Google has developed advanced technologies for its own use, showing strong growth in Google Cloud, especially with AI. However, its solutions may not be practical for typical enterprises, which face different challenges. Companies like Oso are successfully addressing specific needs like authorization without the complexities of Google’s models.
Google has developed an impressive collection of advanced technologies to serve its unique needs. While Google Cloud is growing rapidly, it still trails behind AWS and Microsoft Azure in revenue. However, its growth story is notable as it continues to expand even in the face of competition from established players in the cloud space, particularly leveraging advancements in AI with models like Gemini, purportedly rivaling OpenAI’s GPT-4.
The company’s expertise lies in solving complex computer science challenges and sharing solutions through research, open-source projects, or cloud services. Technologies such as Kubernetes, Angular, Bazel, and Zanzibar showcase Google’s ability to innovate, but these tools may not always be suitable or beneficial for non-Google enterprises.
This article argues against emulating Google’s operational model, particularly through its research outputs, while clarifying that utilizing Google Cloud services can be advantageous for businesses. Google Cloud, with solutions like BigQuery and AI models like Gemini 2.0, has proven beneficial for enterprises aiming to enhance their software development and infrastructure.
Google operates on a massive scale using a homogeneous technology stack, which might not be viable for most enterprises. While many industries emphasize transitioning to microservices architectures, Google relies on monorepos and site reliability engineers, which often do not align with the operational capacities of most businesses. As one developer noted, while Google Spanner excels at scale, it can be overly complex for simpler workloads.
The concept of web-scale authorization exemplifies the pitfalls of imitating Google. Despite the promise of Zanzibar, a globally consistent authorization system developed by Google, many enterprises do not face the same scale of access control requirements. Although authorization is a common necessity, its execution varies significantly across organizations, making Zanzibar’s model impractical for mainstream use.
Oso’s success highlights the importance of recognizing the practical needs of enterprises. By using a hybrid architecture, Oso centralizes authorization data while keeping specific application data in its original databases. This realistic approach contrasts with Google’s centralized systems, which may not always serve as a relevant model for others in the industry.
In conclusion, while Google’s innovations are impressive, businesses should focus on their unique challenges. This means drawing inspiration from Google’s problem-solving methodologies without fully adopting its technology stack. Solutions like Oso demonstrate that tackling enterprise issues like authorization can be achieved without replicating the operational intricacies of Google, providing a tailored approach that fits a broader range of organizations.
In summary, while Google excels at creating innovative technologies addressing its unique challenges, these solutions may not directly apply to most enterprises. Businesses should leverage Google’s methodologies and insights while developing solutions tailored to their specific needs. By adopting a more realistic approach like that of Oso, enterprises can effectively tackle complex problems such as authorization without emulating Google’s expansive technological ecosystem.
Original Source: www.infoworld.com
