Google

The Downside of Canada’s Start-up Buying Binge

By Mark Evans in Startups 6 Comments Tags: , , ,

There has been a lot of euphoria and happy dances recently about the flurry of Canadian start-ups being acquired. The list includes Zite (CNN), Five Mobile (Zynga), PostRank (Google), PushLife (Google) and BackType (Twitter).

The positive news is that the flurry of deals (22 and counting, according to TechVibes) provide a huge boost to Canada’s start-up ecosystem, which needs all the support it can get. Acquisitions reward start-up founders, encourage venture capitalists and angel investors, embolden entrepreneurs, and provide a healthier landscape for people like myself who provide services to start-ups.

In short, Canada’s start-up ecosystem is on a roll and, hopefully, these deals will make things even better and more active.

But there is a downside to these start-ups being snapped up. Many of them are early-stage companies with interesting technology but perhaps not a lot of customers or revenue. Rather than a business being acquired, it is the ideas, intellectual capital and, as important, the people that are being purchased. Many acquisitions are fuelled by the need to add strong talent to jump-start the growth of a business or service. Zynga, for example, was looking to boost its mobile development capabilities so buying Five Mobile was a quick way to do it.

The problem with many of these deals is two-fold: One, many start-ups are snapped up before they get a chance to gain real traction and evolve into small or medium-size businesses that employ dozens or hundreds of employees. It means the loss of an opportunity to build a high-tech community that features a “middle-class” between start-ups and large players (most of them U.S.-owned) such as Microsoft and IBM. In an ideal world, some of these start-ups would grow into an Open Text or, heck, a RIM.

Second, many of these deals involve some or all of the start-ups’ employees moving out of Canada. PostRank’s employees, for example, moved to the Mountain View, Ca. after the Waterloo-based company was acquired by Google. It’s an M&A-driven brain drain when the best and bright entrepreneurs, developers, etc. get sucked south of the border. Granted, many of them will likely return to Canada with more experience and some dollars in their jeans but, in the short-term, it’s a loss for Canada’s high-tech and start-up community.

I recognize that, in the scheme of things, these are nice “problems” to have. After all, it is better that start-ups are being acquired and investors rewarded as opposed to no M&A activity, which afflicted the start-up landscape for far too long. My point is it is also important to recognize there is a downside, even though it is something we can happily accept.

The Dangers of Loving Google Too Much

By Mark Evans in Google 1 Comment Tags: , ,

With the launch of Google+, there’s yet another reason for people to embed themselves even deeper within the Google empire.

The availability of free services that work well have been an irresistible and subtle attraction and, arguably, seduction for many people. Without fully realizing it, you can find yourself depending on a variety of Google services for your personal and professional lives.

For example, my Google portfolio includes Google+ (although I’m a less than enthusiastic embrace), Google Docs, GMail and Google Apps. Then, there’s my regular use of search, Google Maps and Google Images. I would suspect my embrace would be fairly typical of many people who use the Web on a regular basis.

But there is a price to be paid and danger for dancing with Google.

First, the service may cost nothing but they’re not free; there is a price to be paid. For one, Google has access to a good chunk of your activity, which not only feeds its ability to deliver increasingly relevant advertising but information about your online behaviour.

Second, Google has the ability to lock you out of your services without providing an explanation or justification for “violating” its terms of service. For anyone who has seen their online lives disappear behind the dark Google curtain of death, you know how terrifying it can be.

Sure, it’s a remote prospect but, nevertheless, people need to be aware it is part of the deal they strike with Google to gain access to “free” services. You same “deal with the Devil” applies to Facebook and Twitter.

So what can you do to protect yourself from being too dependent on Google or having Google slam the door on your nose?

Well, you could stick to non-online services such as Outlook and Microsoft Office but that would meaning not being able to take advantage of the cloud. For lots of people that would be fine but for people who travel or work away from the office on a regular basis, the cloud offers the convenience of access any time, anywhere.

Another approach is spreading your online portfolio between different service providers. Perhaps you use GMail for e-mail, Microsoft Live or Zoho for productivity services, and DropBox for collaboration and storage. While it reduces risk, it’s probably not the best or most user-friendly approach given there’s no integration between the different services.

In many cases, it means dancing with Google, and accepting the fact there are potential risks or downsides. Given the depth of the Google portfolio, it is a deal most people are willing to make.

Does Google+ Have Staying Power?

By Mark Evans in Social Media No Comments Tags: , ,

Google+I have a confession: I haven’t used Google+ much since it launched a few weeks ago.

As someone immersed in social media, I should be all over it but I’m not. Why? Perhaps the biggest reason is my social media “plate” is overflowing already with Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and blogs. Yes, Google+ has some interesting features but there’s only so much time in the day and only so much social media that can be consumed.

This is a challenge faced by every new social media service that claims to offer something new, different or better than the status quo. Despite Google’s clout, it’s not a social media powerhouse so, in some respects, Google+ is a scrappy start-up battling for attention.

Don’t get me wrong, Google+ has received an enthusiastically wild reception with more than 10 million people registering for it. But as someone succinctly tweeted, Google+ has 10 million “triers” as opposed to “users” – a major difference.

