This could go either way really. Either you think that Google is such a monstrosity with all these parts that don't really fit together which makes for bad UX or you think that Google's services are something we should be thankful for and that this display of free stuff is the kind of really nice UX only Google can deliver.
I think the implication that Google's UX is a monstrosity isn't really warranted based on the content of this page.
Most of these fall into a few categories:
1. Hey, this service exists (Google Contacts, Google Keep, Google News)
2. Look at this intermediate-level thing you can do with this service (Install apps from the web interface of the Play store, make playlists on YouTube, natural language semantic Google search)
3. Bad UX (hey, you can share map search results!)
Google has a lot of services (leading to #1); a lot of users are very cautious about using computers in general and won't try to explore to find intermediate or advanced usages (even though they're very useful and HN would probably bitterly complain about their being taken out); the UX is sometimes bad but having user education doesn't automatically imply that.
Have we really gotten so addicted to onboarding that any feature that can't be explained in a 30-second "welcome to Google" tour should just be shafted? I really like being able to install Android apps from my laptop, but even if I was told that in the Android "welcome to Android" screen that I first saw years ago and haven't seen since, I'd have forgotten it.
Using any tool as an expert requires some amount of education. Is it really desirable to build tools that cannot be used as an expert? What would the world be like if the only tools that existed were only usable at the beginner level?
