RSS
Google Kills Lively Quickly
from the that-didn't-take-long dept
Just a few months ago, when Google launched its "Lively" 3D chat offering, I questioned Google's strategy, as it didn't seem to offer anything different or compelling. Some people here disagreed, and believed Google would be able to turn the service into something compelling, but that appears not to be. Since the launch, to be honest, I can't recall ever hearing about Lively again -- and had pretty much forgotten it existed. And, indeed, less than six months after launching it, Google has killed off Lively, admitting that the experiment was something of a failure.
There seems to be a growing pattern in figuring out which Google projects are a success and which will fail. When it merely copies something others are doing, as with Lively, it tends not to do very well. When it changes the game, as it did originally with things like Google Maps (the first real AJAXy mapping solution) and Gmail (huge storage and AJAXy front end), then it gets usage. Google's success has always been in reimagining products that people seem to believe are mature, and completely reshaping how people think about those products. That was true with maps (which had been dominated by MapQuest and Yahoo Maps for years) and email... and it was even true in search. People thought the search market was too crowded when Google showed up, but its solution was so different and so much more compelling it got attention. Lively, on the other hand, was a pure me-too play. There are half-a-dozen other offerings that effectively do the same thing. Google didn't give anyone a real reason to use Lively... and, so it shouldn't be too surprising that Lively is now dead.
There seems to be a growing pattern in figuring out which Google projects are a success and which will fail. When it merely copies something others are doing, as with Lively, it tends not to do very well. When it changes the game, as it did originally with things like Google Maps (the first real AJAXy mapping solution) and Gmail (huge storage and AJAXy front end), then it gets usage. Google's success has always been in reimagining products that people seem to believe are mature, and completely reshaping how people think about those products. That was true with maps (which had been dominated by MapQuest and Yahoo Maps for years) and email... and it was even true in search. People thought the search market was too crowded when Google showed up, but its solution was so different and so much more compelling it got attention. Lively, on the other hand, was a pure me-too play. There are half-a-dozen other offerings that effectively do the same thing. Google didn't give anyone a real reason to use Lively... and, so it shouldn't be too surprising that Lively is now dead.
I’m looking for research...
Apps, Platforms, Consumer Use
Innovate More. Code Less: Optimizing Open-Source Utilization
I have an app...
Developer Census: Be Counted. It takes less than two minutes.
Marketing And Monetization Strategies For Free Apps
I’m looking for policy...
Policy Resources: Software Patents
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
But of course there's a huge difference between promising creation tools and providing them.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
So True
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Failure is sometimes the key to success
Most modern big businesses are afraid to innovate. It is hard for a small business to innovate because they are going probably going to get hit with an absurd patent claim backed up by nothing but an army of attorneys. At least Google is big enough to withstand most of those assaults.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
That said, I do like Google and a lot of the things they do and produce. They have been true innovators in the age of information. They're not perfect, and they don't always get everything right, but they have done a lot of good. I would go insane if I didn't have Google's search engine at my disposal. I've tried all other wannabe contenders, and none of them give me the power that Google does in my searching. That startup by former Google employees is a joke, and Ask.com, while it may have funny commercials and nice features geared towards kids doing their homework and stuff, it just lacks the raw power of Google. I don't need a screen filled with alternate topics, or cutesy little thumbnail popups of the sites in the search results, or anything like that. I know what I'm searching for, and Google delivers quick, accurate results. There's just nothing else that compares.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Lively was badly executed, not a bad idea
Now that said the idea itself was excellent. I think it would work best across a number of web forums, or chats to see who else is currently on a forum and allow direct conversations...public or private with those members.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lively was badly executed, not a bad idea
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lively was badly executed, not a bad idea
The difference is probably that Lively is resource-hungry... and in this economy, Google probably didn't want to indulge in supporting a long term project without a clearly-defined revenue stream.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment