Remember on Friday when I was talking about big-company PR? Yeah, Google went to the New York Times to leak tomorrow’s announcement of new business-focused services. Information Week got a good look too. It’s already at the top of TechMeme.
Hey, lookie here, 107 news stories about the exact same thing. On a Sunday night, even! I had no idea so many journalists were even working on a Sunday. (Hint: they aren’t, this was written Friday and held).
OK, most of that is big-company news sources. See how this works? One, or a few reporters get an exclusive, then everyone has to jump in too.
So, I figure since it’s Google that the blogs would be all over this one. Over to Google blogsearch I go (I like Technorati better, but this is a story about Google so you’d figure that they’d get at least a few bloggers to talk about it, right?)
I can’t find a single blogger who got leaked this information along with the big-city newspapers.
Surely they’ve given Mike Arrington or Om Malik an early look, right?
UPDATE: Om says he was invited to be on the beta, but turned it down because he didn’t like the privacy disclosure.
How about John Battelle, search engine expert who wrote a book on Google. Surely he has the inside track, right?
Nope. He had to learn about it from a spammy mail sent to customers.
How about Danny Sullivan, most important influential in the search industry? (According to Google’s founders). Nope.
Dan Farber? He writes for ZDNet (professional press, surely he got in on the news) and covers Silicon Valley like a glove. Nope, he’s reduced to linking to Information Week.
Damn, did we all piss off Google PR or something or are they trying to hide something?
Well, hope that PR strategy works for Google. In the experiences of other companies that have gotten lucky enough to get all that PR it really doesn’t work out all that well unless the influentials also back up the hype.
The funny thing is that at PodTech we’re actually using most of the “Google Office Suite.”
I hate it. It isn’t even in the same ballpark yet as having an Exchange server.
Maybe that’s why Google didn’t want to show it to influentials first. They’d tell the big-city press crew to take a pass on this until it at least gets close to Microsoft’s enterprise offerings.
And, yes, I am meeting with Google this week to show them just how far off the mark their offerings are in the Enterprise space.
Please note: that doesn’t mean Microsoft should sit back and celebrate. They are gonna get their ass kicked in this space because of their lack of attention to the Macintosh. That’s the #1 reason I’ll probably be using Google’s stuff over the next year instead of Microsoft Exchange, Outlook, and Entourage.
But more on that another day. For today Microsoft is safe from the Google onslaught.
When Google starts showing normal everyday bloggers (not even self-important jerks like me, but the “z list” that no one usually cares about) their stuff, then Microsoft should worry big time.
To John C Welch: If you really think Microsoft’s attention to the Mac is adequate these days, you haven’t been using any other OS X software. IOW, you’ve lost your frame of reference or something.
Office and even messenger for the Mac haven’t truly been updated in years. Small little things, but feature-wise and user experience-wise, they are horrible. Everyone I talk to using the Mac thinks Microsoft quit trying not long after Office 2004 was released, and they aren’t so sure about that product either.
Personally, I no longer have any Microsoft products on my Mac. Unless you are forced to, there’s no reason to have any products from companies that are writing cross-platform software and hence don’t bother to try to make it nice when they do the Mac version. The original software written only for OS X is too good.
Granted, the one area the Mac has a serious lack of options in is the Office suite arena. I’m currently using NeoOffice Aqua Beta, but it’s got problems.
To John C Welch: If you really think Microsoft’s attention to the Mac is adequate these days, you haven’t been using any other OS X software. IOW, you’ve lost your frame of reference or something.
Office and even messenger for the Mac haven’t truly been updated in years. Small little things, but feature-wise and user experience-wise, they are horrible. Everyone I talk to using the Mac thinks Microsoft quit trying not long after Office 2004 was released, and they aren’t so sure about that product either.
Personally, I no longer have any Microsoft products on my Mac. Unless you are forced to, there’s no reason to have any products from companies that are writing cross-platform software and hence don’t bother to try to make it nice when they do the Mac version. The original software written only for OS X is too good.
Granted, the one area the Mac has a serious lack of options in is the Office suite arena. I’m currently using NeoOffice Aqua Beta, but it’s got problems.
[...] In Depth: Google Discloses Plans For Long-Awaited Office Suite, First Components Due This Week” href=”http://www.informationweek.com/software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=192300431″>Information Week | scobleizer Bookmark this Article:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
Someone said Google’s attitude is just like Microsoft’s 10 years ago. That is 100% true.
