How Google Loves Killing Its Children: A Deep Dive Into Google’s Product Graveyard
Google, one of the most powerful and influential tech companies on the planet, is known for innovation, speed, and scale. It revolutionised how we search the internet, disrupted email with Gmail, and gave us mobile powerhouses like Android and Google Maps. But for every successful product that becomes part of daily life, there’s a graveyard of dead projects that once showed promise. Some were loved. Some were ahead of their time. Others just… disappeared.
This trend of launching and then killing off products so frequently has earned Google a darkly humorous reputation: “Google loves killing its children.”
Let’s explore what this really means—and why it happens.
Video Credits To: https://www.youtube.com/@clyntmedia
The Long List of the Departed
Over the years, Google has introduced hundreds of products and services. Many of them, however, have been discontinued, even if they had passionate user bases. Here are just a few:
- Google Reader (2005–2013): A beloved RSS feed aggregator that still has fans mourning its death.
- Google+ (2011–2019): A social network intended to rival Facebook, which ultimately fell short but left behind a pretty solid photo system (now integrated into Google Photos).
- Inbox by Gmail (2014–2019): A cleaner, more experimental version of Gmail that introduced innovative features many users loved—some of which were later rolled into Gmail proper.
- Google Allo (2016–2019): A smart messaging app with Google Assistant baked in. It failed to attract users.
- Google Play Music (2011–2020): A music streaming service that YouTube Music eventually replaced.
- Project Tango, Google Hangouts, Daydream VR, Picasa, Google Wave… the list goes on.
There’s even an entire website dedicated to the phenomenon: Killed by Google, which tracks all the discontinued projects and apps. As of 2025, it lists over 290+ products Google has shut down.
Why Does Google Kill Its Products?
1. Fail Fast Philosophy
Google has long embraced the “fail fast” mentality of Silicon Valley: experiment rapidly, release to the public, and if it doesn’t take off, cut your losses and move on. This keeps innovation high, but also leads to emotional whiplash for users who invest time and energy into new platforms that get yanked away.
2. Internal Competition
Google is a sprawling company, and sometimes its own teams compete. Messaging apps are the most notorious example—Google Talk, Hangouts, Allo, Duo, Chat, Meet… The confusion stems from different departments launching similar products, often with overlapping goals but differing visions. Eventually, the less successful ones are retired in favour of consolidation.
3. Monetisation Struggles
Some products are simply hard to monetise. Google Reader had a strong user base, but it didn’t generate revenue, and Google couldn’t justify keeping resources tied up. The same goes for apps that don’t fit into Google’s ad ecosystem or its bigger cloud and AI strategies.
4. Security and Legal Risks
Google+ was taken offline not just because of low usage but because of security vulnerabilities and potential legal issues. When risk outweighs reward, Google is quick to pull the plug.
5. Pivoting to Core Priorities
In recent years, Google has increasingly focused on AI, cloud computing, and hardware. Products that don’t align with these priorities are often quietly discontinued or merged into larger projects.
The Human Cost: User Trust
The real problem with Google’s tendency to shut things down isn’t just nostalgia—it’s trust.
When users invest in a product—whether by uploading data, building habits, or integrating it into their business or lifestyle—they expect some stability. Google’s unpredictability can leave users hesitant to adopt new services, fearing they might get discontinued a year later.
This impacts developers and startups, too. Some are reluctant to build apps or tools that rely heavily on Google APIS or platforms that might disappear. When Google killed off Firebase Dynamic Links or the Stadia game platform, it left developers scrambling.
A Culture of Experimentation… Without Commitment?
Google’s culture, inherited from its startup roots, values engineers building things quickly. “Launch and iterate” has been the norm. However, as the company matured, some argue that it never fully transitioned from an experimental mindset to one of long-term stewardship.
This becomes especially obvious when compared to companies like Apple, which tend to release fewer products, but support them longer and build extensive ecosystems around them. Apple rarely kills a major product unless it’s clearly outdated (e.g., the iPod Classic).
Are There Benefits to This Approach?
Not everything about Google’s quick product life cycles is negative. Here’s the other side of the coin:
- Rapid Innovation: Google experiments with technologies that sometimes become future standards. Features from Inbox made their way into Gmail. Google Lens, Assistant, and Translate all benefited from scrapped experiments.
- Resource Allocation: Killing off underperforming projects frees up resources for those that have real traction, like Android, Chrome, YouTube, or Google Search.
- Learning from Failure: Every failure teaches lessons. Even if a product dies, its core technologies or ideas may live on in other forms.
In fact, Google Photos, Google Assistant, and even Chrome were all born in an environment where Google encouraged internal teams to take bold risks.
So What’s Still Alive (For Now)?
While Google may be infamous for axing its own children, it still has a lineup of stable, enduring platforms that seem here to stay:
- Google Search – the backbone of everything.
- Gmail is still one of the most used email services globally.
- Google Maps is deeply integrated into global logistics and travel.
- YouTube – a massive media empire on its own.
- Google Cloud – a growing powerhouse in enterprise solutions.
- Android OS – running on billions of devices.
Still, nothing is guaranteed. Even Google’s hardware line (like Pixel tablets or Nest devices) carries a whisper of uncertainty for savvy consumers who remember the fate of Google Glass or the Pixel Slate.
Conclusion: Innovator or Heartbreaker?
Google’s innovation engine is impressive, but it comes with a cost. When a company repeatedly kills off its own services—even well-loved ones—it creates a brand image of impermanence. The phrase “don’t get too attached” has become an unspoken mantra for Google users.
To some, Google is the daring explorer willing to try and fail in public. To others, it’s a capricious parent, abandoning its digital children at the first sign of struggle.
Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between. Google is still one of the most exciting forces in technology, but if you’re going to invest in one of its new ideas, make sure to back up your data.