![]() MUST MAKE MONEY NOW!"ĩ0s and 00s Microsoft was successful in part because they were an incredibly stable platform to develop against.ġ0 year support goes a long way, and if you paid enough money you could email in your bugs and get custom hot fixes made for issues that annoyed you.Įven their /bad/ technologies had long term support. Of course there are probably a bunch of problems with this idea, but it seems to be more preferable in contrast to just axing a product that a not-insignificant number of people found useful and going "NEED. If any company could do something like this with their various projects as well as culture, I'm pretty sure Google could. Isn't this the kind of project that should be reserved for people in explicit learning states such as (for example) novice hires, new hires, and aspiring mangers who haven't done any management before? It doesn't really have burning deadlines, it's not a frontline project but it's still something that can be referenced as work with impact, there's still the technical challenge of keeping it functional as the years go by, and eventually it will actually be old enough to be taken out back and deprecated. And it would cut FAANG costs in half at the same time.Ī lot of the responses to the parent are things along the lines of "well it needs to be owned by a team" and all the usual valid cost-related reasons why can't be maintained, and of course that doing so is boring. $250M to build up 10 offices around the continent will do more to solve the housing crisis in CA than $1B spent in CA. Shucks, maybe splurge and spend $20M here and there. Then spend $1M in Amarillo, and $1M in Sioux Falls. Quit earmarking $billions to solve the housing crisis in SF. But spreading the talent around geographically would solve a lot of problems for Google and for California and for the world. I'm not saying that Google should do this to keep everything they've ever touched alive. They could cut their teeth on low-profile stuff within Google and perhaps demonstrate abilities that move them up the ladder. They could hire some run-of-the-mill college grads to work on a "dead" project. They could open a modest office in Nebraska and pay some 5-figure salaries. They don't have to keep sucking more and more wealthy people into a concentrated corner of California. Google doesn't have to pay their engineers "a lot". I know it's beside the point, but you stepped on one of my peeves. ![]() This is very unsexy, toil-y and you don't get promoted for it - and as such barely anyone wants to do it at Google. ) undusted, understood, probably fixed in turn, etc.Īs such, some SRE/SWE team _must_ be responsible for projects that are in the "don't touch"/maintenance phase. As with real life, this might mean getting a 1 or 2 year old deployment system (configuration for production, roll out code. Any time a runtime API breaks (think things like interfaces to runtime authentication, compute scheduling, database services, network bandwidth scheduling), updated services must be made to conform and then be rolled out. Any time a library breaks API, all dependents must pass tests, and/or be fixed so that they do. That's not exactly possible with a monorepo that has no branches and everything has to be maintained 'in step'. > Counter-argument: Just let it sit there and keep working? Outside of security patches, if there even are any, there's always the option of "just stop touching it." a product that only launched a few days ago. Right now on Hacker News (just a few spots above this post) is a another site, which hosts a countdown for when customers expect to shut down the Google Stadia product. I wouldn't be surprised if I wake up tomorrow and they shut down search engine. But this is vendor specific and unreliable and required additional steps (had to save to computer, then open an email client, send an email, etc).īut then again, how can I be surprised? We are talking about Google, the company famous for shutting down projects. most printers now have an obfusticated email address that you can send to and it will print from. ![]() It was just a nice convenience that worked every time. I could print it through Google Cloud Print and it would be ready and printed for me when I got home. If I am working at a coffee shop, or out of town and bought something that needed to print a receipt, or a confirmation, or anything else. I loved that I could print stuff from anywhere and it would be sitting on my printer when I got home. Wow, that's a real shame, because Google Cloud Print was one of those nice little services that did ONE THING amazingly. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |