Google swaps old CEO Schmidt for older CEO Page Google's chief executive Eric Schmidt is getting bumped aside after 10 years in charge and will hand back power to original CEO, and co-founder, Larry Page. Schmidt is moving from day-to-day running of the web's largest search and ads company to executive chairman, serving what can only be described as an ambassadorial role. …
he will be taken more seriously in the business world!
Schmidt had the staid personality to suit his role, though, and his business skills have arguably advanced Google in the past ten years.
Rumours reported on Bloomberg this morning suggest he is headed for a government position which should cover his daily expenses, he has made millions/billions in his time with Google.
"The question is what's next for Google, and how does it stop from developing the kind of mid-life spread and loss of direction that's afflicted other tech companies and seen them overtaken by fresher rivals.
Notable challenges today are search on mobile devices, a completely open field, and how far Google can morph beyond search. The chatter currently is the growing competition with Facebook, and whether Google is developing its own social-network-like service"
The future is no longer about searching research, it is all about the product placement of Advanced Intelligent Virtual Reality Programs, which have been phormed for presentation from your searching requests/hidden and sublime and subliminal desires. That is what IT does in the future and can do for you today.
Quite whether that is what Google can do for the future and you today, is something which you might like to ask them, but be sure to also ask them how they are going to do it with IT, if they say that such product placement is one of their projects, for although it is easy to do with IT Control, you first have to have the necessary IT Controls, and thus far I see no evidence of Google having any leverage in the field/SMART Programmers working on Future Production. And it is not unknown for businesses to tell elaborate porkies to give the impression of progress to maintain market interest and/or pork flow for derivative products which they might like to have a call upon, but which they wouldn't own or have any rights upon, although that is easily solved with an Astute Purchase and Intellectual Property/Ideal Share Arrangement for a SMARTer Utility Facility....... although that may just as attractive to/be much more suited to a Google rival/competitor/adversary/contemporary with similar thinking on Future Presentation Matters and the Manner of ITs AIdDelivery Mechanism.
Eric Schmitt is a utter waste of space, he is Google's answer to Steve Ballmer from MS.
Eric always reminds me of the old 18th factory owners, who held anyone who was not a fellow factory owner , in utter contempt. His comments about Streetview ( "Don't like us taking pictures of your house? Just move!" ) sums him up as a typical arrogant corp CEO, ready to tread on anyone to get what he wants.
Even better, avoid Google whenever possible, until such time as they get a conscience and give a monkey's about us or our data. I won't hold my breath waiting though.
Um, who is awaiting Chrome OS? It's targeted at netbooks, but tablets are taking market share there and those run android quite happily. Chrome is an attempt by google to produce a thin OS where every interaction with the app generates dataminable events. I don't see users calling for that, I don't hear OEMs asking for it.
the resentment it would stir among telcos when it decided to sell its own Google phone, the Android-based Nexus One.» What a pity that Google's attempt to break the oligopolistic control that carriers exercise over our choice of mobile phones did not succeed ! If the decision to try to market the Nexus One outside carrier channels was indeed Mr Schmidt's, than he is rather to be congratulated for his strategic vision. Yes, the attempt failed - but Google was wise enough to draw the necessary conclusions in time and withdraw its forces (until next time ?). Sales of Android-based devices would seem to indicate that no significant damage to the firm has resulted. I hope that this event will not dissuade the Google leadership from strategic moves in the future !...
Henri
The problem is that what you suggest would have been mere accident, not a design of Mr. Schmidt nor a testament to his business acumen.
It wasn't that Schmidt drew the "necessary conclusions in time." Google saw everyone making money from Android while at the same time, due to the prevalence and focus on "app" specific functionality (rather than on "web search"), they saw their relevance diminished. Since Chrome OS was not ready yet (which was their actual strategic project), they opted to correct this situation by controlling the device end-to-end.
Thus it was greed and hubris (and actual lack of vision) that led to that decision. The hubris cannot be understated, because--as the article states--they completely failed to foresee the resentment that such a move would inspire among their own partners, who have at that point invested heavily in Google's platform.
Had Google succeeded, the move wouldn't have eliminated the oligopoly of the networks, but shifted it to a new lord of arguably equal ambitions.
-dZ.
I find a situation in which carriers «subsidise» the purchase of locked-in phones - and attempt to brick the instrument if one opens it - and more than recoup the costs of the subsidy by obliging the user to subscribe to their over-priced services for a lengthy period before taking his or her custom elsewhere and beginning the process again, greatly to the disadvantage of users. For us, a more transparent state of affairs in which the phone purchaser paid the full cost of the instrument and then subscribed to the carrier offering the best service at the least cost in his or her area would be far preferable. This, as I understand, is the change Google attempted to effect with the Nexus One, and I find it deeply unfortunate that it did not succeed as planned. Hubris ? I think not, as Google, as mentioned previously, was wise enough to draw the necessary conclusions in time and withdraw its forces. While the attempt to re-order the mobile phone market did fail, the company certainly has not. Hubris is not a question of never making a decision that proves unwise ; rather it describes ae situation in which one is so enamoured of one's own decisions that one becomes unable to change one's course. Oidipous' determination to get to the bottom of the riddle of his birth is one example ; the US government's invasion of Iraq another. As a business decision, the Nexus-One affair was long from this class....
Henri
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
