Unpredictable. Unfocused. Just like life.

The Business 2.0 Blog suggests that most Google tools other than search are struggling. Search gets about 80% of the user traffic, and the other products drop drastically from there. But if Search likely sees billions of hits, are the other products really suffering if they see only millions of hits?

The article also neglects to mention the share each Google product has in its market. Perhaps Google Earth gets only 0.22% of Google's traffic, but it is clearly the dominant product in an emerging market and has achieved excellent mindshare. So it would be easy to call it a very successful marketing exercise. And Google Maps and Google Local may see only 0.82% and 0.05% respectively, but that is how my kids and their friend, and myself and my friends, get directions and local information. So it may be on the early adopter side of the curve, but off to an excellent start.

Google is creating and owning markets early on. These markets didn't really even exist before Google got there. It matters little that those markets are small now because they will grow, and Google will grow with them. Sort of like something like RSS, which still only accounts for a very small percentage of traffic compared to the web overall.

Arguing that Google is a one-hit wonder ignores that fact that their seeming competitor, Microsoft, is pretty much a two-hit wonder - Windows and Office. Really, compared to Windows and Office, I'd be surprised if something like Sharepoint is used by more than 0.01% or their users. So should we be declaring Microsoft a failure too?