Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Google's Turn To Be The Villain

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:36 AM
from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.
caesar79 writes "The New York Times has an article titled "Relax, Bill Gates; It's Google's Turn as the Villain" (also evil but at least free registration required) According to the article, the "go-getting" attitude of Google is coming across as arrogance to many people in the Valley. More importantly, it draws attention to the fact that Google has drained the market of talent, caused a 25% to 50% hike in salaries and made it difficult for startups to get funding."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Google's Turn To Be The Villain | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 835 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Damn you Google! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MoxCamel (20484) * on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:37AM (#13390123)
    Google has...caused a 25% to 50% hike in salaries and made it difficult for startups to get funding."

    So, Google is a villain for improving the wages of technologists, and also retroactively (circa 2000) making it harder for startups to get funding?

    <emote=plea style=Jon Stewart> Oh Google, why must you be so evil?<

    Mox

  • 25-50% hike in salary (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:37AM (#13390126)
    Sure thats going to make your average coder hate google...
    • Sure thats going to make your average coder hate google...

      I love the idea that talented people can make more money, especially in areas with ridiculously high costs of living.

      However, consider the coder who comes up with an idea for the next killer app. If they can't get startup funding to hire a few extra sets of brains and typing-fingers domestically, what are their options? Seek assimilation by a corporation, or get in touch with the folks in Bangalore, it seems.

      If the talent pool is drying up, be it from Google's quest for brainpower or from other reasons, then perhaps it's time to seek the means to increase the pool.

      (Geeks ordered to reproduce; film at 11!)
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by Compuser (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:09PM
        • Living off the air (Score:4, Informative)

          by rumblin'rabbit (711865) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:37PM (#13390741)
          (Last Journal: Sunday October 29 2006, @07:37PM)
          Start a FOSS project, build up a reputation, build up a community...
          And how, pray tell, are your suppossed to eat as your're building up your precious reputation?

          That's what venture capital does. It puts food on your table as you develop your product. It seems like an awfully successful system for something that's supposedly a sham.

          The alternative is to fund everything out of pocket. If you have no financial resources, well then you're just another talented designer working at McDonalds.

          [ Parent ]
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by schon (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:16PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by BlackCobra43 (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:16PM
      • allow more immigration by toiletmonster (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:16PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mrlpz (605212) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:19PM (#13390562)
        No..it's time for companies to maybe think "out of the valley" for once. Not all of us care to live in Cali. I'd rather see the sun RISE over the water, than set ( but if you're lucky enough to live in FL you can see both. I can just hear the "voting" jokes...c'mon, bring'm on. ).

        Still, the point is there. Startup company's over there hem and haw about not finding talent this, or talent that. Get a CLUE, most of us don't want to live in Overpriced-everything land, ok ?

        So if that there aren't enough engineers in the valley is the excuse start ups are using to try to get in more H1B's then they deserve to crash and burn like they did during the DotBomb Boom. There is NOT a shortage of qualified engineers in the United States of America ( and Canada ). What there IS a shortage of, is legislators who will stop being namby-pamby's whenever someone like Bill G complains that it's costing him 2 Million more to drill out a new wing for his house, and his financials won't look right because he can't get the number of UNDERPAID H1B's and F1's that he wants.

        There isn't a shortage of skilled engineers, it's not like we're picking tomatoes out of the ground people, it's that company's have come up with progressively sneakier and more loop-hole clinging ways to try to maintain the pay scales down.

        Hence, why I've gone back to contracting. As long as you're going to think you're going to run your company with impunity, I'll charge you for the privilege of that false sense of power.

        I've said it before, and I'll say it again,....more power to the company who is prepared to pay for a skill, they will keep that skill longer, and get more ROI dollar for dollar, out of that person, than the company who isn't. Sure, some of you younger guys are willing to work for "wheatgrass" drinks, but just wait until you have a family and have REAL bills, we'll see if that extra indoor basketball court is really worth that absense of a commensurate salary.

        [ Parent ]
      • Or MOVE (Score:5, Insightful)

        by SuperKendall (25149) * on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:28PM (#13390648)
        However, consider the coder who comes up with an idea for the next killer app. If they can't get startup funding to hire a few extra sets of brains and typing-fingers domestically, what are their options?

        Well one option is to leave freaking California! There are a lot of talented programmers that for whatever reason do not want to live in CA. Find a place where a lot of them are and go there.

