Bloomberg Anywhere Remote Login Bloomberg Terminal Demo Request


Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.


Financial Products

Enterprise Products


Customer Support

  • Americas

    +1 212 318 2000

  • Europe, Middle East, & Africa

    +44 20 7330 7500

  • Asia Pacific

    +65 6212 1000


Industry Products

Media Services

Follow Us

Bloomberg Customers

Businessweek Archives

Is Google That Innovative?

? Rid the world of "solutions" |


| That Wi-Fi Thread.... ?

November 08, 2005

Is Google That Innovative?

Heather Green

Is a Google podcasting aggregation service next? If you follow Tristan Louis' provocative analysis, yes. Louis says that with all the Google hype, people are missing that fact that it's new services are aimed at "filling up holes in their offering, in an attempt to match its competitors." As an example, because Google needs to keep up with the Jones, including AOL, Apple, and Yahoo, it will probably offer podcasting services next.

He takes apart the company's different offerings to come up with this conclusion:

"Google does innovate in some spaces but has largely innovated in order to gain entry in markets that already existed. As a rule of thumb, they've been very smart at breathing new innovations in those markets. However, their competitors are generally quick to notice and are catching up."

What's interesting about that analysis is that it leads you to the conclusion that if there weren't a group of innovative comapnies around Google, it wouldn't be as innovative....

09:03 AM

blog technology

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Very true..

I can say, Google's innovative offerings and better products came because

1. Everything is free (or almost) in consumer no one can have price advantage..only way out is to get better products out

2. The "late majority" tends to rely on single window interface to the internet and that's why in the initial phase of internet directories then portals and now aggregators/personal organizers are very attractive when you want to build a few billion dollar business and don't want to be a niche player.. That means it is not sufficient for Google to be "best of the breed" in search and ignore other established channels such as mail/mapping etc...they have to compete everywhere and that needed to give "google" touch to everything

3. The technology is not rocket science in this space and it is not a chip or drug development business where you have to toil hard for years before getting any designing something "cool and effective" is not that difficult both for independent groups and small groups in larger organizations.. and that is really fueling innovation..

4. Google kind of positioned or was rather perceived by people as "Anti-Desktop-Establishment" and that image can only be sustained through continued innovation

So my kudos to Google's superior products team but as far as innovative spirit is concerned I fully agree with you -- they have no other option

Posted by: getvendors at November 8, 2005 01:20 PM

A lot of recent articles have posted comments about the migration of Google to a Web Based Applications or Office Suite Provider and, possibly, offering the Sun Open-Office product as one giagantic ASP offering. Other articles have made reference to Microsoft's counter efforts to create Web Versions of their solutions including their MSN Search Portal and their more recent BETA of "". What I want to know is, what do the consumers want?

It is clear that the advertising-based FREE Application offering is very appealing and could, I am sure, cost justify the delivery of a FREE product. FREE offerings were the platform for the cell phone industries "FREE PHONE" offering, with the purchase of a plan. In the case of the Web Based Software Model in exchange for what could be considered an advertising contract, well, I just don't see it.

For starters, the Microsoft PC based software products still provide the ever valuable privacy option of installing your software without having to log onto the Internet. And, with growing Internet security issues, I don't want my personal information just available to anyone.

A recent statement from a Google employee went something like" if you want to keep your information private, just don't put it on a computer".

Popular software programs like Intuit's Quickbooks will access the Internet (often without your knowledge) to check for updates and do whatever else the Intuit company tells their program to do. My firewall delivers seemingly endless requests to allow their program to access the Internet. For what, I have no idea.

From an operating system stand-point, Sun's Open Office clearly needs some work. Their operating system is good and does offer some nice features but, unfortunately, is not as good as the products offered by the Microsoft Corporation (point Microsoft).

Overall, I'd be very interested to learn more about what your readers think of the options and the possibility of having Google Everything or keeping Microsoft and just Integrating Google Search products within the products, as much as possible.

In my calculated opinion, I think Google should partner with Microsoft somehow. That, I think, would be the best for the consumer, in the long run. (They are trying to deliver the best product to the consumer, Right?)

All the Best,

Gary Pick

Posted by: G.C.P. at November 9, 2005 07:53 PM

Remote Action Interface (RAI)

Google should move that innovation in the following direction.

As the Internet expands due to the addition of new systems, applications and users the need for efficient communication between all these entities increases. The Remote Action Interface Architecture (RAI) achieves loose coupling among internet entities. Any system which is network addressable is considered an entity. In order to simplify entity to entity communication there is a need to abstract away the complexity of the network. By eliminating the knowledge of the network from the implementation layer the RAI architecture is able to move data from one entity to another seamlessly. Implementing a solution built on the principles of Remote Action Interface (RAI) provides the ability for entities to self manage their own data without human intervention.

Within the RAI Architecture there are three classifications actions, entity and containers. The classifications are organized in a hierarchical tree structure. All leaf nodes are entities while all paths starting from the tree root (domain) are containers.


The four basic actions which can be preformed on an entity are view, delete, update, and add. From these four actions additional actions can be derived. Data sent to entity is contained within xml tags.

Syntax: action@


The entity defines what time of actions it will perform. The entity must reside within a container.

Syntax: action@entity


Containers hold zero or more entities. The classification changes between entity and container depending on the manner in which the entity or container is being referenced.

Syntax: action@entity.container

RAI Definition

A request is sent to discovery@entity.container the response is a RAI definition, which lists all entities and actions.

RAI Architecture Implementation

RAI Server

Today the communication and programming are two distinct layers. The RAI server functions as a mail and web server, which allows fusion of the network and the implementation layers. The RAI server is not able to hold the requester’s state information; therefore security access verification is done on each request.

RAI Language Extension

In order to support the paradigm shift in computing architecture, programming languages must support embedded communication. Data within the application is passed to method using either the RAI request or conventional memory stack.

The first interaction directed at an entity is the RAI discovery request sent to The response will contain the entity’s RAI Definition. The RAI definition is simple and universally available to all requesters. The requester is free to invoke any discovered action. The requester invokes an action by sending a request to action@entity.container. Data is sent to the RAI action in the format specified by the RAI definition. The RAI response is the result of a RAI request made by a remote entity. The format of the RAI response is outlined in the RAI action definition.

Implementation Example

Wal-Mart purchases products from hundreds of vendor world wide. Many of Wal-Mart’s suppliers’ change mailing addresses frequently. Every time a supplier changes its mailing address Wal-Mart must locate the supplier in their supplier database and manually update the address information. Having to manually find and update information costs Wal-Mart time and money. Costs are reduced by implementing a RAI solution. In the following example Wal-Mart initials are request to fedex ever week requesting FedEx to update their mailing address.

Sample RAI Definition



Entity; // entity declaration

public view; // action declaration

// input: none

// returns: website




public view;

// input: none

// returns: company address information

// 43

// wall street


Fedex Source Code



String streetNumber = “7”;

String streetName; = “Long Tail Drive”;

// load data in to entity = streetNumber; = streetName;

// from is global variable

// from variable can contains

return from =;


Wal-Mart Source Code



// from is global variable

// from variable can contains

String Number = streetNumber.from;

String Name = streetName.from;




Posted by: Bira Rai birarai at December 4, 2005 12:41 PM

blog comments powered by Disqus