I think flash vs. consistent execution is a good analogy about the two Internet giants (Yahoo and Google).

Google's really been about the flashy stuff up to this point. Get as much out there as quickly as possible and see what sticks. This is fine... it's definitely a better approach to software development than the tired "write a spec, design the system, write the code, test the code, put the code in the box and ship it to the customer" model that was warmed over from the days when that last step actually applied.

The idea that web development should be a constant process of improvement is definitely something I'm on board with. The problem I have with Google is while they've got the "quick win" portion of agile development methodology down (it seems)... they don't have the constant and consistent improvement portion down. They make a big splash with "Google "... all the blogs and other Google-watchers herald it as the next coming of and people flock to try it out. Then it sits there. And sits there. And then they add another "gee whiz" feature and everyone talks about how cool it is. I used to be as guilty of this as anyone else.

Lets take Google Maps for example. It debuted at a time when MapQuest, Yahoo, etc. were all pretty static. It had a cool UI that worked more like people expected it to. It was spiffy. But the driving directions sucked and it lacked a lot of the nice stuff that other mapping software had. It was half-baked. That's cool... as I said before... I'm on-board with releasing it and letting the public play and fall in love with it.

But Maps has been out for how long now? And guess what? It still lacks good solid driving directions (I see a LOT of invites to parties and the like that say "DO NOT FOLLOW GOOGLE MAPS DIRECTIONS") and nice stuff like an address book for storing your friends addresses. It's not really integrated with any of their other products... think about it... how cool would it be if your friend sent you the address of the latest rave and Google parsed the address out of the email (in Gmail of course) and put a "map it" button next to it? Infinitely useful.

But Maps has scroll wheel support! When you scroll with your mouse wheel, it zooms!

Which do you think you're gonna use more? And I'm not against the mouse zooming... I think it's also useful. But the difference is its exciting and Gmail integration and an address book aren't.

Wins in user experience aren't won just on the fancy features... they're more often won in the rote, boring stuff that makes the product more USEFUL to the public. Fancy features get them to come, good solid user experience makes them stay. One thing I really don't see in Google is the willingness to address the boring, mundane features that people desperately want... but don't get 1,256 diggs on Digg.

Yahoo's proven that they're a little more willing to dedicate their resources to a good overall experience. Integration of your products is key... and like the article says... Google seems really behind in this area.

So, it's Yahoo's outmoded development practices but well-thought-out output vs. Google's faster time to market and sometimes (often) half-baked ideas that never become fully-baked. That's a pretty even challenge, honestly.

The exciting part will be when one (or both) of them decide to address the weak side of their match up. Sounds like they both "plan" to, but it remains to be seen if they'll actually step up and do it.

I bet Google has the bigger uphill battle... in a company of superstars, it's gonna be hard to find a janitor.

Very insightful comment jb. I agree with you – janitors are few and far between at Google. I will never forget when we met the MIT graduate at the Google Dance who had been at Google for two months and they still hadn’t given him anything to do. MIT grads are not janitors. Neither are Cal Tech or Stanford grads.

I also agree that product improvement at Google is not really a priority – which is a shame since they build great (read- fun) beta products.

I think Yahoo certainly has a better process in place to improve their products, but I don’t see them as agile at all. For example, Yahoo! had every possible developer working on the “Panama” PPC project, and they still didn’t get it done on time. I have to admit that it is good that they didn’t push out an imperfect product, but you would hope that a company as big as Yahoo! would be able to plan the development more accurately.

I guess the big question is who will be the next big start-up that will come out of the shadows to take Google off its throne. Most people think there will be one but no one know who or when (yet). One thing is for sure, there is some Google blod in the water and the sharks are starting to circle…

Steve Rubel weighs in on the matter here.