I guess that includes product naming as well? “Google Office,” ok. “Google Suite,” better. But “Google Apps for Your Domain?” Uh, did they ask someone in Redmond to come up with that name?
I’m trying not to see this as another “Google Pack.” I am. But as Tyler Durden once said, “Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.”
Someone said Google’s attitude is just like Microsoft’s 10 years ago. That is 100% true.
I guess that includes product naming as well? “Google Office,” ok. “Google Suite,” better. But “Google Apps for Your Domain?” Uh, did they ask someone in Redmond to come up with that name?
I’m trying not to see this as another “Google Pack.” I am. But as Tyler Durden once said, “Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.”
[...] Now on to the way Google rolled out the story. As Robert Scoble pointed out in his post this morning, news of Google Apps originated with the New York Times, InformationWeek and a few I might have missed, who were briefed by Google. It’s like Google’s PR team handing out gifts to a few selected reporters. I have been the lucky recipient of such gifts during my years as a journalist, and I thoroughly enjoy getting the scoops–but that was when a company had one handful of choices, not a dozen key outlets, to spread the word. Surely Google could get its executives to talk to ZDNet, TechCrunch, GigaOm (Om didn’t like the privacy disclosure) and the various Google topnotch bloggers prior to the announcement. [...]
While hosted Exchange has a nice UI (it invented the whole AJAX craze many years ago, after all), it is pretty unusable because of it’s very poor spam filtering. If Microsoft adds a spam filter that can rival the Gmail one, then we are talking.
While hosted Exchange has a nice UI (it invented the whole AJAX craze many years ago, after all), it is pretty unusable because of it’s very poor spam filtering. If Microsoft adds a spam filter that can rival the Gmail one, then we are talking.
Scoble, they’ve been letting “z-list” bloggers use custom domain feature for a while. I got an invite way back in February and I’m as z-list as it gets.
Scoble, they’ve been letting “z-list” bloggers use custom domain feature for a while. I got an invite way back in February and I’m as z-list as it gets.
[...] Google has the dominate user marketshare and has plenty of money, talent, and ambition to make it happen. However the task to dominate in the enterprise will not be a ‘cake walk’. SAP, IBM, and others have been moving their software stacks to a service model. Google’s handwaving about its intentions needs to be backed up with good products. [...]
I think Mike made a good point in comment #39. I give him credit for keeping the comments on his blogs turned on. In my opinion every publication should provide a mechanism for public comments.
That said, perhaps Mike did not notice that the comment he responded to (#38) was preceded by an earlier comment (#21) by the same author which provided context for what he was responding to. I don’t blame Mike if that was the case. It is very tedious to wade through so many comments (let alone trackbacks/pingbacks), as it is to wade through the swamp of techmeme articles that typically appear when a big story like this breaks, especially one that is so politically charged and with huge ramifications to the tech industry.
I would rather Google did not pre-release stories to either MSM journalists or influentials in the blogosphere. It just pisses off those that don’t get invited which sometimes gets reflected in their opinions. It reminds me of why we have camps of wannabe influentials fighting foo all over the globe.
I think Mike made a good point in comment #39. I give him credit for keeping the comments on his blogs turned on. In my opinion every publication should provide a mechanism for public comments.
That said, perhaps Mike did not notice that the comment he responded to (#38) was preceded by an earlier comment (#21) by the same author which provided context for what he was responding to. I don’t blame Mike if that was the case. It is very tedious to wade through so many comments (let alone trackbacks/pingbacks), as it is to wade through the swamp of techmeme articles that typically appear when a big story like this breaks, especially one that is so politically charged and with huge ramifications to the tech industry.
I would rather Google did not pre-release stories to either MSM journalists or influentials in the blogosphere. It just pisses off those that don’t get invited which sometimes gets reflected in their opinions. It reminds me of why we have camps of wannabe influentials fighting foo all over the globe.
[...] Google sticks its toe into enterprise waters (is Google hiding from bloggers?) [...]
[...] Well clearly they were all off sneaking their new ‘Office 2.0′ to the mainstream press. They didn’t sneak it to John Battelle or Danny Sullivan or even Dan Farber. Robert Scoble thinks they’re ‘hiding’ from the blogosphere. Om Malik refused to agree to their terms and in general – this was about as normal of a launch as you can get. [...]
I consider myself both a professional journalist, just like those at the New York Times, and a blogger. Worried I didn’t get a prebrief on this? Nah.
