Google ditches its free WiFi service in South Africa, three months after launch(businessinsider.co.za)
businessinsider.co.za
Google ditches its free WiFi service in South Africa, three months after launch
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/google-backs-out-free-wifi-google-station-partnership-with-think-wifi-in-south-africa-2020-2
155 comments
I remember when Google Fiber was going to put verizon, comcast, time warner, etc out of business. I remember everyone being so hyped for Google Fiber to come to their neighborhood. Haven't heard anything from them in years.
They’ve stopped the rollout to new cities - however in cities they currently exist in they continue to roll out new fiber, just at a rate slower than molasses. Austin TX seems to get a new neighborhood once every 2-3 months or so.
> Then Google found out that when the street lights turn off, there's no power to run the access points.
Uh? Duh! What did they expect? A switch in every street light? (Which also would need to be controlled in some way ...)
Uh? Duh! What did they expect? A switch in every street light? (Which also would need to be controlled in some way ...)
In my experience a fully-centralised switch is actually quite uncommon.
In many locations they use light sensors, and if you live above a street oriented the right way you can see quite a cool effect of the lights going off sequentially down the street as the light goes below the threshold.
In other locations that I'm familiar with, they use a ripple relay, where a particular signal is transmitted over the power lines (a "ripple") in a way that doesn't affect unaware equipment, but signals the target equipment (relays on the supply to the streetlights) to switch. Similar technology is used to provide day/night rates where one circuit is only energised during off-peak hours.
I don't see any reason the ripple relay couldn't be bypassed to provide a second always-on feed for the Wi-Fi gear, but it might be that the ripple relays are not at every lamp post but instead at the substations or roadside cabinets, in which case there would indeed be some cost to run the extra circuits.
In many locations they use light sensors, and if you live above a street oriented the right way you can see quite a cool effect of the lights going off sequentially down the street as the light goes below the threshold.
In other locations that I'm familiar with, they use a ripple relay, where a particular signal is transmitted over the power lines (a "ripple") in a way that doesn't affect unaware equipment, but signals the target equipment (relays on the supply to the streetlights) to switch. Similar technology is used to provide day/night rates where one circuit is only energised during off-peak hours.
I don't see any reason the ripple relay couldn't be bypassed to provide a second always-on feed for the Wi-Fi gear, but it might be that the ripple relays are not at every lamp post but instead at the substations or roadside cabinets, in which case there would indeed be some cost to run the extra circuits.
I previously worked at a company that made the light-controlled switches that control individual street lights. We shipped a lot of them, so I assume they are common. They are visiable and you can often spot them. They look like a plastic bulb on top of the light fixture.
At one point we came out with a slim line (low profile) design. When I asked why, they said that good ol' boys in Texas were riding in pickups and shooting the switches as a game. The low profile model was a harder target to hit. :-)
At one point we came out with a slim line (low profile) design. When I asked why, they said that good ol' boys in Texas were riding in pickups and shooting the switches as a game. The low profile model was a harder target to hit. :-)
I am surprised Google was surprised, perhaps you were working with more modern infrastructure? Commercial areas?
I ran into this same problem in a the first 3 municipalities around 15 years ago when we tried deploying a street light solution.
I ran into this same problem in a the first 3 municipalities around 15 years ago when we tried deploying a street light solution.
> In my experience a fully-centralised switch is actually quite uncommon.
Just to offer a counter-point, in my experience it's often that they are managed in big groups, and individual control is uncommon.
Quite often at the right time you'll see big swathes of lights turning off, sections of neighbourhoods, as far as you can see down a reasonably straight road, etc.
From what I understand, it's usually just a timeswitch in the circuit breaker box at the side of the road.
Just to offer a counter-point, in my experience it's often that they are managed in big groups, and individual control is uncommon.
Quite often at the right time you'll see big swathes of lights turning off, sections of neighbourhoods, as far as you can see down a reasonably straight road, etc.
From what I understand, it's usually just a timeswitch in the circuit breaker box at the side of the road.
Hard to say; it could be time control or ripple control of relays at substations, which would explain neighbourhoods turning on/off at the same time. It's still not fully centralised, and the more "decentralised" (I cringe when I write that word these days) it gets, the cheaper it gets to provide an always-on supply to the lamp post.
Thanks, that was quite an interesting read.
Google operated city-wide public WiFi in Mountain View for many years. So, it's not like they didn't have any experience.
I would also like to point out that most cities have a utility electrical grid to power traffic lights and the like. While I imaging some south cities could get away with solar-powered traffic lights, it's unlikely that Chicago is one.
I don't know anything about this Google+Chicago experience (even though I currently work at Google), but I would bet the issue was not as simple as "they found out that street lights turn off".
I would also like to point out that most cities have a utility electrical grid to power traffic lights and the like. While I imaging some south cities could get away with solar-powered traffic lights, it's unlikely that Chicago is one.
I don't know anything about this Google+Chicago experience (even though I currently work at Google), but I would bet the issue was not as simple as "they found out that street lights turn off".
> Google operated city-wide public WiFi in Mountain View for many years. So, it's not like they didn't have any experience.
Google has been operating free WiFi in India at 400+ locations since 2016 and claim they've got a 8 million userbase [0].
> ...but I would bet the issue was not as simple as "they found out that street lights turn off".
I'd be very surprised if this was true. It seems more plausible to me that news.yc has anti-Google bias.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation...
Google has been operating free WiFi in India at 400+ locations since 2016 and claim they've got a 8 million userbase [0].
> ...but I would bet the issue was not as simple as "they found out that street lights turn off".
I'd be very surprised if this was true. It seems more plausible to me that news.yc has anti-Google bias.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation...