So for all the breathless talk about Google+’s usability and its threat to Facebook, Twitter, et al, it is not going to be easy for Google+ to elbow its way into the social media “party”. For many people, particularly those already into social media, Google+ will need to be so compelling that they will either spend less time with existing social media services or drop one of their tools completely.

In an ideal world, I’d like Google+ to be easier to embrace.

As Fred Wilson mentioned in a recent blog post, one of Google’s most high-profile feature, Circles, should be less work-intensive. Currently, Google+ users have to put all of their contacts into circles they have created. After awhile, this task becomes tiring.

I’ve dabbled with many of Google+’s other features but I can’t say the “wow factor” has been so overwhelming that it has made me want to change my social media habits. Maybe Google+ will grow on me over time but, for now, it sits there in the corner waiting for some love and attention.

Links:
- LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner disses Google+, suggesting there’s no room for it within the social media landscape.
- O’Reilly Media’s Edd Dumbill suggests Google+ is the “beginning of a fundamental change on the Web”.

The High, High Hopes for Google+

By Mark Evans in Google 1 Comment Tags: ,

So it’s been a little more than a week since Google+ launched, and the enthusiasm has been palpable. Google bubbles there will be 10 million Google+ users by tomorrow, which will no doubt see many cases of Moët and Chandon champagne popped at the GooglePlex.

Some of it has to do with the fact the digitrati loves new and shiny things – and there’s been a dearth of cool and compelling social media services arguably since Twitter launched – apologies to all your Foursquare fansboys/girls.

But I think there is another key factor driving Google+ that have little to do with Google+’s features or functionality.

As much as many people (700 million and counting) have joined Facebook, there is a growing concern about Facebook’s dominance and bold ambitions to inflict its social graph across the entire Web. People use Facebook but they’re afraid of it because of its dominance.

So, in many respects, the optimism about Google+ have everything to do with the high hopes that it can become a big enough player to keep Facebook honest.

This is not to suggest Google’s ambitious are any less aggressive than Facebook’s but there needs to be another social networking player to keep Facebook in check, otherwise Facebook will rule the roost and do what it wants because there would be no other options.

So as Google (and its boosters) trumpet the fact millions of people are joining Google+, keep in mind there are other factors at all that have everything to do with Facebook.

Links:
- Tommy Walker talks about why Google+ doesn’t stand a chance against Facebook.

Google+: Finally, A Rival to Facebook

By Mark Evans in Google, Social Media 3 Comments Tags: ,

I’ve been on Google+ for all of three days but my initial impressions are pretty good. Although I’ve only scratched the surface of what Google+ offers and there are lots of cards that Google has yet to show, Google+ has an excellent shot to become the badly-needed rival to Facebook.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting Google+ will be a Facebook-killer but the social networking world desperately needs another player to keep Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook honest. After MySpace imploded within the bosom of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., Facebook could do anything they wanted because there’s nowhere else to go. For all the complaints about Facebook’s cavalier attitude to privacy, for example, it didn’t matter because users had no other choices.

I’m excited about Google+’s potential because it not only offers many of the features that social media users want but it has some interesting features that make it different and better than Facebook. Here’s a short list of what’s good about Google+:

1. The ability to create different circles based on your personal and professional interests is great because it lets you splice and dice your digital presence just like you do in real-life. This means you can leverage social media to connect with different groups of people on the same platform rather than throw them all into the same bucket like you do with Facebook.

2. In Google+, you control the data. I’m sure Google will leverage it somehow as part of the deal but the company says that if you leave, your data comes with you. And they’ll make it easy to delete your account. Facebook, on the other hand, believes it owns or, at least, control all data. And leaving Facebook is not an easy process.

3. As Google+ evolves, the integration with other Google services will make Google+ a more valuable and multi-faceted service to share content and provide updates to different circles.

I don’t expect Google+ to cause major damage to Facebook in the short-term but Google+ has the potential to become a strong rival to Facebook within the social networking market, which should be cause for celebration for anyone who has misgivings about Mark Zuckerberg’s hubris or bold ambitions.

At the very least, Google+ should keep Facebook on its toes and force it to change how it operates, which is the great thing about real competition.

Links:
- Robert Scoble who believes Google+ will become the social network for geeks, early adopters and social media gurus.
- All Facebook on the one Google+ feature that Facebook should fear – the integration with other Google services.
- Nine Reasons to Switch to Google+ (PC World)
- Fred Wilson on the fact he’s rooting for Google+ to expand the social media landscape and provide more choices

Would You Buy a Chromebook? Not Me..Yet

By Mark Evans in Google 3 Comments Tags: , ,

Would you buy a Chromebook?

Would you pay $28/month for the privilege of having one of these fancy new computers from Google that’s entirely dependent on the Web and Google services?

It’s a question a lot of people are going to be asking themselves after Google introduced the Chromebook yesterday. Personally, I don’t know if I’d buy a Chromebook. I love Google’s library of applications but do I want to pay Google $336/year for a Chromebook?

I’ve actually become anti-subscription because it provides the freedom and flexibility to change directions and make different decisions as opposed to being locked in a single supplier. The Chromebook sounds appealing in many ways but I’m not convinced it’s a bandwagon I’m getting on.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
1 2 3 4 5 6