Facebook, probably, but I doubt Google. They are no Apple when it comes to building new business models and money-making products, but I don't see anything that could kill Google in the next 5 years.
Facebook on the other hand - I'm noticing a (slow) trend of people getting bored with it. I don't think people are bored with Google searches. Plus, as a company Facebook is much more vulnerable - a lot less money, a one-hit product with nothing else outside the social network to show for themselves. Yes, both use advertising, but that's a business model, not a product/service. It's like arguing Apple only makes money from selling hardware. Google has multiple products/services that use advertising. Facebook has one.
I actually think the opposite. Google still relies very heavily on search related revenue and with more and more people choosing apps over the web, plus with the advancement of things like Siri the importance of Google for search could be vastly reduced.
Facebook has massive growth potential. Smartphone usage is continuing to increase and people are using Facebook on smartphones to communicate (free text messaging essentially). Also with their purchase of instagram photo sharing on Facebook will continue to increase further.
Personally I think both will still be around in 5 years (although they will probably look very different) but I think Google carries the most risk.
You do understand "things like Siri" needs search to function; and not only google is aware of it's importance, but they built a competitor much before it launched?
They need search to some extent but they don't need Google. Siri tries to provide answers so it uses Wolfram Alpha, Yelp etc. Previously I had to google a question and wade through blue links. Now, I ask Siri and it gives me the answer direct from a knowledgable source. No Google.
"they built a competitor"
I've never used it but I thought that the Android equivalent of Siri was just voice recognition/dictation?
What? How do "apps" answer "search"? (What do you think powers Siri, and keep in mind that a Google competitor to Siri is expected within 2012).
Further, if "free texting" and "Instagram" are what is going to keep Facebook afloat... well I hope for their sake, you're wrong. I can tell you from the app and mobile web experience alone, no one I know has ever used Facebook messaging as a replacement for SMS. Plus there are a dozen dedicated services that fill that role better (Google Voice included no less).
Apps answer search in several ways. If I want information ona restaurant I don't google it - I launch the Yelp app. Instead of using Gmail (where they display ads to me) I use a native app (Sparrow) which Google makes no revenue from afaik. I have specific apps that provide news to me rather than using search to find stories. Instead of comparison pricing on Google Shopping I will use the Amazon and eBay apps.
Nearly everyone I know uses Facebook Messaging instead of texting. They still use texting but too but more and more and relying on Facebook Messaging (I think this is because Facebook has a dedicated iOS messaging app which is much better than the full Facebook app). Their may be dedicated services that fill the role better but 'everyone' is on Facebook (And Google Voice is US only).
I probably didn't explain the Instagram thing properly. Facebook is become (maybe it already is) the photo sharing platform of choice. You can already share privately with friends & family very easily (from where ever you are thanks to smartphones). Now that they own Instagram they also have a great system for allowing people to share photos publicly too. This will help people stay on Facebook - if they don't they lose access to thousands of photos they have uploaded and the many more they are tagged in.
I agree. Plus I don't trust (unlike some other commenters) reviews on Amazon, so I Google for several reviews and trust the consensus of all sources. Google search is very much alive.
I think Google search will die instantly if anyone ever gets a vastly superior search product. I used to use Yahoo! in 75% of my searches mixed with others on the 25%, then along came Google and I found I could get my answers faster on 99.9% of my searches. If Yelp+Siri+Wolfram+whatever turns out to be a much better way, then goodbye Google. But I think Google is really good at building technologies, they have a lot of smart people, and they won't let someone get away with supplanting their search engine without giving it serious competition, which Yahoo! was unable to do. Google is trying to take over Yelp, they are competing with Siri, they even try to compete with Facebook. Maybe eventually they'll die, but they aren't letting anyone get the huge jump on them that they got on Yahoo!.
Google does lack a sufficient "moat". If someone were to have a demonstrably better take on finding answers to what people are looking for on the Internet (be it traditional search, or something else), Google might not be able to pivot quickly enough. Competition is only a URL away so switching costs are low for end users. Google's real customers (advertisers) will follow quickly if users leave.
Being a URL away is a pretty big thing. Their moat includes being the default search engine for Chrome and Android devices. They've also made deals with everyone except Microsoft to be the default search engine on every browser/platform/device you can imagine.
Facebook on the other hand - I'm noticing a (slow) trend of people getting bored with it. I don't think people are bored with Google searches. Plus, as a company Facebook is much more vulnerable - a lot less money, a one-hit product with nothing else outside the social network to show for themselves. Yes, both use advertising, but that's a business model, not a product/service. It's like arguing Apple only makes money from selling hardware. Google has multiple products/services that use advertising. Facebook has one.