Nope. News.yc individuals have biases, often quite strong. Some are very pro-Google, and some anti-Google. It depends on the time, the article, etc. Definitely goes both ways.
And how much bias you see depends on where you are on the spectrum. You naturally tend to see the unbiased opinion as closer to your own POV.
And how much bias you see depends on where you are on the spectrum. You naturally tend to see the unbiased opinion as closer to your own POV.
> It seems more plausible to me that news.yc has anti-Google bias.
It's surprising that you first speak about claims with very little proof and then continue to blatantly make one yourself.
It's surprising that you first speak about claims with very little proof and then continue to blatantly make one yourself.
I'm sorry it came of making a claim to a fact... but, really, my intention was to highlight that I'm more inclined to believe that news.yc has negative bias against Google (or at least in the context of this thread as the the comment voted to the top would indicate) than Google not doing their homework and shutting shop because they found during implementation that there was no electricity to power the access-points day-time because street lights (citation needed: I couldn't find any online reports supporting the claim made by the top comment. May be there's an offline public record of this?).
Ones in my neck of the woods just switch based on a light sensor on the top. No need for programming/timing adjustment or a master-switched second grid.
Streetlights in Berlin (at least on my street) are completely autonomous. It's a lot of fun to watch them start sequentially (with the light dimming down).
Maybe they did. We have street lights with light sensors, so they turn on when it's sufficiently dark rather than on a schedule.
I've seen videos of people who'd rather not have a light on outside their bedroom window at night setting up a laser pointer to point at the sensor to keep the light off.
I've seen videos of people who'd rather not have a light on outside their bedroom window at night setting up a laser pointer to point at the sensor to keep the light off.
Huh, they didn't have the motivation to add an 18-hour battery/UPS per light? Charge it while the light is powered, and discharge during the day..
Or, solar panels..
Or, solar panels..
I suspect they're withdrawing due to infrastructure issues. We also have frequent power cuts (in my area it's up to 4 hours a day with no electricity) and loads of cable theft. Some of the cell towers even get shut down because people steal the hardware, the batteries that keep them operational. Heck, we've even had cases of people stealing fibre cables, because they thought they were worth more than copper.
*I am a South African living in South Africa.
*I am a South African living in South Africa.
Eish, that's still going on? I'm half South African and grew up in SA but left in 2007, mainly because of the crime, but also the Telkom monopoly and rolling blackouts ("load shedding") were not so conducive to starting an internet business.
It's kinda amazing to me that any techies stay there. Cape Town is beautiful yes, but so is New Zealand (where many Saffers such as my family emigrated to).
It's kinda amazing to me that any techies stay there. Cape Town is beautiful yes, but so is New Zealand (where many Saffers such as my family emigrated to).
It's worse than ever. I am having a lot of trouble keeping to my deadlines for work and have to work around all the blackouts which frustratingly disrupts my life and thousands of other businesses. Just a couple more years until my degree is done, then I am GTFO of here.
It's not like loadshedding is happening year round. We have periods of it, but it's almost as if you forgot last time it happpened. Now it's ongoing though, and yes it is frustrating.
Can’t you get a UPS? Or do they last too long to make that an option?
Load shedding lasts for hours. Generators are a big business, but they are expensive to buy and run. Keeping a good battery in your laptop is great, but the power to the wired internet infrastructure, the cell towers, etc are also cut. You could drive to the office, but the traffic lights have no power either.
So it is nightmare.
The real reason you can't operate in ZA is Empowerment, and what Google probably ran into. They can only own 49% of the business the start. They must find an empowerment partner (which means some black people, but they have no money so you have to give them their controlling 51% share) that happens to be a friend of the ANC (not a documented requirement, but I did mention corruption). So they will siphon funds out of the company, but if you have the right ones, you can win big government contracts such with the bailout money they keep getting.
The place is a banana republic - Live there, enjoy you cheap labour, great food, amazing geography, the wildlife, your personal security guards and inexpensive servants, but don't reside there and keep everything in another currency.
So it is nightmare.
The real reason you can't operate in ZA is Empowerment, and what Google probably ran into. They can only own 49% of the business the start. They must find an empowerment partner (which means some black people, but they have no money so you have to give them their controlling 51% share) that happens to be a friend of the ANC (not a documented requirement, but I did mention corruption). So they will siphon funds out of the company, but if you have the right ones, you can win big government contracts such with the bailout money they keep getting.
The place is a banana republic - Live there, enjoy you cheap labour, great food, amazing geography, the wildlife, your personal security guards and inexpensive servants, but don't reside there and keep everything in another currency.
> The real reason you can't operate in ZA is Empowerment, and what Google probably ran into. They can only own 49% of the business the start.
There's no evidence that Google ran into empowerment (BBBEE) roadblocks here. And that assertion about 49% ownership is quite incorrect. BBBEE doesn't actually work like that (1). A lot of factors go into scoring a company's empowerment rating.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-Based_Black_Economic_Emp...
There's no evidence that Google ran into empowerment (BBBEE) roadblocks here. And that assertion about 49% ownership is quite incorrect. BBBEE doesn't actually work like that (1). A lot of factors go into scoring a company's empowerment rating.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-Based_Black_Economic_Emp...
'Companies in South Africa that deal with the government or parastatals must be empowered as required by the Preferential Procurement Act.'
$3M USD / year turnover is a low bar these days and must apply all seven pillars of BBBEE to calculate their score as per the Generic Scorecard. - Black Ownership - 25 points - Black Management control - 15 points - Black Skills development – 20 points - Black Enterprise & Supplier development – 40 points - Black Socio-economic (SED) development 5 pts
So yeah, I need 51% Black ownership to get full points and again for management control points.
This is so racist my brain is bleeding, but it could be republished as a book on how to make a corrupt government.