Robert, I cover search. This ain’t search. That’s probably why I didn’t get a nod about it coming this time. And since it’s a holiday for me today over here in the UK, I don’t even mind too much
I get plenty of other advanced briefings, especially on stuff related to search. I even get offers for stuff not related to search, but since we then don’t do much coverage about that, it doesn’t get much ink at Search Engine Watch. So I’d guess in this case, the powers that be at Google probably figured we weren’t looking for a heads-up.
Anyway, I can’t speak for the other bloggers, but it’s not a case of “hiding” from me. Plus, I’m pretty sure there have been a number of examples where bloggers have been allowed to break stories by Google and then the “traditional” press gets to pick it up. They play us off each other; and, of course, the publications play them as well. That’s just PR.
I’ve been part of Gmail For Domains for several weeks, though I signed-up
I consider myself both a professional journalist, just like those at the New York Times, and a blogger. Worried I didn’t get a prebrief on this? Nah.
Robert, I cover search. This ain’t search. That’s probably why I didn’t get a nod about it coming this time. And since it’s a holiday for me today over here in the UK, I don’t even mind too much
I get plenty of other advanced briefings, especially on stuff related to search. I even get offers for stuff not related to search, but since we then don’t do much coverage about that, it doesn’t get much ink at Search Engine Watch. So I’d guess in this case, the powers that be at Google probably figured we weren’t looking for a heads-up.
Anyway, I can’t speak for the other bloggers, but it’s not a case of “hiding” from me. Plus, I’m pretty sure there have been a number of examples where bloggers have been allowed to break stories by Google and then the “traditional” press gets to pick it up. They play us off each other; and, of course, the publications play them as well. That’s just PR.
I’ve been part of Gmail For Domains for several weeks, though I signed-up
Danny: I consider you a very professional source of information. The best in the industry, in fact, on search.
If it were only you they didn’t invite that might make sense, but there were lots of other “professionals” who cover enterprise stuff who weren’t pre-briefed either.
I’m not sure what it says, but it’s a trend I’m noticing. Google used to show up at influential conferences too and didn’t this year. It’s a strategy shift of theirs and strategy shifts that multi-billion-dollar corporations do are always interesting to talk about.
Danny: I consider you a very professional source of information. The best in the industry, in fact, on search.
If it were only you they didn’t invite that might make sense, but there were lots of other “professionals” who cover enterprise stuff who weren’t pre-briefed either.
I’m not sure what it says, but it’s a trend I’m noticing. Google used to show up at influential conferences too and didn’t this year. It’s a strategy shift of theirs and strategy shifts that multi-billion-dollar corporations do are always interesting to talk about.
I dont see how any of this is NEW news. Google has had this info on its publicly accessible pages when I came across it in mid June (no invite, just me clicking around from the Google domain squatting service pages).
I dont see how any of this is NEW news. Google has had this info on its publicly accessible pages when I came across it in mid June (no invite, just me clicking around from the Google domain squatting service pages).
@66. Or could it be your level of influence exists only in your own mind? Maybe Google doesn’t feel all you A-Listers aren’t all that influencial in the end. I know is sucks to be out of the loop.
Yes, Arrington,I’m sure Scoble is a very nice guy. From reading his blog, I’m not so sure about the “smart”.
@66. Or could it be your level of influence exists only in your own mind? Maybe Google doesn’t feel all you A-Listers aren’t all that influencial in the end. I know is sucks to be out of the loop.
Yes, Arrington,I’m sure Scoble is a very nice guy. From reading his blog, I’m not so sure about the “smart”.
LayZ: I’m not smart. I’m blonde. Thanks for noticing!
LayZ: I’m not smart. I’m blonde. Thanks for noticing!
[...] Update 8.28.06: This morning there are stories from the Associated Press, the New York Times, News.com, Reuters. Om Malik’s got some privacy concerns, though. Michael Arrington at TechCrunch uses the news to point to Zoho. Kent Newsome doesn’t think Google will take the office-suite crown from Microsoft. And Scoble says this was a classic case of leaking a story to make big news. [...]
[...] Robert Scoble’s rants about Google’s recent PR tactics were echoed by Rob Hof of BusinessWeek yesterday. It seems that, when announcing Google Apps, Google ignored bloggers in favor of pre-briefing a handful of traditional media such as The New York Times and InformationWeek. Even ZDnet’s Dan Farber didn’t get a look-in. Rob Hof rightly points out the irony of the situation: “that the world’s most prominent Internet company–one that’s specifically trying to get us all to do our work online instead of on the desktop–chose to brief mostly print publications.” [...]
paeasgyzm
bbgsukflo fqqoauvy iptzhwpuq bmdwsindwo