Google connaît l’échec !
Par François GRISONI, jeudi 4 janvier 2007 à 16:56 :: Services :: #40 :: rss
La puissance dégagée par la firme californienne et son dynamisme dans tout ce qu’elle entreprend impressionne tous les observateurs, à commencer par les rédacteurs de Googlinside. Pourtant, il arrive que la machine connaisse un problème mécanique et ne gagne pas toutes les courses.
La fermeture le 1er décembre 2006 du service Google Answer est un exemple de grossière erreur stratégique, due à l’appât du gain qui bourgeonne dans la firme. Pour une fois Google ne prend pas la parole pour annoncer le lancement d’un nouveau produit ou service, çà change !Petite explication :
Vous vouliez savoir combien de temps il faudrait à un éléphant pour vider votre piscine, connaître le protocole expérimental de la transformation du rutile en éponge de titane par le procédé de Kroll, ou le nombre exact de grain de raisin dans une bouteille de beaujolais nouveau… Ne cherchez plus la réponse du côté de chez Google.
Vous pouviez, jusqu’au 1er janvier 2007, poser toutes les questions possibles et inimaginable au service Google Answers, qui garantissait une réponse dans les 24 heures.
Cette innovation montée il y a quatre ans par un groupe de quatre personnes sur une idée de Larry Page himself, rentrait dans l’objectif global officiel de Google d’organiser l’information pour que chaque utilisateur trouve celle qu’il cherche exactement. C’était l’un des plus vieux service de Google.
L’erreur stratégique de Google a été encore une fois de se sentir invulnérable et de se croire supérieur et incontournable.
Faire payer ce service entre 2$ et 200$ selon la complexité de la question, quand de grands concurrents proposent le même service, mieux organisé et gratuit, suppose une immense confiance en soit, et un esprit mercantile exacerbé. Ajoutez la faiblesse du nombre d’experts sélectionnés pour répondre aux questions (800 dans le monde...), et vous comprendrez pourquoi ils se "recentrent" en fermant ce service. C’est en effet la seule explication donnée par les dirigeants (cf "Adieu Google Answers)
C'est, à ma connaissance, la première fois que Google arrête un projet qu'il a lui-même initié.
Google Answers s’arrête à une époque où le service concurrent de Yahoo!, nommé (Yahoo! Answers), qui est lui basé sur des réponses communautaires (et ne venant donc plus d'experts désignés) dans le cadre d'un service gratuit, annonce un succès important, notamment en France (Yahoo! Questions/Réponses) avec un million de visiteurs uniques pour le dernier mois d'octobre.
L’autre concurrent emblématique de Google, à savoir Microsoft vient également de lancer la version bêta de son Windows Live QNA. Il existe d'autres services gratuits comme Wondir ou IQ Lycos.
Google Answers n'a jamais vraiment décollé et a perdu petit à petit des "parts de marché" au profit de Yahoo
Le modèle humain et personnalisé ne convient pas à Google, qui préfère de l'automatique de masse: c'est là qu'ils sont imbattables!
La preuve est faite une fois de plus qu’un service ne fournissant pas de bénéfice à l’entreprise n’intéresse pas les dirigeants de Google. La preuve est faite encore une fois également que les principes éthiques du moteur de recherche peuvent être de plus en plus rattachés à de lointains souvenirs de 2 jeunes hommes idéalistes, niant désormais des règles qu’ils s’étaient eux-mêmes imposé.
Que penser d’une firme qui basait principalement sa différence sur le fier objectif de mettre à disposition de chacun l’information exacte recherchée, et qui aujourd’hui ferme un service de réponse personnalisée (qui devrait être son cœur de métier) car il ne rapporte plus assez de bénéfices et coûte trop cher ? Et quelle crédibilité lui accorder alors que ses concurrents, qui n’ont pas ces prétentions, continuent de faire fonctionner gratuitement ce genre de service ?
Le masque tombe petit à petit…
Il est toujours possible de consulter les archives de Google answers, ce qui a tout de même l’avantage de pouvoir s’amuser un peu:
Combien de tyrannosaures peut-on trouver dans un galon d'essence?
Pourquoi les mouches survivent à une séance de four à micro-ondes?
Toujours pour finir sur une note joyeuse, la fermeture de Google answers a entraîné un mouvement de protestation sur le Net, dont voici un exemple amusant:
The power released by the Californian firm and its dynamism in all that it undertakes impresses all the observers, to start with the writers of Googlinside. However, it happens that the machine has a mechanical problem and does not gain all the races. Closing of the service Google Answer, on December 1, 2006, is an example of coarse strategic error, due to the lure of gain which buds in the firm. For Google once does not speak to announce the launching of a new product or service, that changes!
Small explanation:
You wanted to know how long an elephant needs to empty your swimming pool, to know the experimental protocol of the transformation of the rutile to titanium sponge by the process of Kroll, or the exact number of grape in a bottle of new beaujolais wine… Do not seek any more the answer on the side from Google.