From the Wikipedia article, "A general criticism can be made that wealthy and politically connected black individuals have been the real beneficiaries of BEE and not those still living in poverty. In fact, unemployment and inequality have both increased since the introduction of BBBEE policies.
In 2018 a surfacing argument is that BBBEE should be changed from a race-based policy to a policy that favours poverty regardless of skin colour. Apartheid was criticised exactly because of race-based legislation that favoured a minority based on skin colour and BBBEE once again has introduced race-based policies diverting South Africa's problems from endemic poverty to race. "
$3M USD / year turnover is a low bar these days and must apply all seven pillars of BBBEE to calculate their score as per the Generic Scorecard. - Black Ownership - 25 points - Black Management control - 15 points - Black Skills development – 20 points - Black Enterprise & Supplier development – 40 points - Black Socio-economic (SED) development 5 pts
So yeah, I need 51% Black ownership to get full points and again for management control points.
This is so racist my brain is bleeding, but it could be republished as a book on how to make a corrupt government.
From the Wikipedia article, "A general criticism can be made that wealthy and politically connected black individuals have been the real beneficiaries of BEE and not those still living in poverty. In fact, unemployment and inequality have both increased since the introduction of BBBEE policies.
In 2018 a surfacing argument is that BBBEE should be changed from a race-based policy to a policy that favours poverty regardless of skin colour. Apartheid was criticised exactly because of race-based legislation that favoured a minority based on skin colour and BBBEE once again has introduced race-based policies diverting South Africa's problems from endemic poverty to race. "
skc(1)
I'm a techie living in Cape Town and I love it. I have no plans to emigrate. We have problems down here yes, but they've been no impediment to my career.
Both Amazon AWS and Oracle OCI have satellite development offices in Cape Town, and if anything they are hiring more and more.
Both Amazon AWS and Oracle OCI have satellite development offices in Cape Town, and if anything they are hiring more and more.
Are they still having the rolling brown-outs in Cape Town? My hubby's family were getting a bit gatvol of those a while back, telling everybody here in New Zealand all about it.
gatvol?
Others have explained, but I found it funny to read this word. My native language is Dutch (flemish variety) and I would also read this word as expressing a negative emotion (fed up sounds right). "gat" = dialect/slang for ass, "vol" = full.
> Adjective. (South Africa, slang) Completely fed up; very upset.
Speaking as a South African, still living here.
gatvol = "fed up"
It disappoints me that so many fellow South Africans are seemingly oblivious to the audience they are interacting with and casually use local slang regardless.
gatvol = "fed up"
It disappoints me that so many fellow South Africans are seemingly oblivious to the audience they are interacting with and casually use local slang regardless.
When I saw it I guessed it was some local slang, and I was excited to learn what it meant from someone who really knew rather than some online dictionary. I don't think it should be a disappointment, it contributes to the wonderful diversity of language.
As a Brit, likewise - and the context of this thread is fairly, well, South African.
Reading South African as a Dutch person is always great. I understand most of the words, but it’s still clearly a completely different language/context.
Gatvol = hole is full
Gatvol = hole is full
When I learnt Dutch is came is a surprise that ‘opgewonde’ does not mean excited.
I told many an executive at KPN that I was opgewonde to work on their project. :)
I told many an executive at KPN that I was opgewonde to work on their project. :)
Apparently Google Translate hasn't had the epiphany that you did yet. What does it mean? :)
Afrikaans: opgewonde → excited
Dutch: opgewonde → aroused.
:)
:)
More specifically, in this word gat would mean ass.
Jislaaik. Don't skrik bokkie.
As a non-South African, it's always great to learn local slang from around the world. On forums such as HN or Reddit, there's always someone around to explain it means. It's never an impediment to understanding the point being made.
I’m not South African, my husband is. I picked it up from him. We use it around our home quite a bit. I was replying to a South African. Whilst talking about South Africa. I'm fairly sure nobody's upset about it, more intrigued.
[deleted]
>"Cape Town is beautiful yes, but so is New Zealand (where many Saffers such as my family emigrated to"
I found this interesting. I did not know that was a common migration. Is there any reason for that? I know they are similar latitudes but I'm guessing there's some other connection?
I found this interesting. I did not know that was a common migration. Is there any reason for that? I know they are similar latitudes but I'm guessing there's some other connection?
There's a massive middle-class emigration going on in South Africa. Roughly sorted by volume descending:
* UK - many families have ancestry that enables them to easily get UK/EU Visa's
* Australia - most common Visa is points-based. Aus is attractive because the climate and lifestyle are comparable
* New Zealand - Visa's are more accessible than Aus, some families move to NZ first as a route to Australia but as mentioned there are clusters of expats there too
* US - comparable climate depending on state
* Canada - points-based Visa's
* Panama - you can buy your way in on a ~$3000 visa
* UK - many families have ancestry that enables them to easily get UK/EU Visa's
* Australia - most common Visa is points-based. Aus is attractive because the climate and lifestyle are comparable
* New Zealand - Visa's are more accessible than Aus, some families move to NZ first as a route to Australia but as mentioned there are clusters of expats there too
* US - comparable climate depending on state
* Canada - points-based Visa's
* Panama - you can buy your way in on a ~$3000 visa
not from either, but they are both english speaking commonwealth countries with warm climates of similar size
Unfortunately, this is the downward spiral of having bad actors. I kinda wish we lived in a world where communities could self-regulate and expel bad actors to let the ones who want to work together to achieve something can thrive.
Do you mean law and order?
When you see the inequality in South Africa, when even people working good jobs still get paid only in single digits (which in Rands comes to /nothing/), where things cost so damn much — you might have a slightly more sympathetic take on why people do what they do to survive.
As a cuban, I totally understand that theft is the only way to survive in some environments. I wonder if the future might be companies investing in countries to reap the benefits (but that would require thinking beyond the quarter)
Whereabout in SA are you? Are the issues you describe more common in rural areas or is it in the larger cities as well?
The power cuts are country-wide. The sole, state-owned power utility Eskom has neglected its infrastructure despite warnings going back decades and now cannot generate enough electricity to meet demand. And the corruption under former president Jacob Zuma has caused newer power station projects to be botched and run way over schedule and budget. In the best case we will be having regular power cuts for the next 18 months at least.
Johannesburg region
I’m surprised none of the comments mention widespread increases in 4G coverage and decreased cellular broadband costs as a factor in shutting down the program worldwide.
At least here in Myanmar free WiFi is no longer needed at cafes and the like as most people now have access to affordable cellular broadband at 4G speeds. I know it’s a similar situation in India where Google was operating the program.
At least here in Myanmar free WiFi is no longer needed at cafes and the like as most people now have access to affordable cellular broadband at 4G speeds. I know it’s a similar situation in India where Google was operating the program.
A huge pity. Langa, Khayelitsha, Gugulethu, Delft, Elsies River, and Philippi are poor, underserviced areas. It’s unlikely they benefit from the fiber to the home that the rest of Cape Town has (nor could many of their residents afford it).
What they do have are cellphones and a free wireless service would likely benefit many.
I can’t see any commercial value from continuing the service in these areas: Exactly why a wealthy tech company /should/ be considering this service. It’s quite possible the new operators will retreat to the formerly white (and rich) suburbs and center of Cape Town.
* I’m a South Africa ex-pat living in the U.S.
What they do have are cellphones and a free wireless service would likely benefit many.
I can’t see any commercial value from continuing the service in these areas: Exactly why a wealthy tech company /should/ be considering this service. It’s quite possible the new operators will retreat to the formerly white (and rich) suburbs and center of Cape Town.
* I’m a South Africa ex-pat living in the U.S.
I don't really know why Google, a company, is doing what should be done by the government with no clear benefit to the bottom line. This is not to say they shouldn’t do this, but if you look at it that way, it shouldn't be surprising at all.
If they really wanted to help they probably should have teamed up with the government to ensure that there is government buy in to the program.
If they really wanted to help they probably should have teamed up with the government to ensure that there is government buy in to the program.
I think Google is an insecure advertising company.
It's as if Phillip Morris International was trying to develop solar panels and vegan food products to make everyone forget that most of their revenue comes from tobacco.
Would have made it harder for the public to hate big tobacco if they had been putting their names behind good stuff for all the years they had insane profits. Might even have kept regulators from decimating their business.
Google learned from mistakes of the past.
Google learned from mistakes of the past.
> Phillip Morris International
You mean Altria. They changed their name, for some strange reason.
You mean Altria. They changed their name, for some strange reason.
Funny how it is almost like Altruism.
Google is not a person. It can't feel anything. It is also composed of several teams, so it's perfectly possible for Google to look both to the left and to the right at the same time, before the higher ups decide to do some spring cleaning and shut down projects that don't align with their bigger picture.
It's pretty cheap and offers branding, data, ad impressions, and the opportunity to upsell other Google services. The government is very ineffectual in these areas, if it even exists beyond a name. These services will never happen without big companies starting them.
At least Google tried, and it looks like they're able to hand it off to another company that can keep it running now.
At least Google tried, and it looks like they're able to hand it off to another company that can keep it running now.
More people using web -> more ad revenue for Google
"Commoditize your complements." Covered by Joel Spolsky in an oldy but goody: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ (2002!)
Small companies grow their market share. Big companies grow their market.
I guess that didn’t happen here.
The South African government would have to be capable of managing some kind of project competently, which they demonstrate they are not able to do on a regular basis.
> with no clear benefit to the bottom line.
I dont think they are doing it for the bottom line. Google also offers free wifi on many railway stations in India where lot of poor Indians get to use Internet for the first time.
It's good PR but also that automatically becomes a branding opportunity where lot of people think internet means google and creates a trust factor in the mind.
I dont think they are doing it for the bottom line. Google also offers free wifi on many railway stations in India where lot of poor Indians get to use Internet for the first time.
It's good PR but also that automatically becomes a branding opportunity where lot of people think internet means google and creates a trust factor in the mind.
Government is a corrupt single party system in practice. Can't even keep the power on and the water system is in trouble. They would need a World Bank bailout for the Internet in a few years.
Google needs all the good PR it can get, these days. I'd be willing to pour money into ventures like this if I was in their position, too.
Google has been working on WiFi projects for a long time. They have enough good PR outside HN, no need to trivialize when a company takes up a good project.
No need to not call out PR marketing when you see it in the wild.
It's fine praise a company that does good, but don't act as if these companies are doing it out of pure kindness of their heart when they have legal shareholders to account for.
It's fine praise a company that does good, but don't act as if these companies are doing it out of pure kindness of their heart when they have legal shareholders to account for.
With India, they did this. They collaborated with RailTel, but I assume that was more logistical then anything else.
Lesson: never bet your business on a Google product other than ads.
Considering how easily you can get banned from Google ads, you should also prepare for that scenario.
This seems to be a part of the Google Station project (product?) being shut down world-wide [1].
TBH, while I'm all for projects that provide public uplift, it's clear that Google was never doing this completely out of the goodness of their hearts. Moreover, providing things for free here needs to be balanced with building services that provide a path out of the endemic unemployment that crushes so many people and communities.
[1] https://mybroadband.co.za/news/cellular/338928-google-pullin...
TBH, while I'm all for projects that provide public uplift, it's clear that Google was never doing this completely out of the goodness of their hearts. Moreover, providing things for free here needs to be balanced with building services that provide a path out of the endemic unemployment that crushes so many people and communities.
