Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google To Rebrand Blogger & Picasa For Google+ Integration

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the great-googley-moogley dept.

Google 162

dkd903 writes "Google plans to rebrand its photo-sharing platform Picasa and the blogging platform Blogger and will re-introduce them as Google Photos and Google Blogs. All this forms part of a massive feature addition to Google's new social network, Google+."

cancel ×

162 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Google+ promotional video (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36664698)

I always love the promotional videos [youtube.com] that Google makes for their products. Much better than the creepy stuff Micro$oft does.

Re:Google+ promotional video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665792)

I always love it when mods neg my rickrolls. It's confirmation that I got at least one person.

Re:Google+ promotional video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666550)

Seriously man... Rickrolls? You are quite literally years behind the times. This shit hasn't been funny for at least 2 years.

Jumping the Gun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36664720)

Google has a long track record of products that never took off. Google+ may be no exception. They probably shouldn't overentangle things into it in an attempt to "force" it into popularity.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

x6060 (672364) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664782)

It more sounds like they are just renaming products they own that are fairly successful and merging them for basic functionality that every social networking site has.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664824)

I wasn't aware that facebook had a blog feature.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

DevConcepts (1194347) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664870)

It's called "Notes", It allows for much longer posts than normal wall status updates.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664968)

Do FB Notes appear on people's news feed if they aren't tagged in it? I thought that Notes were only written for oneself and whoever was tagged, and other users couldn't see them unless they purposely went looking for them. (Yes, I know that an outside RSS feed can be linked to Notes, but I thougth this was a half-assed attempt at making them useful.)

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

bartok (111886) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665070)

"Do FB Notes appear on people's news feed if they aren't tagged in it?"

Yes.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664884)

I wasn't aware that facebook had a blog feature.

They call it a "status message."

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

x6060 (672364) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664922)

I would liken it more to the "Notes" feature which is extremely blog like.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665176)

They call it a "status message."

That's more comparable to a microblogging feature than a blog.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

theillien (984847) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664918)

While not a real blogging feature, they do have the Notes feature that can be used for more in depth updates.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

reeno49 (1558221) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664820)

I've always thought that fragmentation of their products (possibly due to the large number of products having been purchased from their creators) is part of what has halted or slowed their popularity. While it's still too early to tell if Google+ is going to be the force they hope it'll be, I can only imagine that bringing all of their socially geared products under one roof will simply add to the surge of people joining up.

Think about all of the people who don't know about Picasa or blogger, now they see this new shiny Google+ with these things integrated? If it were me, I'd probably just be impressed with how well rounded the network is so early (assuming they do it in a while that's impressive). Google has a great brand to geeks and non-geeks alike and I, for one, hope they do well with this.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664836)

Google has a long track record of products that never took off. Google+ may be no exception. They probably shouldn't overentangle things into it in an attempt to "force" it into popularity.

I'm pretty sure every company has a wall of shame; must I bring up Bob, the Newton, or Clippy? This feels more like a consolidation than the launch of a new product. I'm concerned about how this will affect Google's CLI, I have an extensive number of scripts for backing up my photos to Picasa on-the-fly.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665528)

Google has a long track record of products that never took off. Google+ may be no exception. They probably shouldn't overentangle things into it in an attempt to "force" it into popularity.

I'm pretty sure every company has a wall of shame; must I bring up Bob, the Newton, or Clippy? This feels more like a consolidation than the launch of a new product. I'm concerned about how this will affect Google's CLI, I have an extensive number of scripts for backing up my photos to Picasa on-the-fly.

And then there's Microsoft Access. The original one (serial communications) not the current database application. It used to have a mention on Wikipedia, but now even that is gone. Motto: if you have an application that becomes am utter failure, re-use the name until it becomes attached to a product which is a success. Then its association with failure is buried.

For those whose memories are short, Microsoft Access was a serial communication program which competed with Hayes Smartcom II and suchlike back in the days of DOS. It flopped, partly because people had alternatives, and in part because most of the alternatives were better (but don't look at the prices, really, don't). Here's a 1986 article on modem sharing and how Microsoft Access would probably do it in the future while other did it already.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665540)

Forgot the linky bit for that 1986 article [google.com] .

Google is showing confidence! (1)

thule (9041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664974)

I am sure there will be Facebook fans for sometime to come. I am sure that G+ won't take out Facebook. Facebook could implement the same controls that G+ has. G+ doesn't have Farmville, I'm sure that will hurt it by some people's standards. I don't worry about the integration with the rest of Google. It just tells me that Google is really very confident in their G+ product. The integration just makes sense. It is pretty obvious where they will integrate it further (e.g. Google Reader). G+ is a huge play for Google. It just feels better than anything they've done in the space so far.

Start your own circle [youtube.com]

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665082)

Depends on how that integration works out. As long as all the pieces remain modular, there might be no down side to better integrating various products. For example, when I create a gmail account I also have access to docs and calendars. I can safely ignore either if I never want to use those features even if they're one click away. Never touching a Calendar will not expose anything from gmail.

Note that this is different from when Google released Buzz which exposed information from other services (namely gmail). Hopefully they've learned from that mistake.

Re:Jumping the Gun (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665376)

This reminds me of how Microsoft rebranded all their stuff "Windows Internet Explorer," "Windows Live Messenger," and so on. It's astounding how much this company has become like Microsoft. Just as Microsoft is dependent on the Windows platform, Google is dependent on their advertising platform, and they must tie as many people too it as they can.

I hope they don't take away offline pic management (1)

Hsien-Ko (1090623) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664724)

I really hate the cloud.

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664766)

I completely agree, until they can at least save the feature set. I use the facial recognition to help sort hundreds of photos at a time. I don't necessarily want to "share" recognition, but I still want it to organize my own photos.

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (2)

Hankinator (2344236) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665020)

With Google+ you can actually save all of your photos to your hard disk. It downloads them as a zip. :)

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (1)

kevinmenzel (1403457) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665248)

With facebook, you can do that too! https://www.facebook.com/download/ [facebook.com]

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665594)

Yes... it creates a zip... over the course of a day and tosses in every post, link and other bit of data you ever put on Facebook and puts them all in one big zip file that is about as useful as one would think a large, undifferentiated and unorganized zip file that one has to wait too long for might be.

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665128)

I completely agree, until they can at least save the feature set. I use the facial recognition to help sort hundreds of photos at a time. I don't necessarily want to "share" recognition, but I still want it to organize my own photos.

Then you should just use iPhoto instead of uploading to a web site.

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665362)

I would like to use iPhoto, but the big feature it's missing for me is auto-discovery of pictures.

Re:I hope they don't take away offline pic managem (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665972)

I really hate the cloud.

I also hate the cloud, but they have already FUCKED Picasa. It always had a few quirks but it is now so buggy that I don't trust it. After months of correcting face data, after my latest upgrade it just started becoming corrupt every few restarts. The first time I lost probably 40 man hours of work. Fuck Google. Fuck Picasa. Fuck the "Cloud".

Also (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36664762)

Also their video site will now be called Goo-tube.

Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664764)

I thought I'd have a look, and went to the page where it asked me to log in with my google account. I did so, only to *then* be told that you can't join up!

I understand they're in beta (hey, what google product isn't in perpetual beta?!), but the point of a social network is to attract and maintain users. Right now, all the buzz going around quickly dissipates from people when they reach the doors of the country club, only to be turned away.

A friend of mine received an invite for it, but she cannot make an account since "they are full up right now".

Google lacking server power and/or bandwidth? Say it ain't so! I suspect they want to play on the "exclusivity" thing to make people want to join up - it worked for gmail (but I suspect a lot of that success was because it was a genuinely better free email service than Hotmail and Yahoo), but did not work so well for Orkut (remember that?).

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (2)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664808)

You need a friend who already has it to invite you. They are not doing "official" invites right now, but you can still get an invite by having someone add you to a circle and then send you a notification of some content being posted. That's how I got in, a stranger from 4chan added my e-mail address and I got a link in the e-mail to sign up.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36664902)

You gave a stranger from 4chan your email address?

Balls, son. Balls.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665048)

Just use a throw-away account, something like Hushmail.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665196)

I would say that sqrt(2) was being irrational there.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664904)

Huh, I thought they had closed that particular loop hole since it has failed for me a couple times now. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665072)

Yes, they did. The other loopholes (such as tagging people in photos) have been closed, too. If there's any glitch like these left, I'd like to know; the wife is crazy because I have a Google+ account and she doesn't.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (2)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664906)

Yes, my friend got one of those invites from someone already "in", but Google told her that it was full when she tried to claim the invite and set up an account.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Lysander7 (2085382) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665178)

Funny, I got my invite (several, actually) by giving out an email on 4chan as well. Though G+ still is saying they're full and can't add me, and I've tried repeatedly the last few days.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

energizer-bunny2 (1308043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665454)

