For all its skill and dominance in artificial intelligence, Google can be surprisingly lacking in the natural kind. Download film dragon nest rise of the black dragon sub indo mp4. In move after move, Google snatches defeat from the jaws of victory. And all because the company’s culture is blind to the value of passionate users.

Welcome page of the online ordering site of the gas products of the Messer Group.

I’m quite certain that Google watches user numbers and applies analytics to everything it can measure. A radically analytical approach is powerful, but it can blind you to the factors that cannot be measured. Factors such as user passion.

[ Related: ] My favorite example is Google+. After an initial surge of usage in the first couple of years, the social network gradually fizzled — smothered by a reputation for low engagement. That reputation was largely false. But over time it became a self-fulfilling prophecy as Google took repeated action to hide and suppress engagement. It killed Circle sharing, the best way to discover high-quality active users. It added Communities, which reduced attention aimed at users. Its dumb algorithms flagged (and thereby hid from public view) high-quality comments, while simultaneously failing to flag obvious spam.

(Eventually, Google’s algorithms got much better, but only after most users had already abandoned the platform.) This is a great plan — if your objective is to minimize user engagement. [ ] Google+ was, and still is, the online playground for Google’s most loyal fans.

Google could have brought a billion people into this playground, where Google fans could hold sway and persuade everybody else to share their enthusiasm for Android, Pixel phones, Pixelbooks, Google Search, Google Assistant, Google Home, Gmail, YouTube and all the rest. Instead, it actively buried or suppressed user engagement until Google+ became a shell of its former self. It has robbed its own most passionate users of audience, demonstrating that it doesn’t understand the value of those users.

And now it’s doing something comparable with email. Google giveth, and Google taketh away Google this week announced the end of two email-related products. The first is the experimental alternative to Gmail called Inbox. The other is a Chrome app for offline Gmail. The Gmail Offline Chrome app, which Google introduced seven years ago and hasn’t updated for five years, will be removed from the Chrome Web Store on Dec. It has been superseded in functionality by the web version of Gmail, which has supported superior offline capability for years. (You can turn on the offline feature by going into Gmail Settings, choosing the Offline tab and making sure the “enable offline mail” checkbox is checked.) But nobody cares about the Gmail Offline Chrome app.

Good riddance to it. Technically, it never even made it out of beta. The termination of Google Inbox, on the other hand, is more problematic. Inbox will be killed in March, according to this week. Inbox, which is officially and oddly branded Inbox by Gmail, was in 2014.

And probably in a panic. Back in 2013, Gmail was proudly text-based and largely devoid of significant interface design. The service was popular and growing, and it looked as if Google would rule the email roost indefinitely. Then catastrophe struck. In early 2013, a startup announced an app for iPhone called. More than a million people signed up to try it before it even launched, based on the innovation and appeal of its user interface.

The key Mailbox innovation — common now but revelatory then — was the use of swiping left or right to move or snooze messages. Mailbox emphasized other interface elements as well, including the containment of elements into boxes or “cards.” The combination of Mailbox features facilitated the quick achievement of “zero inbox” — Mailbox made it easy to skim and process emails. It’s possible that the interface of Mailbox, and the obvious appeal of it, shocked Google into rethinking its hyper-minimalist design and may have influenced the course of its design language, Material Design, which the company introduced in the summer of 2014.

Google announced Inbox — one of the first Material Design products — a few months later. Google may have rushed Inbox to market to stave off the loss of users to swipe-centric, card-happy upstarts such as Mailbox and its subsequent imitators. Alas, poor Mailbox never had a chance. Its fatal flaw was that it wasn’t an email service, but a front end to the email services owned by other companies.