You could, until January 1, 2007, to put all the questions possible and unimaginable with the service Google Answers, which guaranteed a response in the 24 hours. This assembled innovation four years ago by a group of four people on an idea of Larry Page himself, returned in the official total objective of Google to organize information so that each user finds that which it seeks exactly. It was one of the oldest products of Google.
The strategic error of Google was once again to feel invulnerable and to believe themselves higher and impossible to circumvent. To make pay this service between 2$ and 200$ according to the complexity of the question, when large competitors propose the same service, organized better and free, supposes an strong confidence is, and an exacerbated mercantile spirit. Add the weakness of the number of experts selected to answer the questions (800 in the world…), and you will include/understand why they "are centred" by closing this service. It is indeed the only explanation given by the leaders.
That is, to my knowledge, the first time that Google stops a project which it itself initiated. Google Answers stops at one time when competitor service of Yahoo!, named ( Yahoo! Answers), which is him based on Community answers (and thus not coming more appointed experts) within the framework of a free service, announces a significant success, in particular in France (Yahoo! Questions/Réponses) with a million single visitors for last October.
The other Google's emblematic competitor, namely Microsoft also comes to launch the version beta of sound Windows Live QNA. There are other free services like Wondir or IQ Lycos.
Google Answers never really took off and lost gradually "shares of market" to the profit of Yahoo.
Human and personalized model is not appropriate for Google, which prefers automatic of mass: it is there that they are unbeatable!
The proof is made once more that a service which does not provide a benefit to the company does not interest the leaders of Google. The proof is also made once again that the ethical principles of the search engine can be attached more and more to distances memories of 2 idealistic young men, denying from now on rules that they had been essential themselves.
What to think of a firm which based mainly its difference on the proud objective to place at the disposal of each one the required exact information, and which today closes a service of personalized answer (which should be its heart of trade) because it does not pay enough any more of benefit and is too expensive? And which credibility to grant to him whereas its competitors, which do not have these claims, continue to make function this kind of service free?
The mask falls slowly…
It is always possible to consult the files of Google answers, which has all the same the advantage of being able to have fun a little:
How many tyrannosaures can one find in a galon gasoline?
Why the flies survive a meeting of microwawe oven?
Small explanation:
You wanted to know how long an elephant needs to empty your swimming pool, to know the experimental protocol of the transformation of the rutile to titanium sponge by the process of Kroll, or the exact number of grape in a bottle of new beaujolais wine… Do not seek any more the answer on the side from Google.
You could, until January 1, 2007, to put all the questions possible and unimaginable with the service Google Answers, which guaranteed a response in the 24 hours. This assembled innovation four years ago by a group of four people on an idea of Larry Page himself, returned in the official total objective of Google to organize information so that each user finds that which it seeks exactly. It was one of the oldest products of Google.
The strategic error of Google was once again to feel invulnerable and to believe themselves higher and impossible to circumvent. To make pay this service between 2$ and 200$ according to the complexity of the question, when large competitors propose the same service, organized better and free, supposes an strong confidence is, and an exacerbated mercantile spirit. Add the weakness of the number of experts selected to answer the questions (800 in the world…), and you will include/understand why they "are centred" by closing this service. It is indeed the only explanation given by the leaders.
That is, to my knowledge, the first time that Google stops a project which it itself initiated. Google Answers stops at one time when competitor service of Yahoo!, named ( Yahoo! Answers), which is him based on Community answers (and thus not coming more appointed experts) within the framework of a free service, announces a significant success, in particular in France (Yahoo! Questions/Réponses) with a million single visitors for last October.
The other Google's emblematic competitor, namely Microsoft also comes to launch the version beta of sound Windows Live QNA. There are other free services like Wondir or IQ Lycos.
Google Answers never really took off and lost gradually "shares of market" to the profit of Yahoo.
Human and personalized model is not appropriate for Google, which prefers automatic of mass: it is there that they are unbeatable!
The proof is made once more that a service which does not provide a benefit to the company does not interest the leaders of Google. The proof is also made once again that the ethical principles of the search engine can be attached more and more to distances memories of 2 idealistic young men, denying from now on rules that they had been essential themselves.
What to think of a firm which based mainly its difference on the proud objective to place at the disposal of each one the required exact information, and which today closes a service of personalized answer (which should be its heart of trade) because it does not pay enough any more of benefit and is too expensive? And which credibility to grant to him whereas its competitors, which do not have these claims, continue to make function this kind of service free?
The mask falls slowly…
It is always possible to consult the files of Google answers, which has all the same the advantage of being able to have fun a little:
How many tyrannosaures can one find in a galon gasoline?
Why the flies survive a meeting of microwawe oven?
![[T]](http://static.technorati.com/pix/icn-talkbubble.gif)
Commentaires / Comments
1. Le dimanche 7 janvier 2007 à 14:25, par jolafrite
Ajouter un commentaire / Add a comment
Les commentaires pour ce billet sont fermés.