Google 1, Nicholas Carr 0
from the still-matters dept
The increased use of on-demand software, or software-as-a-service as it's sometimes called, has prompted some, such as Nicholas Carr, to conclude that IT is commoditizing and will soon resemble the power plant model for distributing electricity. But while it's true that companies such as Google and Microsoft are building huge computing centers to power software and storage, it's not the case that their products are becoming commodities. The New York Times ran an interesting profile on Google this week that goes beyond the standard line, that the company's backbone is simply based on cheap commodity parts and software. While the components may be cheap, the company is doing a lot of innovation in designing massive computer systems, such as developing new assembly methods and applying formerly theoretical computer science ideas. And this isn't just some company tinkering with its boxes. By some estimates, the company is now the fourth largest maker of servers, which means that a significant number of the world's boxes are now being built in a totally new manner. Google has also considered designing its own semiconductors that suits its purposes, which is rarely done even by the incumbent box makers. The article also has quotes from Bill Gates talking about Microsoft's own efforts on this front, which he argues are better than Google's. Whether that's true or not, this doesn't sound like commoditization at all. Just because the distribution may resemble a power plant, it looks like there will be a continuation of what's always gone on in IT: constant innovation leading to fleeting technological advantages.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
How so?
I think there are reasons to take the commoditization argument with a grain of salt, but this isn't one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How so?
I think Joe's argument makes sense. If hardware has really become so commoditized, then why is Google designing its own hardware and able to squeeze a lot more out of it than buying off the shelf hardware? That seems to go against Carr's thesis. It shows that Google *can* get an advantage through its own proprietary implementation of the technology.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also don't agree with premise of entry
Or you could say that this effort is just a modern equivalent of the "edifice complex" (where other companies build their own buildings).
Either way, Carr would still be correct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Commodity? Sort of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Say what???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sure, google is a comodity supplier...
Idiots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All products eventually become a comodity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]