It took me 2 tries, 2 hours apart...then I got in. That was last week FWIW.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (2)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664860)

I suspect they are being exclusive so they don't blow up their servers before they are sure they can handle the load.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (4, Funny)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664936)

You think they're running on a Pentium III server in Sergey's garage? It's Google we are talking about, not Twitter :p

They already index the whole world, read everyone's e-mail, and watch you from roving surveillance vans. Connecting you with your friends and letting you share pics shouldn't tax them too much.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36664978)

No, they're being exclusive right now because they massively screwed up the last time they tried to create a social networking capability, Google Buzz. It failed miserably, because the people running it were utterly ignorant about how their customers would react to it. With Buzz, they imposed it on all of their existing GMail customers (among others), whether we wanted it or not, and we had to actively take steps to keep them from sharing our personal information with others... and in some cases, we couldn't even do that. On top of that, their conceptual model had serious flaws, and nobody could understand it. That led to many people not even trusting whether the contents of their GMail messages were private or not, under the system.

Thus, they are now trotting it out gently, testing the waters and hoping to get things right. This is their last chance to try to enter this arena. Personally, I think they will fail this time, too. Google helps people FIND information; people don't particularly expect (or want) it to be the repository of their own personal information which they choose (or not) to share with others.

For a variety of reasons, I just don't trust Google's offerings in this area. I love their search, and I love GMail. But I don't want to have my social network service ALSO be my e-mail service, for example. Thus, I am not using Facebook's new e-mail service, even though I am a Facebook user. I WANT to have multiple presences on-line. I'm even leery of websites that require using by FB identity to comment. I'm thinking of making a dummy FB page just for that purpose. The more Google tries to "integrate" all of these different things that I, at least, don't want integrated, the more likely it is to lose me as a customer entirely.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664988)

That was one of my possible points - if anyone has server power to spare it's Google.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666634)

it's also kinda buggy and doesn't run really fast enough unless you're using chrome

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (2)

redemtionboy (890616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664862)

I can't believe that people are complaining that they can't join the beta of a social networking site that just launched less than a week ago. Come back to complain when it's been 4 months. They were planning on letting more people in right now, but then someone found a bug that allowed someone to send infinite invites and they got overwhelmed. Give it a little bit and I'm sure it will open up again.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664964)

The salient point being "social networking site" that they've been hyping, and advertising... only to not let you in.

If that was a discovered bug, then why not mention that - the message I got was "we're full at the moment!".

The entire point of launching it is surely to get users and generate interest, if they truly do want to "topple" facebook. How many people are going to keep checking back after getting turned away during the big launch phase where it's all fresh?

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

redemtionboy (890616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665008)

yeah, except they didn't launch, they launched a beta. Do you people complain this much when Blizzard runs a closed beta version of WoW and only some people are allowed in? Give it a little bit of time. As I pointed out. It's been a week since they launched the beta.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

cuckolds (2344480) | more than 3 years ago | (#36666128)

I agree...Google has pretty much always done their betas in a limited closed environment...from gmail, google voice, wave, and now Google+. Granted I got an invite early on from a random user so I can't complain.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665056)

You seriously think that mentioning there was a bug found in there service will make grandma wait it out to join instead of just saying, "we're full?" Especially with how much people hate Facebook for it's bugs?

The entire point of launching it is surely to get users and generate interest...

Which is why they haven't launched it yet. That's what betas are for.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666098)

You say that but ignore that this was how Facebook overtook MySpace (rolling out successively broader access university by university in a rough order of exclusivity). Granted Google+'s exclusivity is social proximity to Google employees, but that doesn't mean that they should not try to find bugs with a smaller group before opening it up to everyone.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665130)

I'm not sure if you get the idea of a social network.

My bigger issue is that as a Google users for many years, one that uses gmail, calendar and docs everyday, I can't get in. Mean while, a friend that can barely turn a computer on and will check her gmail maybe 3 times a week gets in. Nearly the same thing happened with Wave.