[1] https://mybroadband.co.za/news/cellular/338928-google-pullin...
I appreciate that Google tries new things, but I don't get why their success rate seems to fall far short of Amazon.
> I appreciate that Google tries new things, but I don't get why their success rate seems to fall far short of Amazon.
From the ground up, Amazon is focused on customers. Its mission statement is literally "to be Earth's most customer-centric company."
Compare with Google: “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful."
Google just isn't a customer-focused company. It seems many people who've tried to deal with their front-facing staff directly (AdWords, Pixel, Cloud, etc) have experienced this.
They don't need to be, because search/ads are a licence to print money.
From the ground up, Amazon is focused on customers. Its mission statement is literally "to be Earth's most customer-centric company."
Compare with Google: “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful."
Google just isn't a customer-focused company. It seems many people who've tried to deal with their front-facing staff directly (AdWords, Pixel, Cloud, etc) have experienced this.
They don't need to be, because search/ads are a licence to print money.
Google seems to build things their engineers want to build.
Amazon seems to build things their customers want to have.
From what I've heard Amazon has a more data driven approach to product development. They're still prepared to take risks, but do it in a more controlled fashion. There's no Amazon Stadia yet (for example) but there is Lumberyard and various services catered towards game developers on AWS. If they do decide to launch something similar in future they will at least have some understanding of the industry they're getting into.
I think they way they see it is they are a company of scale. Scale is what they are good at (if anything). So they shutdown lots of small successes to try and focus on the huge wins.. things like youtube, gmail, google docs, etc. things millions of people use.
This is a reasonable perspective on their actions, but it then it still belies a huge glaring problem in Google fundamentally lacking the ability to understand which projects have the potential for scale at the desired level. It seems a standard part of a typical SV pitch deck to address the potential market and growth opportunities. Sure, they're wildly optimistic most times, but VC knows this and can price it in. But it almost seems like Google doesn't have the internal filtering mechanism necessary to perform this same function.
This is how it works:
1. Googler wants a promo. They know they need to "launch" to get promo. They can't get a promo if they just improve or maintain something that already exists.
2. Googler gets together with other googlers and puts together something they could launch. Nobody cares if it makes any sense.
3. The thing launches. Googler gets their promo. It is now pointless to spend any effort on maintaining something that you can't "launch" again. Googler moves on.
4. Project dies and gets shut down after a while because no sane person would touch maintenance work with a 10 foot pole.
9 out of 10 projects at Google go through this lifecycle, pretty much verbatim. This is why you have three different Google-provided messsengers on Android, and why stuff launches with great fanfare and then quickly runs out of steam. You get the behavior you reward. This is what Google rewards.
1. Googler wants a promo. They know they need to "launch" to get promo. They can't get a promo if they just improve or maintain something that already exists.
2. Googler gets together with other googlers and puts together something they could launch. Nobody cares if it makes any sense.
3. The thing launches. Googler gets their promo. It is now pointless to spend any effort on maintaining something that you can't "launch" again. Googler moves on.
4. Project dies and gets shut down after a while because no sane person would touch maintenance work with a 10 foot pole.
9 out of 10 projects at Google go through this lifecycle, pretty much verbatim. This is why you have three different Google-provided messsengers on Android, and why stuff launches with great fanfare and then quickly runs out of steam. You get the behavior you reward. This is what Google rewards.
Well if Google tried rewarding maintenance work, would people who do hard maintenance work and reduce tech debt actually be rewarded? Instead I think the result would be people gaming the new system and doing nothing while claiming to solve hard maintenance problems. Managers, as usual, would reward the wrong people. At least with the current system, google gets something kinda measurable.
Managers are only very tangentially involved with "rewarding" employees at Google. They do not promote them: it's the responsibility of the employee to apply for a promo, though manager has to support. And promotion decision is not made by the manager either: it's made by a committee that has never even seen the employee and knows nothing about their work other than what they choose to put in their "promotion packet", as well as peer feedback. IOW your manager can torpedo your promo chances, but they can't unilaterally "promote" or "reward" you per se, aside from some fractional bump in the yearly perf score.
So employees have to support the assertions they make in the promo packet with evidence. I suppose you could support the assertion that you've done great maintenance work on something that's valuable to the company, and show off the metrics, PRs (or "CL"s in Google terminology), monetary impact, and things of that nature. But Google culturally doesn't really give a shit about this kind of thing, even if it's otherwise impactful. A few people manage to do well maintaining code at scale, but by and large my advice to Nooglers would be to stay as far away as they can from anything that's not contributing to a launch in some _easily quantifiable and attributable_ way. Or even if it does contribute to a launch, stay away from things they personally can't take credit for. Otherwise you'll end up working on something that someone else "started", and that someone will take credit when it's done.
So employees have to support the assertions they make in the promo packet with evidence. I suppose you could support the assertion that you've done great maintenance work on something that's valuable to the company, and show off the metrics, PRs (or "CL"s in Google terminology), monetary impact, and things of that nature. But Google culturally doesn't really give a shit about this kind of thing, even if it's otherwise impactful. A few people manage to do well maintaining code at scale, but by and large my advice to Nooglers would be to stay as far away as they can from anything that's not contributing to a launch in some _easily quantifiable and attributable_ way. Or even if it does contribute to a launch, stay away from things they personally can't take credit for. Otherwise you'll end up working on something that someone else "started", and that someone will take credit when it's done.
In other places without committees most of the same rules still apply. Instead of the committee, the employee needs to justify the promo to the manager+skip(s) and external assessors from other teams often need to also approve promos.
