Google Answers Its Question
Google yesterday announced that it is closing down Google Answers. This four year old service provided online access to researchers who developed answers to questions for a fee. It appears that the demand for such a service was low, even at bargain rates (you could get a question answered for as little as $2.50). With no scalable revenue model, there was no business case for continuing the service.
CNET notes that "Bloggers wondered whether the move was a rare misstep by the search engine giant, or a sign that Google was trying to focus more energy on its core business, and stop futzing around with test projects." Neither of these ideas seems right to me. True, Google is trying to tighten the focus of its experimental projects and rationalize its seemingly perpetual beta offerings, but shuttering Google Answers is nothing more than ending a completed experiment.
The purpose of an experiment often seems to mystify many in the business press. The fundamental purpose of any experiment is to do something and observe what happens. Ask a question, get an answer. Sometimes there is an hypothosis to test, but even then the overarching design is simply to do something and see what happens. There is no wrong result of an experiment. There is only accurate observation of what happens under a known set of conditions.
Businesses do experiments all the time. They often strive to keep them under the radar of the business press precisely because of the goofy reporting that occurs. Google for one is refreshingly honest about its experiments, though it creates some confusion with its proliferation of beta services. Perhaps it would be better served if it made a clear distinction between an experiment and a beta offering, where the latter was reserved to mean "early release for those who like to fool around with something before it is made generally available." Trouble is, it is hard to get people to participate in an experiment but easy to get them to try a beta offering.
The reason Google Answers is closing is that the experiment is over. Google gave it enough time to find out what happened. Now it knows. It got its answer.
Copyright © 2006 Philip Bookman
Technorati: software strategy, web strategy, Google
CNET notes that "Bloggers wondered whether the move was a rare misstep by the search engine giant, or a sign that Google was trying to focus more energy on its core business, and stop futzing around with test projects." Neither of these ideas seems right to me. True, Google is trying to tighten the focus of its experimental projects and rationalize its seemingly perpetual beta offerings, but shuttering Google Answers is nothing more than ending a completed experiment.
The purpose of an experiment often seems to mystify many in the business press. The fundamental purpose of any experiment is to do something and observe what happens. Ask a question, get an answer. Sometimes there is an hypothosis to test, but even then the overarching design is simply to do something and see what happens. There is no wrong result of an experiment. There is only accurate observation of what happens under a known set of conditions.
Businesses do experiments all the time. They often strive to keep them under the radar of the business press precisely because of the goofy reporting that occurs. Google for one is refreshingly honest about its experiments, though it creates some confusion with its proliferation of beta services. Perhaps it would be better served if it made a clear distinction between an experiment and a beta offering, where the latter was reserved to mean "early release for those who like to fool around with something before it is made generally available." Trouble is, it is hard to get people to participate in an experiment but easy to get them to try a beta offering.
The reason Google Answers is closing is that the experiment is over. Google gave it enough time to find out what happened. Now it knows. It got its answer.
Copyright © 2006 Philip Bookman
Technorati: software strategy, web strategy, Google
Labels: Google, software strategy, web strategy
posted by Phil Bookman at 11:41 AM
<< Home