Tech & VC 24 Aug 2007 01:56 pm
Google Transit Maps Shows the Dark Side of Platform Developement
After just blogging about my use of HopStop yesterday, and I was interested to see that Google is going to launch a subway mapping service. I am particularly interested in seeing how HopStop (currently the best NYC subway maps web service) responds to this. Google is directly entering their space, and I wonder how the movie will end.
We have seen this movie before: Google has moved in on the territory of niche mapping services in the past. Previously, Platial was the best way to create your own personal map of a set of locations of routes, but then Google launched MyMaps directly competing with Platial. But, this movie is still playing out… Platial is still alive and kicking.
I’m interested in this news story because it speaks of a larger trend in web services platforms. What happens when you build on a platform, and then the platform developer decides to release a first-party version of your software? The platform developer almost always have the upper-hand in this relationship because they design the API that applications use, and so they can use that leverage to their advantage.
In the case of Microsoft, they made special Microsoft-only APIs that only first-party applications (like Office) could call, which blocked out third-party competitors, forcing the competition to use slower, outdated API calls. This API blocking issue was central to the Microsoft vs DoJ anti-trust suit. We know how that movie ended.
Every platform needs a killer app to succeed, so platform developers need application developers. And, most application developers need a platform because they don’t want to reinvent the wheel. But the relationship between these two parties is delicate. Perhaps, the two parties are fundamentally at odds with each other.
I’m not sure how the latest version of this movie will end, but I’m looking forward to watching. Time to go make some popcorn.
2 Responses to “Google Transit Maps Shows the Dark Side of Platform Developement”
on 25 Aug 2007 at 10:38 pm 1.Nate Westheimer said …
Andrew –
This is a very interesting note. You’re right — these issues do not go un-addressed by teams developing applications and platforms which rely on the services (in some cases free) of others (especially when those “others” have such an ability to reinvent *your* wheel overnight).
On the data pipeline control issue, we have a belief that all services on the web are best publicly available, and — here’s the important part — the more folks who have access and ability to use these services as they see fit, the more likely they are to stay free and available to folks who have access and ability to use them. This is a common balancing act on the Internet, but ultimately both API service providers and ourselves want to see web services in the hands of people. We think creating a platform for that to happen adds to this natural, democratic process.
On the second point, indeed the Goliaths can come out with their own versions of applications, functions, and platforms, but they can’t always communicate the value of their product as effectively as an independent company focused on that one thing. Google’s replacement of boutique RSS readers with the Reader app may be easier to predict because there’s only so much one can do to differentiate a product which receives consistently formatted information over a set protocol — and Google can do it. But for a product like a blogging platform, the Big Cos. can still have their product out and doing well (i.e. Blogger) while other companies exist happily, earning revenue, innovating and building value for their users, investors, and the broader Internet community (i.e. Six Apart’s several, eventually acquired products, tumbler, Twitter, to reference a few).
So my reaction to your post, in a nut shell, is this: Yes we lose sleep over these issues, but no it doesn’t phase us. Anyway, it’s my over simplification to say that if these services and platforms are really valuable enough that we’re worried about how Google compete, then we’re in the right business.
Thanks,
Nate
BricaBox
on 27 Aug 2007 at 5:09 am 2.morland said …
As you mentioned with Microsoft, it’s a problem with development platforms in general, not just web services. This behavior results in criticism oft targeted at Apple as well – that any enterprising independent developers build new apps that the user community takes to will see Apple’s own version built into the next Mac OS. Konfabulator/Dashboard, Sherlock/Watson, etc. It’s a very delicate thing, spurring innovation…