I find a lot of the most impactful work isn't easily measured by metrics or monetary impact. These metrics are always deceptive and if you are doing honest maintenance you may encounter many additional issues that make you look like a troublemaker. The people who get promoted often cause disasters and then fix the disaster while recording metrics. Putting in hard work to make stuff run as expected looks like doing nothing to people unfamiliar with the low level technical details.
I find a lot of the most impactful work isn't easily measured by metrics or monetary impact. These metrics are always deceptive and if you are doing honest maintenance you may encounter many additional issues that make you look like a troublemaker. The people who get promoted often cause disasters and then fix the disaster while recording metrics. Putting in hard work to make stuff run as expected looks like doing nothing to people unfamiliar with the low level technical details.
Arguably Google's system is fairer, because the committee doesn't know you, so their decision has to rely on the facts in the packet (and their cursory validation of such facts against other evidence). IOW, you don't get a promo just because you brownnose your boss or skip, or butter up some bosses that you know will be present when the decision is made - they aren't on the committee, and they aren't the ones making the decision.
Even though this system is objectively fairer, it _feels_ shitty nevertheless, I suppose because it's much harder to game through the mechanisms outlined above. You have to game it in other, much more labor-intensive ways, such as "work with" people who are a level or two above you (of which there are very few in remote offices, so you better be in Mountain View for that), sit in important meetings, "show leadership", virtue signal, etc. In fact if you do all of these things really well, you could skip the actual productive work by switching to the management track. If you're not super good at this, you have to do them in addition to your day job, and your promo prospects become tenuous at best beyond level 5.
Regarding metrics, there's a universal law at Google: you can't improve what you don't measure. This is part of the reason why Google sucks at UX for example, and rocks pretty hard at ads and search. The former is not measurable. The latter is.
Even though this system is objectively fairer, it _feels_ shitty nevertheless, I suppose because it's much harder to game through the mechanisms outlined above. You have to game it in other, much more labor-intensive ways, such as "work with" people who are a level or two above you (of which there are very few in remote offices, so you better be in Mountain View for that), sit in important meetings, "show leadership", virtue signal, etc. In fact if you do all of these things really well, you could skip the actual productive work by switching to the management track. If you're not super good at this, you have to do them in addition to your day job, and your promo prospects become tenuous at best beyond level 5.
Regarding metrics, there's a universal law at Google: you can't improve what you don't measure. This is part of the reason why Google sucks at UX for example, and rocks pretty hard at ads and search. The former is not measurable. The latter is.
AWS found a way to reward the maintenance of amazons internal deployment infrastructure.
Apple and the yearly WWDC found a way to reward improving bugs and stability in operating systems (by labeling them as launches).
Hell, Microsoft provides huge lifespan guarantees ensuring that maintenance is a success metric.
You can totally incentive correct behavior.
Apple and the yearly WWDC found a way to reward improving bugs and stability in operating systems (by labeling them as launches).
Hell, Microsoft provides huge lifespan guarantees ensuring that maintenance is a success metric.
You can totally incentive correct behavior.
"You get the behavior you reward. This is what Google rewards." From what I have heard, I think you're right. Promotions and kudos flow from launching new products & services, but not in maintaining them.
Yes, it convinces me there needs to be a 3rd stage to the old axiom: 1) Ideas are easy but 2) execution is hard and (new) 3) Maintenance is boring and lacks prestige but you'll fail without it.
"ditches" definitely not the word that should describe this (this is towards the article and not the HN submitter since it's the article's title); it could lead those who don't click to think it's another project Google has shut down.
> “We are transferring our Station operations in South Africa to Think WiFi who will now carry out the project independently,” a spokesperson told Business Insider SA.
> “We'll work with Think Wifi on a plan to transition the service to them, and continue to support them until the end of 2020. We remain committed to looking for ways to make the internet more accessible to users around the world.”
> “We are transferring our Station operations in South Africa to Think WiFi who will now carry out the project independently,” a spokesperson told Business Insider SA.
> “We'll work with Think Wifi on a plan to transition the service to them, and continue to support them until the end of 2020. We remain committed to looking for ways to make the internet more accessible to users around the world.”
In all likelihood the “transfer” is just a way for Google to save face and avoid yet another “Google kills project” news cycle. Good on the editors for not falling for it.
Another possibility is that the legal landscape was more hostile than Google anticipated and they essentially got squeezed out.
Isn't "this didn't go the way we thought it would and we're not willing to fight for it" the reason why all their products die?
No, it seems their products die because there's more prestige in launching a product than maintaining one.
"This went poorly because we care far more about launch than execution" is really the same spirit as the gp's paraphrase.
Many products from Google die because is a bottom up company: many ideas that make it into products come from Engineering directly, (guys who wants o solve challenging problems), to later find out that the business analysis was poor...and an internal performance system that advocates for launches
So, extremely poor governance?
Definitely, specially in Cloud where Enterprise don't like cool projects or experiments, they need solid roadmap and commitment from product companies
silicon valley: “fail fast”
also silicon valley: “google shuts down too many things”
also silicon valley: “google shuts down too many things”
public: not interested in adopting a product that likely will disappear when I start to depend on it
public: This would have been such a lovely product, now it will never happen :(
same public: not paying for wifi in some area for a year, on somebody else's dime, but still getting upset at whoever provided it when the glory days are over.
Even if you pay for it, it’s highly likely to disappear when it comes to Google.
If I hand my child over to someone else to raise forever, I'm ditching them. :p
bad analogy. There's no parent/child relationship between this service and google. As long as the service is continued, there's no issue as to who is owning and operating it.
Using children makes it seem like google is providing essential operational expertise to keep the child alive, and the child would die if stopped.
Using children makes it seem like google is providing essential operational expertise to keep the child alive, and the child would die if stopped.
Products often die when transferred to another organisation. They never say that they will die in the announcement.