        If you can't stand the heat then move somewhere cold.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Or MOVE by Jonny_eh (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:17PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Or MOVE by sanosuke76 (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:17PM
        • Re:Or MOVE by miggybot (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:24PM
          • Re:Or MOVE by NeMon'ess (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:47PM
          • Re:Or MOVE by jedidiah (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @03:00PM
            • Re:Or MOVE by BlueHands (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @09:53PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Or MOVE by loconet (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @02:38PM
        • Re:Or MOVE by zoomzit (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @03:01PM
          • Re:Or MOVE by BackInIraq (Score:2) Thursday August 25 2005, @04:37AM
          • Re:Or MOVE by zorro6 (Score:1) Thursday August 25 2005, @03:28PM
            • Re:Or MOVE by zoomzit (Score:1) Thursday August 25 2005, @04:13PM
              • Re:Or MOVE by zorro6 (Score:1) Thursday August 25 2005, @05:30PM
        • Works to a point (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Dav3K (618318) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:26PM (#13391240)
          This strategy works to a point, but can be taken too far. For example: you set up shop in the middle of nowhere, Iowa. You find a few talented coders and begin work. When one of them leaves for whatever reason, you are left scrambling for replacement talent - you already tapped the local sources and now have to draw from abroad. But what coder is going to risk going to Iowa to work for you? Should the job opportunity fail, he's stuck in a place that has no hope of offering him comparable work.
          [ Parent ]
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by ksheff (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:28PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by AviLazar (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:38PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by neoform (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:45PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by FreshFunk510 (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:04PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by gravyface (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @03:52PM
      • Maybe if you didnt make [good] uni's exclusive... by sethstorm (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @08:45PM
      • Re:25-50% hike in salary by TheRaven64 (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:24PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:25-50% hike in salary by nacturation (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:27PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Google isn't the Borg... (Score:5, Funny)

    by QuantaStarFire (902219) * <ed@kehoe.gmail@com> on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:37AM (#13390127)
    Yet so driven has Google been in its pursuit of new markets that at least a few in Silicon Valley are using an epithet to taunt Google that people here once reserved for Microsoft: "The Borg," a reference to an army of creatures in "Star Trek: The Next Generation" that took over civilization after civilization with machinelike precision.

    I disagree. I think Microsoft earned their title, and I doubt it's gonna go away. I'd like to think that the Google invasion is going over more like the story in Doom3:

    You are too late...Google no longer needs Internet Explorer! The innovation you saw was only the FIRST WAVE! The Google Browser is capable of sending MILLIONS of our ads into your world!

    Soon, the folks from Slashdot will be here, and with their computers, we will BRING THIS HELL TO EARTH!

    Or something to that effect, anyways.

  • Villainy will be temporary (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nokilli (759129) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:38AM (#13390133)
    For instance, everyone who identifies BillG as the wellspring of all evil forgets how scared we all were of IBM back in the day. Now IBM is seen with much favor in the community. It wouldn't be that way were it not for Microsoft.

    So really, it isn't Google's turn to be villain, it's Microsoft's turn to be the good guys.

    Hrm, did I really just say that?

    --
    You didn't know. [tinyurl.com]
    • by Spetiam (671180) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:43AM (#13390192)
      (Last Journal: Thursday October 20 2005, @07:58PM)
      I for one, welcome our new borg overlord.

      Wait a minute...
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Villainy will be temporary by Marc Desrochers (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:48AM
    • Re:Villainy will be temporary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by interiot (50685) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:49AM (#13390246)
      (http://paperlined.org/)
      Wake me up when Google a) starts being remotely monopolistic, or b) drops their support for open source.

      IBM is cool now because they're actively 1) paying for linux advertising (related to IBM, but still), 2) writing lots of Linux articles, 3) contributing to linux, etc etc.

      Google Talk is cool because it uses an open, standardized protocol. You can't really go after Google under the Sherman Act for using the Jabber protocol.

      It's still possible for Google's management to change, and for them to start leveraging their massive marketshare in a way that directly inhibits search engine competitors. Until they try something like this though, I'm going to sleep well.

      (and note that MS is still, by far, the least likely to contribute to open source, or even seriously grok open standard protocols)

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Villainy will be temporary by man_of_mr_e (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @11:58AM
        • Search monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)

          by PaxTech (103481) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:05PM (#13390411)
          (http://www.cellfish.com/)
          There's a difference between a monopoly on search engine services and a monopoly in the OS space. Changing search engine providers is as simple as replacing a bookmark, changing operating systems requires some serious expeditures, especially at the enterprise level.

          If Google has a monopoly on search engine services, it's a very fragile one.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Search monopoly by glesga_kiss (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:17PM
            • Re:Search monopoly by Fulcrum of Evil (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:36PM
            • Re:Search monopoly (Score:4, Insightful)

              by PaxTech (103481) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:38PM (#13390770)
              (http://www.cellfish.com/)
              Google is FAR more powerful. Who cares of Word vs. ClarisWorks, which is the bottom line of the OS market. We're talking about being the gatekeeper for the majority of information retrieved via the net.

