JMIRROR on Blog

누가 이길까요? 『Yahoo vs. Google: ‘Wow’ vs. familiar』

July 25, 2006 – 5:41 pm / 747 views

투표 한번 해볼까요? 누가 이기나?

기사 내용이 잼이있네요.

아래 기사를 읽어보시라 방치 하는 건 예의가 아닌 것 같아서 제가 공감가는 부분을 뽑아 보았습니다.

우선 이 기사의 핵심적인 질문은  

Do Internet users prefer services that are consistent and predictable, or are they more interested in the “wow” factor?

인터넷 사용자들은 ‘일관성’이 있고, ‘예측가능한’ 서비스를 좋아할 것인가 아니면, ‘WOW 새로운 걸’ 하는 요소들을 더 좋아 할 것인가?

야후와 구글은 이 두가지 관점에서 서로 다른 접금을 하고 있고, 거기에는 둘 모두 위험성이 존재 합니다.

There are risks to each approach. Google tends to introduce a lot of new products and then watch to see what works. This has the potential to alienate users if there are too many false starts. At the same time, Yahoo risks being seen as irrelevant if it tries to put so many features into each product that it is always months late to market with any good idea.

구글은 새로운 상품을 내놓고 있고, 시장에 내놓고 시장 반응이 어떤지 지쳐 보는 경향이 있다. 서비스를 시작하면서 너무 많은 오류가 있다면, 이것은 사용자들로 부터 외면 당할 수 있다. 반면에, 야후는 너무 많은 서비스들을 서로 집어 넣으려고 해서 늘 몇달씩 좋은 아이디어를 시장에 내 놓는데 늦어 질 경우에는 연관성이 부적절해 보일 수 있다는 점이다.

그래서 필자의 생각은

So far, neither company appears to be able to make a significant dent in the position of the other

어느 두 회사도 상대방에 큰 치명타를 주기는 어려워 보인다.

고 하고 있습니다.

그리고 야후가 구글을 상대하는 적절한 방법이나 어려워 하고 있는 점을 소개 하였습니다.

Yahoo’s difficulty in gaining traction in social networking is especially troublesome for the company, because it has made a big bet that contributions from users will help differentiate its offerings from those of Google

야후의 어려움은 Social Networking (우리는 커뮤니티 라고 부르죠)의 트랜잭션을 높이는데 있다. Social Network이 구글과 차별하여 제공할 수 있는 구글에 큰 한방을 먹일 수 있는 것이기 때문이다.

—————————————-

우선 이 기사를 쓴 기자에 박수를! 왜 우리나라 신문들은 이정도 깊이있는 기사를 쓰지 못하는 걸까 한번 생각해 보게되었습니다.

심지어 이 기사를 보고 쓴 매일경제신문과 한겨레 신문의 기사 (특히 매경 기사는 ㅡ,.ㅡ) 기자님들에게는 죄송하지만, 뭔가 덧붙치지 말고 원 기사 내용을 충실히 소개 했으면 하는 바램마져 들었습니다.

개인적인 의견은 야후!에 한표. 여러분 의견은 어떠하신가요?

——————————————

Yahoo vs. Google: ‘Wow’ vs. familiar

By Saul Hansell The New York Times
TUESDAY, JULY 25, 2006

NEW YORK When Google introduced its mapping service last year, it did something that made its competitors look antiquated. Users could click on a map and drag it to see an adjacent area, a much faster approach than those offered by rivals.But today, Google Maps still does not offer some of the pedestrian conveniences of Yahoo Maps or AOL’s MapQuest. For example, it does not remember addresses, so users need to tell it where they live every time they seek driving directions from their homes.
Alan Eustace, a senior vice president for engineering and research at Google, said in an interview last week that the company had made a conscious choice to play down copycat features. 

“We are trying to come up with something that is new and different that makes people say ‘Wow,’” he said.

Do Internet users prefer services that are consistent and predictable, or are they more interested in the “wow” factor?

These differences in Web products define a crucial front in the battle for online loyalty between Google and Yahoo, the major players in Internet searches.

Both companies see e-mail and other services as additional locations on which to display advertising. Even more important: They are a way to keep their brands in front of users in order to capture as many search queries from them as possible.

“The battle is about one thing: Getting that search box in front of as many people in as many places as possible,” said Jim Lanzone, the chief executive of Ask.com, the IAC/InterActiveCorp search service.

Yahoo is using its position as the leading Internet portal to help differentiate its search service, a distant No. 2 to Google. Yahoo has tried to keep the look and behavior of its digital services consistent, while retaining as much information about its users as it can, saving them time and personalizing their experience.

“Our philosophy is that being part of the Yahoo network is a huge advantage and a huge competitive differentiator,” said Ash Patel, Yahoo’s chief product officer. “When we build a product that takes advantage of the Yahoo network, it doesn’t feel like an orphan.”

Google has tied some products together - for example, combining its instant messaging and e-mail services on the same Web page. But those links are often created after a product is introduced.

“There is a tradeoff between integration and speed,” Eustace said. “We are living and dying by being an innovative, fast-moving company.”

To some degree, the difference in emphasis when developing products defines the sort of customer that each service most attracts: Google appeals to those who prefer technological wizardry, even if it is a bit rough around the edges, while Yahoo aims more for those who want a smoother experience.

There are risks to each approach. Google tends to introduce a lot of new products and then watch to see what works. This has the potential to alienate users if there are too many false starts. At the same time, Yahoo risks being seen as irrelevant if it tries to put so many features into each product that it is always months late to market with any good idea.

“Yahoo has lost its appetite for experimentation,” said Toni Schneider, a former Yahoo executive who is now running Automattic, a blog software company. “They used to be a lot more like Google where someone would come up with a cool idea and run with it.”

While Yahoo’s processes, he said, have become too bureaucratic, it still is attracting an audience. “Google’s products may be more innovative, but at the end of the day, Yahoo is pretty good at nailing what the user really wants.”

So far, neither company appears to be able to make a significant dent in the position of the other.

“Google and Yahoo are both pretty hip new media brands,” said Michael Zeman, the director of insights and analytics for Starcom IP, a media buying agency of the Publicis Group. “Yahoo stands for content and Google stands for search.”

He said that research shows little difference in the demographic characteristics of the services’ audiences.

It is hard to tell which tactic will ultimately win out because both companies are gaining users as AOL and Microsoft’s MSN decline. Yahoo is the No. 1 site for e-mail and online news in the United States, while it is ranked second in instant messaging, behind AOL, according to comScore Media Metrix.

Google, by contrast, is much less consistent. Its map service is now a very close third behind Mapquest and Yahoo. In two years, Google’s Gmail has grown to having 8.6 million users in June.

That is not bad in a market where people do not switch e-mail addresses casually. But during the past year, according to comScore, Yahoo added 11.8 million e-mail users, more than Gmail’s entire user base.

Also, some of Google’s products are languishing. Its Google Talk chat software had only 44,000 users in June, according to comScore. And its Orkut social networking service had 279,000 users in the United States, although it is popular in Brazil.

Yahoo’s social networking service, Yahoo 360, had 4.7 million U.S. users in June. That is not a small number, but the service is tiny compared to the 52 million people who used MySpace.

Yahoo’s difficulty in gaining traction in social networking is especially troublesome for the company, because it has made a big bet that contributions from users will help differentiate its offerings from those of Google.

During the past several years, Yahoo has also devoted so much of its resources to building up its search business that it has been slow to improve many of its other offerings. This has allowed Google to gain the initiative in areas like e-mail and maps.