This article examines the limitations of adopting Google’s cutting-edge technologies for mainstream enterprises. While Google excels in advanced computing solutions and rapid growth in AI, its technologies may not be suited for all organizations. It highlights the need for tailored approaches to complex problems, such as authorization, advocating for solutions like Oso that fit diverse enterprise architectures instead of imitating Google directly.
Google has developed a range of advanced technologies to support its massive infrastructure. Google Cloud, while growing rapidly, still trails behind competitors like AWS and Microsoft Azure. Despite this, its growth is noteworthy, especially in the area of artificial intelligence where its Gemini model is reported to rival OpenAI’s GPT-4 in complex reasoning capabilities.
Google excels in solving complex computer science issues, often sharing their findings as research, open-source projects, or cloud services that benefit various users. Notable contributions include technologies such as Kubernetes, Angular, Bazel, and Zanzibar, which are widely used in the industry. However, the applicability of these technologies to other enterprises may be limited.
While it may be tempting to model an organization after Google, it’s important to recognize the differences between your enterprise and Google’s infrastructure. Google operates at an unparalleled scale with a uniform technology stack and a centralized monorepo, which may not be feasible or necessary for other organizations. Microservices are a trend many enterprises follow, but Google’s supporting structure influenced by its scale and standards took decades to develop.
Some technologies, like Google Spanner and Bazel, may be too advanced for typical workloads. They can be seen as excessive for many enterprises that do not have complete control over their dependencies or require the same level of scalability as Google. Ease of use and user experience are often overlooked in these open-source offerings, making them less suitable for general adoption.
An example of misaligned technological adoption is Google’s Zanzibar authorization system, which has inspired numerous startups aiming to replicate its capabilities at an enterprise level. However, most companies do not need to handle billions of authorization requests daily, nor do they operate under a Google-like environment.
Authorization remains a critical need for businesses, but the methodologies used by Google may not suffice for most. Startups trying to mimic Google often miss the mark, failing to accommodate the distributed architecture that more companies are employing today. Oso, by contrast, implements a hybrid authorization model that combines centralized role management with decentralized data handling, better addressing real-world complexities in enterprise technology.
In conclusion, while Google’s innovations are groundbreaking, directly adopting their technologies without adaptation may not yield similar success. Instead, utilizing insights from Google’s approach—without forcing a fit for your organizational structure—can lead to effective problem-solving strategies. Solutions designed for broader enterprise applicability, like those offered by Oso, demonstrate this principle by simplifying complex authorization issues without requiring a complete mimicry of Google’s methods.
Original Source: www.infoworld.com
