over 500 billion minutes per month on Facebook. That's an awful lot of time (even to waste right?) for any company to capture if it wants to. While I don't want to digress into the sociological consequences of this type of usage, its hard not to notice that. Twitter ended 2009 with just over 75 million user account although a majority of Twitter accounts are inactive, with about 25% of accounts having no followers while around 40% or so of these accounts having never sent a single Tweet. But, Twitter is a white-hot medium for companies in their reaching out efforts. FB supposedly captured around $500 million in revenues in 2009 and is projected to be on the path to becoming a billion dollar (revenues) company in 2010. Advertising money is raining on FB. These are massive numbers for a website that lets people interact in a web 2.0 way. Dell and many other companies use Twitter avidly while FB is a darling of many companies (who end their TV commercials directing users to FB). Web is moving from being a search-able vault to being a private network, which allows users interact through any media (audio, video, files) they like. FB and Twitter are succeeding in building these private networks but Google does the menial task of being a search service provider.
If Google never tried in this space, it would have not mattered. But Google tried, hard. Orkut is a wannabe, it never captured a sizable market in the US or Europe. For some reason, its only famous in Asia and that too among a certain demographic. Google Wave (from a user experience) was a confused product, with no proper utility but some cool features. Who cares if it has sexy technology? As a user, its useless for me. Seems like, Google must have thought "wait a minute, what is FB anyway? It lets people share pictures (we have Picasa), it lets people email (We have Gmail), it lets people share videos (we own YouTube), it lets people update their status (they can do that in Gmail too), so lets put it all together and have a whole web in Wave with a search bar that lets users search the web while they are at it. Sorry, does not work. Wave is a confused and useless product that fails to generate any user interest what-so-ever. Next, Google comes up with Buzz. What is Buzz anyway? I still fail to understand it till today. Is is just mixing Gmail with Wave and then adding Picasa with a search bar on top? But that is Wave. I am lost by this point and I give up trying to define Google's social media initiatives. Bottom line, Google has a confused, botched up and muddled strategy in the single-most interesting aspect of Web 2.0
Google also seems to positively hate FB. I am not surprised. Its like Microsoft banning all its employees from carrying an iPhone. Never underestimate the power of denial. If Steve Ballmer says iPhone is trash compared to a Windows Mobile phone, he means it because he is delirious. If Google's triumvirate management thinks that FB is trash and social media is a trend, they mean it too. Its called, disconnection from reality.
The web is moving into a strange direction. Internet is the ultimate democracy. The whole world saw what happened during Iranian revolution, thanks to Twitter. There are more users on FB than there are human beings in the United States. That is something. Its hard to ignore. More recently, its heard that Google is trying to consolidate Orkut, Wave and Buzz under one single umbrella and give it another shot. But the social media train has left the station and Google is left behind. Nevertheless, Google has terrific new areas to be excited about (such as Smart phones through Android and net-book O/S thru Chrome) and also has a vital role to play in web 2.0 thanks to its YouTube acquisition. If Microsoft could be smart enough to invest in FB, why did Google miss out?
Google, being a hardcore engineering company, is filled with some of the best brain power there is on Earth. There is also some amount of justified pride in being Google, for all the greatness it accomplished in the last decade. But pride can easily turn into hubris. By neglecting this vital medium, Google might have shown what ancient writers have seen in great heroes. Because its so good at what it does, Google never looked at the social media seriously enough and that probably why it failed to build a viable presence in social media. I would love to be proven wrong in the coming few years, but for now social media networks seems to be the hubris for this hero, a sore tendon on the great Achilles.
No comments:
Post a Comment