It's like they totally forget their biggest users. I also agree with the other posters about Google being in trouble once this media dies down. You would think they would want to get everyone in as possible. If you want to beta test it, do it within Google. You only have 24,000 employee after all. This very limited roll out just seems silly.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

redemtionboy (890616) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665346)

That or they have profiles of types of users they want to add and you don't fit that profile. Testing isn't purely about getting a bunch of people to use the service. It's about covering a spectrum of users and experiences. My boss at work got a Chrome laptop and I didn't, because he fit the profile of what they were looking for and I didn't. I assume that's how they handled their initial google based invites before the additional user selected invites.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

x6060 (672364) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664900)

I'm guessing that they are allowing people to join as they are adding capacity. Also it is REALLY hard to deal with 50 million new users that all sign up, create profiles, upload photos, send messages, search through the other 50 million people so they can add them, create groups, make events and invite 100+ people in a single day if they opened it to everyone all at the same time on a brand new product.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (4, Informative)

Marble68 (746305) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664914)

As a member of G+ - I can understand why they shut off new subscribers.

Their threading logic was cumbersome and needed work. The "rings" concept is cool - but when you have threads that "fork" - as in one conversation becomes closed to one ring - and another conversation to a different ring - the UI representation was horrible. If the people I interact with weren't limited - I would have turned away from G+ pretty quickly.

I'm get the feeling invites will open up again, soon. The UI has undergone some minor tweaks, the mobile app got updated, HangOuts is working better now.

Some of the stuff that's not quite perfected (IMHO) are the "nearby posts" and "incoming posts".

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665660)

I agree with the other post, fed up etc.. This is just a huge bs focus group exercise.

I'm so dying to post something to FB and cannot because I don't know if I'll get my G+ invite accepted.

The problem is not scale, or resources. It's a weak hand in figuring out what UX people are going to "Like". (oops, I mean +1).

That's going to be a problem there already.. I so "+1" you, doesn't have a ring to it. Oh maybe it does. Get it. "ring" to it... hee hee.

Anyway.. Yea, Google stop it already.. Open the door and let real users kick the tires, already sheesh.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

mekkab (133181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36666014)

That sounds like the performance problems of Wave.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665054)

email me your gmail address at jacer@mailinator.com

I'll check it tonight and send you a Google+ invite.

This goes for anyone else too.

bvukich, koalacuhe, stevetop159 (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665730)

email me your gmail address at jacer@mailinator.com

I'll check it tonight and send you a Google+ invite.

This goes for anyone else too.

Is this for real, or are you just trolling to see who will publish their email addresses in a public place? So far, there are only three, perhaps partly because slashdot is mostly frequented by paranoid cynics, or friendless sociopaths.

Alternatively, did bvukich or koalacuhe or stevetop159 actually receive a real google+ invite? Or are you now just waiting for the spamflood to start?

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

BOUND4DOOM (987004) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665064)

I would suspect your right in they are trying to play the exclusivity thing. However, it doesn't work if you are a Google apps account either, you have to create a profile first. However, the Google profiles don't work with Google Apps accounts. So after going round and round trying to sign up, I finally said meh, and went on my merry way. Personally, I am already sick and tired of all the buzz and news and articles on Google+ either let me in or quit interrupting my regular news with vapor ware. I am honestly reminded of Duke Nukem Forever, lot of hype, lot of talk, but sorry only certain select few can see it. I don't mind it being in beta, but public beta would be better.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665096)

Yeah, good way to shoot yourself in the foot.

The value of any social networking site is in how many users it has. If no one you know uses something, why will you use it?

I don't use Latitude because none of my friends do. I don't use Buzz because no one I'm friends with wound up using it. Same for Wave. Google+ will probably wind up the same.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

whoami9801 (765798) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665422)

Am I the only one that remembers when Facebook was restricted to college students only? For years the only "invite" you could get to Facebook was having a .edu email address. Everyone's griping about Google+ being invite only Facebook did it pretty successfully for years.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

getto man d (619850) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665848)

Yes, but remember that once Facebook allowed .edu addresses from your institution then any of your friends could join with no hassle. Specifically, I remember when I first joined; a good number of my friends were already members. If any were missing, many soon joined after they heard of the "wonders" of Facebook. So you have to remember that Facebook started with groups where it was natural to have many social connections.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665554)

I think its because, unlike many of Google's other products, the whole point of G+ is to form a network. This means that a bug with one person's account could potentially affect EVERY other user on G+. Furthermore, they're fighting a well established, tried-and-not-quite-true-but-still-good interface and feature set on Facebook. Google has one, only one, chance to draw people away from Facebook. If, as seems to be the case, their initial launch was glitchy and hard to use, and they let everyone in, G+ would be DOA. As it stands, the few early adopters realize that its a beta, and the rest of us get a little annoyed at having to wait.

Seems to me everyone is annoyed because they're used to Google treating their beta's like finished products. Its a little weird for Google to suddenly develop some sanity in their release systems and treat a beta like an actual closed testbed rather than simply releasing it into the wild and fixing it afterwards like they do with most of their products.
I think this is a sign that Google REALLY wants G+ to succeed, and realizes what they need to do to make that happen. All in all, seems like they are approaching this with surprising amounts of realistic prudence and wisdom. Surprising from Google, I know, but it was bound to happen eventually.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

Shihar (153932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36666072)

Relax. It has not been released for like three whole days.

Google is in a tricky spot. The only way to REALLY figure out how this is going to all work together is to throw some bodies at it. If they screw it up though, they don't want everyone to already be in. Think of the Buzz disaster. They let everyone in at once, made a few missteps, and Buzz was promptly dead. Google learned that they suck at rolling out products like that and are going back to their Gmail roots.

They need Google+ to not suck before they start letting everyone pile in. From the sounds of it from two friends of mine who did get in, they are well on their way there. They just need to figure out the timing and balance the need to tweak and not piss people off by changing things with their desire to get people in

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666182)

Why do so many people want to get into a club that won't have them as a member? By the time they open it up to the masses there will so much pent-up demand that Facebook will become the next MySpace.

Re:Google+, the social network you cannot join! (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 3 years ago | (#36666268)

You know Facebook started out restricted to students at a single college? Then expanded to all US students, then all US residents, then everyone? Facebook had been operating for years before overseas users could register. Restricted, phased membership is nothing new to online services, not even social networks.

I couldn't care less (-1, Troll)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664786)

Bye.

Re:I couldn't care less (1)

theillien (984847) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664944)

Then why did you bother putting forth the effort to even comment? Attention whoring?

Re:I couldn't care less (0)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665026)

Nope, just trying, in my own little way, to indicate the difference between could & couldn't.
Take it or leave it you "attention whoring" (what the fuck would that be?) twat.

I 3 Google (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664794)

Google just sounds so sweet to my ears, much better than some random names that I don't know are associated with my favorite company of all time.

Google what? (5, Funny)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664812)

That's it. I'm completely fed up with hearing about this stupid new whizz-bang service, dammit! Please stop posting and blogging and writing articles about this crap.

until you send me an invite

Re:Google what? (1)

assertation (1255714) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665116)

Seriously, there are loads of articles about Google+, what is going with people using it, 3rd party tools, etc........and it hasn't been released to the general public.

Google should send thank you notes for the free promotions.

Re:Google what? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665254)

Just like Google Wave and that turned out to be a monstrous success, right?

Re:Google what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665762)

Just like Google Wave and that turned out to be a monstrous success, right?

No, not just like Google Wave. They have the invite-only system in common, but the difference was that nobody ever gave a shit about google wave, nobody wanted an invite. In fact, when one of your idiot friends would send you an invite, you'd delete the email.

Re:Google what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665192)

Stop bitching you just got an invite.

Finally! (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664930)

With confusing names like Picasa and Blogger, I was at a loss to understand what those products were and who owned them. Thank goodness Google has cleared up this mystery. Now I can go back to sorting my pocket lint by color and size.

Re:Finally! (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665536)

In addition, any new name Google will pick is bound to be much more self-explanatory and descriptive, like Google+.

Re:Finally! (1)

jason.sweet (1272826) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665690)

They wanted to name it "All your * are belong to google!", but google+ sounded less evil.

Die marketing department die! (5, Insightful)

MacTO (1161105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36664956)

Blogger and Picasa are good names: concise, searchable, and trademarkable.

But I guess that Google's marketing department wants headlines to reverberate their name in the tech and business media.

I will adjust, but I still think that the decision sucks.

Re:Die marketing department die! (1)

jinushaun (397145) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665114)

I agree, although Google is nowhere near as bad as Microsoft where everything must contain at least four words (the longer the better) and include "Windows" branding in it somehow.

Re:Die marketing department die! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665796)

You must be that stupid fuck we keep hearing about. I'm hard pressed to find examples that support your bullshit.

Re:Die marketing department die! (1)

xigxag (167441) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665240)

The problem with umbrella brands is that one weak spoke can bring down the whole brand. If Google Blogs has a problem, it will give all of Google a black eye, not just the Blogger brand. And if "Google" stops being cool, then even if they could somehow spin off the lines into their own brands again, those old labels would've lost their previous cachet. After all, the history of internet branding has taught us that the public is drastically less faithful to digital properties than they are to real world brands where the consistency of the quality can be reinforced by taste or touch.

