![]() The research arms of the CIA and NSA hoped that the best computer-science minds in academia could identify what they called “birds of a feather:” Just as geese fly together in large V shapes, or flocks of sparrows make sudden movements together in harmony, they predicted that like-minded groups of humans would move together online. How they sell ads is irrelevant, they are still an advertising company first. ![]() Without the ad business they wouldn't exist, at least not to the extent they do today. Everything they do is being done to further prop up their ad business. They bought Nest and released routers to gather data and sell ads. They released Chrome to gather data and sell ads. They released Android to gather data to sell ads. They bought YouTube to gather data and sell ads. If they can give exact metrics on the impact of the ads, they can charge more. If they can target the ads, they can charge more. Yes, they have a bunch of complex algorithms and way to track, but it's all in the name of selling those ads. More than 80% of Alphabet's revenue comes from their ad business. They don't need a complex algorithm, but they are going to charge by the impressions/demand in that sense. I'm sure a billboard in Times Square is much more expensive than one in rural Montana. That choice to build new should not be taken lightly, as migrating millions of users is not a trivial task and they will lose people along the way. When the "build new" dev make something new it's up to management to decide if it should be a feature of the existing service or if it's foundational enough to require a whole new app. Engineers can "build new" within an existing framework if the foundation is solid. If someone went from a v1 iPhone to an iPhone 13, the new one would have dramatically more features and capabilities, yet it will still feel familiar. It was a new name, but it felt more like a unification between iOS and macOS vs just thinking a new app would help them get more users. When iChat moved to Messages a couple features were lost, but the important ones are back now. Messages feels like one continuous evolution from the basic SMS app on the first iPhone. The occasional revolution is great and necessary, but evolution is extremely underrated.Īpple tends to do this well. This gave Apple an advantage because they can implement their own iMessage in the default SMS/MMS app, and ramp people up onto iMessage without people even choosing it. Texting was unlimited in the US, or effectively unlimited because it was so cheap, that people in the US did not bother to look into a non default SMS/MMS apps to message others, since Americans are mostly contacting other Americans.Īll the people I knew who had international contacts jumped on WhatsApp, but a huge portion of Americans never contact anyone outside America, so they never cared about international messaging costs, and never bothered with WhatsApp/Viber/Tango/Skype/whatever other chat app was out there to bypass text costs. It was a killer app that everyone knew how to instantly use, not have spam, and the contacts/pics/video/group sharing just worked across all phone OSs.Įdit: In fact, the exact opposite is what I think happened. I do remember international texting costs driving adoption of WhatsApp though. At least I do not recall text costs being a concern for domestic texts anytime in the 2010s. I feel like texting was unlimited by the time iMessage became prominent. Did the people running Maps actually watch people using their product? I just found myself baffled at how bad the usability was. So in order to see if you clicked on the right result, you have to pull the map waaaaaay in. I don't remember exactly, but I believe when you search, you get a wildly zoomed out regional view, and then when you click on a specific result.you're still stuck at the very zoomed out view. There are also some really bizarre choices in how the UI works. Not wait for even the screen to get drawn, then wait for autocomplete, then wait for the map to draw, etc. When I open Maps, I want to quickly search for something and then likely navigate to it. Google has heaped more and more into Maps, trying to make it do everything, and it has become a resource hogging monstrosity. I had a few year old flagship Android phone and that sort of experience was just silly. Every time I went to use it, I'd stare at a half-drawn screen for ages. Maps on Android for me became painfully slow.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |