Does anyone else see these projects, the always changing Google logo, and G+ as proof that Google just has way too much talent and not enough useful ideas?
These projects and the changing Google logo can be thought of as marketing expenses to maintain Google's brand, which helps them continue to attract users and developers.
G+ is built for strategic reasons (and not something they're just doing because they don't know have 'enough useful ideas'.) You can debate whether G+ is the right thing for them to do, but they're building it because Google leadership thinks they should.
You are right. However, successfully selling products to people isn't fun. See Apple. If some Google homies got together in their spare or 20% time (does that still exist?) and utilized the Google tools to make this, then sweet. But, if some engineers getting paid $80k+ used their work time to build this, doesn't that suggest Google has too much talent?
I like fun (and Google), but investors like profits.
No. Keeping the system from visually stagnating, and having fun with your users, is one of those useful ideas... Besides, I doubt the artists are taking resources from feature developers. If anything, they're probably sitting idle between roll-outs.
Comments
Does anyone else see these projects, the always changing Google logo, and G+ as proof that Google just has way too much talent and not enough useful ideas?
I think Google likes to have fun.
Further, if your job is somewhere that you have fun and are free to occasionally make interesting-but-useless things, you're less likely to quit.
What a great way to demonstrate that talent in unique ways and keep employees happy with an awesome atmosphere!
These projects and the changing Google logo can be thought of as marketing expenses to maintain Google's brand, which helps them continue to attract users and developers.
G+ is built for strategic reasons (and not something they're just doing because they don't know have 'enough useful ideas'.) You can debate whether G+ is the right thing for them to do, but they're building it because Google leadership thinks they should.
You are right. However, successfully selling products to people isn't fun. See Apple. If some Google homies got together in their spare or 20% time (does that still exist?) and utilized the Google tools to make this, then sweet. But, if some engineers getting paid $80k+ used their work time to build this, doesn't that suggest Google has too much talent?
I like fun (and Google), but investors like profits.
No. Keeping the system from visually stagnating, and having fun with your users, is one of those useful ideas... Besides, I doubt the artists are taking resources from feature developers. If anything, they're probably sitting idle between roll-outs.