See https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/
It's entirely reasonable for people to assume this is basically Google shutting down the free WiFi service but with extra steps.
See https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/
It's entirely reasonable for people to assume this is basically Google shutting down the free WiFi service but with extra steps.
> Using children makes it seem like google is providing essential operational expertise to keep the child alive, and the child would die if stopped.
In the same way that when a child is adopted, it instantly dies?
In the same way that when a child is adopted, it instantly dies?
Nah, my analogy between a kid or a car is that if you get thing that is meant to be decently long term, car at least a year or a kid at least 18 years, you wouldn't give up in 3 months. There's not many things a person would own or have that giving up in 3 months wouldn't see like ditching it. Even giving up a cell phone in 3 months is pretty daft
When you are Google, you have millions in funding, almost unlimited engineering ressources, political connections and many good reasons why a project would be successful (journalists, audience, users, accounts, etc)
Once you transfer the responsibilities; all of the support that kept the project stay afloat disappears. It's not sustainable anymore, there is much limited growth, all the business model for exploiting data for advertising cannot exist anymore, etc.
Well, it's dead you know.
Once you transfer the responsibilities; all of the support that kept the project stay afloat disappears. It's not sustainable anymore, there is much limited growth, all the business model for exploiting data for advertising cannot exist anymore, etc.
Well, it's dead you know.
Depends if the project continues to use google branding or has a “built by google” tagged on to it in order to mislead customers that it is still somehow maintained by them.
A 3 month old at that
wtf?
But if you sell a car to a new owner, you aren't ditching it in the woods.
Notice that you had to add "in the woods" to make it clear that ditching is negative here.
If you owned it for 3 months, I'd think you were nuts.
It's being shuttered in India as well [1].
[1] https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/google-to-close...
[1] https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/google-to-close...
SA doesn't have the resources to offer the poor free Wi-Fi so they will miss out. And there is also the ongoing problem of cable theft so maybe google won't chance it here.
What do you mean? Redirect the billions lost to state capture each year and free wifi to a few townships would be nothing.
And do what with it ????.
Folks just want's the basics ... a job to feed their family and decent education for their kids to escape the cycle of poverty.
I don't see how free Wifi is going to help with this one.
Folks just want's the basics ... a job to feed their family and decent education for their kids to escape the cycle of poverty.
I don't see how free Wifi is going to help with this one.
You don't see a connection between Internet access and a decent education?
You don't see how access to WiFi would improve education? Seriously?
Access to the Internet is a basic need.
Apart from access to education that other commenters pointed out, a lot of jobs will only accept digital CVs now.
Apart from access to education that other commenters pointed out, a lot of jobs will only accept digital CVs now.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Amazon, SpaceX and OneWeb are all doing satellite based internet service(or atleast trying to push in that direction.
I wonder why project loon/whatever google calls it's think tanks now discarded that as an idea? seems like a thing purpose built for the google brand - huge idea, requires massive funding, literally no government can prevent you from beaming internet at it's citizens without a satellite killer(which they can't deploy without intl negative attention)
1. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/22/fast-internet-via-satellites...
I wonder why project loon/whatever google calls it's think tanks now discarded that as an idea? seems like a thing purpose built for the google brand - huge idea, requires massive funding, literally no government can prevent you from beaming internet at it's citizens without a satellite killer(which they can't deploy without intl negative attention)
1. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/22/fast-internet-via-satellites...
Huge idea requiring massive Capex seems more like an amazon thing (AWS, fulfillment centers, etc) than a google thing.
Google gets just a little bit shittier, every day. Amazing.
I just can't think of any reason why, if I were building any sort of business (tech or otherwise) I would incorporate google services (apart form google search ads, perhaps) into any aspect of it that I would deem "essential" or even "important". Even Drive & the associated sheets/docs/etc I look at with an eye towards "be ready to mass download the lot of it on short notice"
As an example, about two years ago they were building something that looked poised to compete with MS Power BI and Tableau. Not mature enough at that point, but promising. I poked around and saw potential for what it could offer if I pushed it forward in my work place, but I quickly realized it was a very risky career prospect: It might not work quite so well and sure, that's fine, we'd be trying it out on that possible basis. But it might work just fine, and we migrate some clunky "enterprise" reporting over, decommission some old iron, and then... ::Poof::! Google's system is gone, end-of-lifed with a 90 day notice and then I'm left holding the bag because Google is not a reliable partner for anything outside a narrow core of the selections.
As an example, about two years ago they were building something that looked poised to compete with MS Power BI and Tableau. Not mature enough at that point, but promising. I poked around and saw potential for what it could offer if I pushed it forward in my work place, but I quickly realized it was a very risky career prospect: It might not work quite so well and sure, that's fine, we'd be trying it out on that possible basis. But it might work just fine, and we migrate some clunky "enterprise" reporting over, decommission some old iron, and then... ::Poof::! Google's system is gone, end-of-lifed with a 90 day notice and then I'm left holding the bag because Google is not a reliable partner for anything outside a narrow core of the selections.
There's a big difference between a paid (Google) service and a free one.
Google doesn't generally shutdown paid B2B services, but it certainly does have a record of instability on free consumer services (like this wifi thing).
Google doesn't generally shutdown paid B2B services, but it certainly does have a record of instability on free consumer services (like this wifi thing).
Well, they may not exactly sjut it down in th same abrupt way if it's paid, but if you look at their recent changes to the costs if using their maps API, they're certainly willing to rewrite the terms of use for paid tiers that result in apps that were paying nominal fees to suddenly being charged onerous, crippling costs order of magnitude more expensive that require shutting down the service built on Google's tech.
So, no, paid services are not free from the fear of Google's drastic and suddenly project cuts or (as near as cuts) massiveness overhauls.