              Doesn't using the word "gatekeeper" imply that without Google, the information wouldn't be available? That really isn't the case..

              Google is the "gatekeeper" because it's the easiest, quickest way to find what you're looking for on the net. If Yahoo was markedly better, people would switch (back) in droves, and Yahoo would become the new "gatekeeper".

              IMHO this whole Google paranoia meme is pretty laughable. Seems like people need to fret about some big corp threatening to take over, and the once-favorite whipping boy Microsoft is seemingly on the ropes so the paranoid venting gets pointed in Google's direction, mostly undeservedly.

              If Google strongarmed ISPs into null routing competing search engines, it'd be comparable to the way Microsoft blocks OEMs from installing competing operating systems, but Google doesn't do that. Google's good at what they do, and they deserve to succeed as long as that's the case.
              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Search monopoly by interiot (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:28PM
          • Re:Search monopoly by Wile_E_Peyote (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:21PM
          • Re:Search monopoly by bedroll (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @01:27PM
          • Re:Search monopoly by goldspider (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @03:33PM
        • Re:Villainy will be temporary (Score:4, Insightful)

          by ceejayoz (567949) <cj@ceejayoz.com> on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:07PM (#13390432)
          (http://ceejayoz.com/ | Last Journal: Monday June 05 2006, @06:14AM)
          Remember, you don't have to be the only provider to have a monopoly, you just have to weild "monopoly power", that is the ability to control the market, and I think Google is getting damn close to that.

          No, you have to abuse your monopoly power. MS didn't get in trouble for having one, they got in trouble for trying to keep it through nasty tactics.

          As for "support for open source" wake when they have a Linux "Desktop Search", or Linux "google deskbar" or any of a number of other technologies they implement on Windows (and don't give source code away for).

          So, what, OSS that doesn't work on Linux isn't OSS anymore?

          Google releases useful code to the OSS community. They're basing Google Talk on the open Jabber format. They release useful services with public APIs.

          They're "distributing" their software via a web server, but nobody gets to see the code behind the scenens, improve it, or fix bugs, or anything else.

          Oh, honestly. If using a Linux server meant you have to release all code running on it, no one would use it.

          Can the zealotry. If you don't like people being able to do what Google did, don't GPL it - write a more restrictive license for your code.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Villainy will be temporary by ShieldW0lf (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:35PM
            • Re:Villainy will be temporary (Score:4, Insightful)

              by interiot (50685) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:49PM (#13390879)
              (http://paperlined.org/)
              Like your statement that you need to abuse your monopoly to be a monopolist. So what does that make all those companies that have a monopoly and don't abuse it?

              Um, Google-vs-MS is a canonical examples obvious example of this, but if you really need it to be explained...

              Google naturally became the huge marketshare leader because its product was so damn good. This is a good thing for the little people.

              Microsoft may have naturally come upon its OS leadership (there's no need to argue over that for this discussion). Microsoft then continued and tried to use its huge marketshare in the OS world to gain a majority marketshare in several other businesses: office suites, vsideo/audio player, ISP, internet browser, etc. Especially in the case of the browser, it seemes that if MS would not have had the OS dominance that it had, it wouldn't have been able to gain dominance in browsers. MS also got exclusive deals with computer manufacturers (and/or required them to pay for an MS Windows license even if windows was not sold on that machine) to try to maintain its marketshare in the OS market, and artificially supressed competitor OS's from doing very well in the market. (arguably, there are natural pressures that encourages the market to settle upon a single standard [slashdot.org], but in actively going beyond that, Microsoft was acting against the best interests of consumers).

              Now, if a real competitor to Google pops up, and Google starts using its largess to hinder its competitors, then that's a problem. If, instead, Google decides to not be evil, and focuses on making the best search engine they know how, and allows the marketplace to choose whichever search product is the best, then google will have no problem, no matter how large its marketshare becomes.

              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Villainy will be temporary by ceejayoz (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @04:52PM
        • Re:Villainy will be temporary by ksheff (Score:1) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:13PM
        • Re:Villainy will be temporary by That's Unpossible! (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:15PM
        • Re:Villainy will be temporary by daviddennis (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:18PM
        • Re:Villainy will be temporary by Sleepy (Score:2) Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:26PM
        • Not even close (Score:4, Informative)

          by blamanj (253811) on Wednesday August 24 2005, @12:31PM (#13390685)
          Google is nowhere near to being a monopoly. If you look at recent results from MediaMetrix [searchenginewatch.com], you'll see that Google commands a little over 1/3 of the "market" for search.
          Google 36.5%
          Yahoo 30.5%
          MNS 15.5%
          AOL 9.9%
          Ask/Exite 6.1%
          [ Parent ]