Stratēchery On the GOOG: "Boring Google"
From Stratēchery:
My favorite part of keynotes is always the opening. That 
is the moment when the CEO comes on stage, not to introduce new products
 or features, but rather to create the frame within which new products 
and features will be introduced.
This is why last week’s Microsoft keynote
 was so interesting: CEO Satya Nadella spent a good 30 minutes on the 
framing, explaining a new world where the platform that mattered was not
 a distinct device or a particular cloud, but rather one that ran on all
 of them. In this framing Microsoft, freed from a parochial focus on its
 own devices, could be exactly that; the problem, as I noted earlier this week, is that platforms come from products, and Microsoft is still searching for an on-ramp other than Windows.
The opening to Google I/O couldn’t have been more different. There 
was no grand statement of vision, no mind-bending re-framing of how to 
think about the broader tech ecosystem, just an affirmation of the 
importance of artificial intelligence — the dominant theme of last 
year’s I/O — and how it fit in with Google’s original vision. CEO Sundar
 Pichai said in his prepared remarks:
It’s been a very busy year since last year, no different from my 13 
years at Google. That’s because we’ve been focused ever more on our core
 mission of organizing the world’s information. And we are doing it for 
everyone, and we approach it by applying deep computer science and 
technical insights to solve problems at scale. That approach has served 
us very, very well. This is what has allowed us to scale up seven of our
 most important products and platforms to over a billion users…It’s a 
privilege to serve users at this scale, and this is all because of the 
growth of mobile and smartphones. 
But computing is evolving again. We spoke last year about this 
important shift in computing, from a mobile-first, to an AI-first 
approach. Mobile made us re-imagine every product we were working on. We
 had to take into account that the user interaction model had 
fundamentally changed, with multitouch, location, identity, payments, 
and so on. Similarly, in an AI-first world, we are rethinking all our 
products and applying machine learning and AI to solve user problems, 
and we are doing this across every one of our products.
Honestly, it was kind of boring. 
Google’s Go-to-Market Problem
After last year’s I/O I wrote Google’s Go-To-Market Problem,
 and it remains very relevant. No company benefited more from the open 
web than Google: the web not only created the need for Google search, 
but the fact that all web pages were on an equal footing meant that 
Google could win simply by being the best — and they did.
Mobile has been much more of a challenge: while Android remains a 
brilliant strategic move, its dominance is rooted more in its business 
model then in its quality (that’s not to denigrate its quality in the 
slightest, particularly the fact that Android runs on so many different 
kinds of devices at so many different price points). The point of 
Android — and the payoff today — is that Google services are the default
 on the vast majority of phones.
The problem, of course, is iOS: Apple has the most valuable customers
 (from a monetization perspective, to be clear), who mostly don’t bother
 to use different services than the default Apple ones, even if they 
are, in isolation, inferior. I wrote in that piece:
Yes, it is likely Apple, Facebook, and Amazon are all behind Google 
when it comes to machine learning and artificial intelligence — hugely 
so, in many cases — but it is not a fair fight. Google’s competitors, by
 virtue of owning the customer, need only be good enough, and they will 
get better. Google has a far higher bar to clear — it is asking users 
and in some cases their networks to not only change their behavior but 
willingly introduce more friction into their lives — and its technology 
will have to be special indeed to replicate the company’s original 
success as a business.
To that end, I thought there were three product announcements yesterday that suggested Google is on the right track: 
Google Assistant
Google Assistant was first announced last year, but it was only 
available through the Allo messenger app, Google’s latest attempt to 
build a social product; the company also pre-announced Google Home, 
which would not ship until the fall, alongside the Pixel phone. You 
could see Google’s thinking with all three products:
- Given that the most important feature of a messaging app is whether 
or not your friends or family also use it, Google needed a killer 
feature to get people to even download Allo. Enter Google Assistant.
 
- 
Thanks to the company’s bad bet on Nest, Google was behind Amazon in the home. Google Assistant being smarter than Alexa was the best way to catch up.
 
- 
A problem for Google with voice computing is that it is not clear 
what the business model might be; one alternative would be to start 
monetizing through hardware, and so the high-end Pixel phone was differentiated by Google Assistant.
 
All three approaches suffered from the same flaw: Google Assistant 
was the means to a strategic goal, not the end..... 
...
MUCH MUCH MORE