Message to Microsoft: Google's gunning for ya--again

HALF MOON BAY, Calif.--What's Google's next big revenue stream? Text ads remain the cash cow for the present, but the company's future includes a big role for display advertising.

"I think the opportunity for display is pretty large because people are shifting what we think of as offline budgets to online," said CEO Eric Schmidt at Fortune's Brainstorm Tech conference here.

"The reason I say it's the next logical one--customers who buy text ads are also busy buying display ads from other sources...So, it's a big space," said Schmidt. He made his comments during the course of an interview with Fortune moderator David Kirkpatrick.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt

(Credit: Elinor Mills/CNET News)

Schmidt's musings are not likely to come as any big surprise to Microsoft, but it suggests that the company will face new competition from a tough rival, sooner, rather than later.

During his brief time on stage, Schmidt offered a whirlwind round of comments about the industry and his company.

• You cannot run a company where you listen to the way Wall Street says you have to run the company.

• "We're not focused on stock price...We're focused on building a long-term institution and changing the world.

• One of the mistakes executives make is that they get bored with their core business. Our goal is to be a one-product company. It's called Google. Our idea is to have one seamless experience...and so you have to have a single brand.

• Many, many new forms of advertising are coming out. Maybe the most interesting is click-to-play ads...the testing and measurements is that people are doing it because they enjoy it.

• We select people who share our values...We don't value experience very much, which gets us into trouble sometimes.

• If you look at the history of software development, the interesting things get built by two people...There are essentially no counter examples. You could argue that maybe three is the right model. But there essentially are no examples of revolutionary products that began with 30-member teams.

• Our wireless initiative was the perfect outcome. It was the cost of a letter.

[The_Decider]

"If you look at the history of software development, the interesting things get built by two people...there are essentially no counter examples. You could argue that maybe three is the right model. But there essentially are no examples of revolutionary products that began with 30-member teams."

I couldn't agree more. More cooks ruin the broth. The more people that are involved the more diluted and unfocused it becomes.

Some of the most influential and innovative software has been developed by few small teams. Have any been developed by large teams?

C++ and Java are great examples. C++ started out a one man project and although it was flawed from day 1, its constant updates by committee approach has bloated it out beyond all reason. Java is on the same path.

[Penguinisto]

UNIX was conceived and built by two people. The C programming language was conceived and built by those same two people. Linux began with the dreams of one guy, who (originally) only wanted to make a UNIX-like OS that ran on a 386. Apple started with just a small handful of people in a garage... as did HP.

This is why good programs have good architects - those few folks who have the vision and drive to see their ideas formed into something workable. Those who have them, get things built that are fast, light, efficient, and potentially world-changing. Those who do not, get bloated has-been (or 'never-was') products that the public at large turns their nose up at, if they don't otherwise begin to flee it entirely at first opportunity.

[lleather]

Keep it up Eric - especially the wireless initiative - your work is greatly appreciated. Best thing you ever did was leave Novell! Look at you now! My CNE certification isn't worth a whole lot anymore but seeing your signature on it makes it stay on the wall. When can I buy my google phone?

[Kwasiowusu]

I just gotta laugh at this one from Eric Schmidt : "We're not focused on stock price...We're focused on building a long-term the world s one from Eric Schmidt : "
Yeah. and I am Mother Theresa as well. Its always funny when these Silicon Valley types, who love money more than almost anywhere else on the planet (you only have to look at how the speed with which they scupper off to join another company that they think well give them richer stock options , and forget company loyalty), continues to claim with a straight face that "It?s not the money, ?. Hey, Eric, you will excuse me if I don't believe you, yes? After all, the # 1 reason why Eric Schmidt left Novell, to go join Google, was so he could become a very rich man, through the very same Google stock price increases ?he is not focused on?. And the reason why Larry Page and Sergey Brin were able to buy a huge Boeing 767-200 wide bodied jet, which typically carries 180 passengers, was because of the big stock price gains of Google. In fact these 2 individuals got so carried away with glee, that they were even fighting over the ?California king" size bed they should be sleeping in on the plane. {http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB115222788536400097-i72SXBBTMX_EPvtfDIn9uNjtiss_20070707.html?mod=blogs}. Do these guys care about the stock price? YOU BET!!

[someguy999]

This is probably one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard. Of course every idea initially comes from 1 person but then a team is built around it. Gosling may have been a creator of Java, but its not like Sun said... so Jame's you need ot build this thing all by yourself.

Since they have yet to figure our how to tap into an individual's brain, every idea will originate from an individual. You can say the same thing about MS and IE with Allard, yet I doubt Allard would ever try and say, "oh yeah, it was all me, no one else helped". This is just a stupid statement.

In addition, Google's statement "We're not focused on stock price...We're focused on building a long-term institution and changing the world." Whatever, if that was the case you would have stuck to your purest attitude where the two wonder kids said to the press that paid ads in search was wrong and they wouldn't ever include it as part of Google (check the "Search" book for that reference).

"Our goal is to be a one-product company." Wow... almost nothing could ever be further than the truth. What does things like sketchup or Picasa have to do with the model of search, or even things like Google Health...

Its ok that the world is changing and you're changing with it. Just don't try and pretend like its not and continue to claim you're the same little company underdog that's only got Search on their mind, its just a joke. If that was the case... why the hell build android, why not just build a Search app/add-in for Blackberries and WinMob devices...

People are smart and they know what's up, no reason to pretend like they don't.

[jef5623]

Its time now that Google & Microsoft decide that how they are going to enter the 7th age of computing.