Today on PBS I watched the Charlie Rose interview of Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, that apparently took place live last Friday. I didn’t catch the whole thing, but what I did was quite engaging.
Schmidt: When you do a search do you receive more than one answer?
Rose: Yes, of course.
Schmidt: That’s a bug. We have more bugs per second than just about anybody else.
This statement stuck with me particularly because a portion of interview dealt with the Microsoft threat, and Microsoft has been one of the most publicized software companies in terms of bugs, security issues, patches, etc. (I happen to believe that this is due in large part to the intensive use of its software by the larger public.) Google’s CEO was being extremely direct about this specific quality issue (i.e. bug) for his end users.
I admire Google’s commitment to its end users (ref. also here and here).
Google’s CEO talked about allowing the end user to decide (e.g. to provide information or not) and then to focus on their decision (e.g. leverage said information to increase the quality of the Google experience). While this certainly sounds obvious, it’s equally obvious that today not many service provider “get it.”
When Eric Schmidt talked about a future application of the world’s information being brought to bear on new content–detecting and reporting factual errors during authoring–it really struck a chord in today’s age of the blog, grassroots journalism, etc. Like DRM, such an application won’t prevent users from violating certain principles–you can always take a digital photo of your computer screen just like you can willfully ignore such an application’s notifications, but it could help the well-intended author from getting the story right.
Aside: I really wish that Charlie Rose would start posting his transcripts online. An RSS feed for transcripts would be even better! I’m aware of his shop to buy particular programs/transcripts, but what I’m referring to is an easily accessible way to determine that I want to make a purchase (e.g. the first five minutes of an hour interview or a outline of what is discussed).
1 response so far ↓
1 ErikThomas // Jul 13, 2005 at 10:14 pm
>> I admire Google’s commitment to its end users (ref. also here and here).
I on the other hand do not admire Google’s culture of “sweat shop” that I have heard mentioned from several sources. A stock price of $400/share cannot make up for the fact that Google engineers work some pretty staggering hours.
I strongly believe that there are exacly three (3) stakeholders in any publicly traded business, and in order of importance are 1.) Employees, 2.) Customers, and 3.) Shareholders. It is a shame that so many companies pay only lip service to the importance of their human resources, publishing laughable slogans like “our employees are our greatest asset” and then fostering a company culture that causes “sweat shop” atmospheres that have ruined many of a life, helping to induce divorces and other family related problems.
I believe that a company exists because of the people that make up the products and services offered (their ideas, passion, etc.), and that quality of life far outweighs maximizing shareholder earnings by reducing job satisfaction.
OK, nuff said, sorry for the soapbox! :O)
Erik
You must log in to post a comment.