So, no, paid services are not free from the fear of Google's drastic and suddenly project cuts or (as near as cuts) massiveness overhauls.
The pricing changes to Maps were 2 years ago, that's hardly a pattern.
Microsoft also ends support for products every year, often with replacements, but there's still migration costs: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4470235/products-en...
Apple also deprecates core APIs, not always with a replacement: https://stackoverflow.com/a/53285999
Google does turn down lots of (smaller) free consumer services, but the meme that their behavior around consumer products should translate into not trusting them for B2B is not backed up in their behavior or historical data around support. They behave similarly to all the other major companies.
For example the App Engine Datastore has existed for 12 years and still works, despite the availability of Firebase RTDB, FireStore, Cloud Spanner, Cloud BigTable, etc.
Microsoft also ends support for products every year, often with replacements, but there's still migration costs: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4470235/products-en...
Apple also deprecates core APIs, not always with a replacement: https://stackoverflow.com/a/53285999
Google does turn down lots of (smaller) free consumer services, but the meme that their behavior around consumer products should translate into not trusting them for B2B is not backed up in their behavior or historical data around support. They behave similarly to all the other major companies.
For example the App Engine Datastore has existed for 12 years and still works, despite the availability of Firebase RTDB, FireStore, Cloud Spanner, Cloud BigTable, etc.
The one example is not a pattern, but I'm not familiar with all such moves by Google to know if there are others, but I freely admit there may not be. It is, however, an existence proof to show the possibility, which is enough to engender skepticism when choosing them as a vendor.
In my experience Apple is more considerate in such matters. They tend to API end of life with more lead time, barring some issue that has to be changed more abruptly either due to abuse, security, or bugs, which is not unreasonable. But even they don't approach the level of support guaranteed for traditional Enterpris software though, and Microsoft mostly fits that category. Sure they end support, but it's telegraphed years in advance. In large scale enterprise systems like ERP, a 10 year roadmap of product support and 3 year roadmap of features is pretty much standard. Albeit the products themselves are hardly best of breed, but there is a lot to be said for guaranteed stability of infrastructure, capabilities, and support, especially when you can bolt on your own custom needs (of course at additional expenses though.) Enterprise has these benefits, but you pay an extraordinarily high premium for that.
Also, special agreements with them (provided you're willing to pay even more) are often available to continue support even beyond the EOL of those Enterprise offerings. (My workplace had to do so for a major system for 3 years (it was a 40 year old system) due to delays in upgrades to the newer offering.
Sure it's unfair to expect Google to keep money losing products, but I think if they ate the cost to keep these sorts of things going a little longer for more graceful exits, they'd engender more consumer confidence and gain more in the long term.
In my experience Apple is more considerate in such matters. They tend to API end of life with more lead time, barring some issue that has to be changed more abruptly either due to abuse, security, or bugs, which is not unreasonable. But even they don't approach the level of support guaranteed for traditional Enterpris software though, and Microsoft mostly fits that category. Sure they end support, but it's telegraphed years in advance. In large scale enterprise systems like ERP, a 10 year roadmap of product support and 3 year roadmap of features is pretty much standard. Albeit the products themselves are hardly best of breed, but there is a lot to be said for guaranteed stability of infrastructure, capabilities, and support, especially when you can bolt on your own custom needs (of course at additional expenses though.) Enterprise has these benefits, but you pay an extraordinarily high premium for that.
Also, special agreements with them (provided you're willing to pay even more) are often available to continue support even beyond the EOL of those Enterprise offerings. (My workplace had to do so for a major system for 3 years (it was a 40 year old system) due to delays in upgrades to the newer offering.
Sure it's unfair to expect Google to keep money losing products, but I think if they ate the cost to keep these sorts of things going a little longer for more graceful exits, they'd engender more consumer confidence and gain more in the long term.
Do you mean Google Data Studio, or something else?
It might have been that... They had a few similar forays into that sort of thing and at least one change of branding for the same offering when they gave it an overhaul, so I'm not sure. It may even still be around, but I just didn't have confidence in it's long term viability to push it organizationally over Tableau and ::shudder:: Cognos. (Cognos was mandatory, it was built on top of the the semantic layer of data from an ERP. A year later we realized we needed Tableau for truly modern data presentation, and used the semantic layer underlying Cognos as the primary data source for it, so it actually turned into a decent compromise. Now my push is for true data mining pipeline/ml development and deplo capabilities. Something like Alteryx, but there's a few solar industry-specific tools I'm looking at instead.
Yes. Been there, won't do that ever again.
slightly misleading as they are handing it over to someone else to run, not completely stopping it
[deleted]
We need a catchy verb for when Google abandons yet another service... De-google?
"South Africa's free Wifi service 'de-googled' as Google abandons yet another product"
"South Africa's free Wifi service 'de-googled' as Google abandons yet another product"
Microsoft had a brilliant one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroogled
Time to bring it back I say.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroogled
Time to bring it back I say.
i always think that Google and Microsoft are the worst when it comes to projects. They make good concept projects, but their problem is that they don't do full commitment. Much like Google Duo or Google Allo. Their problem was, while it's good to have those apps, they never made commitments into pushing them for consumers to like or even recognize. instead, they kept their hangout when they could either migrate fully, or just migrate the core from the new app.
Microsoft did that with many projects too but their problem was different. That's why i believe the last good time google did something good was from when they announced their very first pixel.
At least Microsoft is doing great job currently with their open source approach.
Microsoft did that with many projects too but their problem was different. That's why i believe the last good time google did something good was from when they announced their very first pixel.
At least Microsoft is doing great job currently with their open source approach.
Then Google found out that when the street lights turn off, there's no power to run the access points. So it just walked away.