I guess I'm wondering what's Google's game plan. Did they learn nothing from the failures of msn.com, lycos, and others? Or even their own failure to make Google Video catch on as a worthy competitor to YouTube?

Re:Die marketing department die! (2)

UnanimousCoward (9841) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665312)

>I will adjust, but I still think that the decision sucks.

I agree that the decision sucks. I was hoping that in the spirit of GMail, they were going to rename BlogSpot to GSpot...

Re:Die marketing department die! (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665816)

Better than "Evil Money Grubbing Corporation Photos" and "Evil Money Grubbing Corporation Blogs", nyet comrade?

Re:Die marketing department die! (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36666400)

Blogger and Picasa are good names: concise, searchable, and trademarkable.

How on earth was "Blogger" ever granted a trademark? It's incredibly generic.

Google Boring (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665044)

Yes, and the bathrooms at the "Google Plex" are called the "Google Bathrooms".
The toilet stalls are called the "Google Toilets".

All staff are being renamed:

"Google Developer", "Google Manager", "Google CEO", etc...

I can hear it now at the Google Coffepot:
"Hey Google, did you catch the game last night?"
"Who me?"
"No not you Google Developer, I was talking to Google Marketing"

Google are begining to sound like the smurfs... Google this, google that... google google google.

Synapse from Antitrust (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665102)

I know people don't like this movie, and I agree the story has nothing to with the title or Microsoft, but this Google+ basically Synapse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jN8LC1aDpk [youtube.com] .

It doesn't matter... (1)

EvilStein (414640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665230)

If it's from Google, it could grind newborn infants and puppies into a slurry and tech bloggers would shower it with love and geek adoration.

Re:It doesn't matter... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666258)

iPhone components? That's crazy! Apple would never stand for it.

Integration is a good thing... (1)

jamesgamble (917138) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665148)

I think that the majority of tech savvy users won't see the point in integrating Picasa and Blogger into the Google+ platform because we're already use to using these services and know how to navigate around them. But for people like my grandmother who think Google is just the search page and GMail, this could help to bring them to a place where they feel more comfortable using other Google services. If Blogger and Picasa look more like something that my grandmother uses every day, she's going to be more likely to explore the service to see what it can do. I think Google is on the right track here. Having a common user interface among all of their products and services can only help to make it easier for users to start using new services that they never tried in the past.

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665288)

This is what I call ground breaking news.

Okay... (1)

Tolkien (664315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665352)

So like the potentially confusing Google Chat, Google Talk and Google Voice, there's now Google Images and Google Photo? Bravo Google! *slow clap*

But, it's also a search engine. (1)

formfeed (703859) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665802)

You forgot, that you can still use Google as a search engine!
In the future you will be able do that with Google google

Private network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665750)

>All this forms part of a massive feature addition
>to Google's new social network, Google+."

Not that anybody can JOIN this wonderful new network ...

lack of good marketing (2)

BigGerman (541312) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665788)

They should use something more evolutionary and more suitable for giant company, like: Google Plus Picasa Photo Service

Re:lack of good marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666304)

I always thought that "blogger" and "blogspot" sounded like vomit words.

Call me back when Picasa is a native application (1)

kriston (7886) | more than 3 years ago | (#36665844)

Call me back when Picasa is a native application. I don't now nor will ever use Wine.

Re:Call me back when Picasa is a native applicatio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665948)

I'm running it as a native application right now. I don't now, nor will ever use Wine either.

Re:Call me back when Picasa is a native applicatio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36666240)

ring ... ring ...

It's native (Windows) now ... If only you didn't use Whine.

Google, now jack of all trades, master of none. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36665882)

I got an invite the other day and decided to check it out and see what all the fuss is about.
Goto Google+ , enter my email (a google apps account) only to be told I needed a Google Profile (whatever that is) before I could join.
So goto the Google Profiles page, enter my email again, only to be told 'Sorry, Profiles isn't available to Google Apps users'.
I could have sworn that back in March this year Google announced Profiles were coming to Apps accounts in few weeks time.

I just get the feeling with all this rebranding, new services being announced, other services shut down etc that Google are beginning to act like Microsoft did in the late 90's , instead of doing one thing really well (like how google search USED to be) they're now doing a multitude of things in a half-arsed way, with no real clear direction.

Plus should have been open to all right from the start, not this 'limited invite' crap. What the hell is the point of a social network when none of your friends/colleagues can sign up for it ? What impetus is there for people to try it out it they're still stuck on Facebook?
Fine, it's beta. In that case why the fucking big fanfare about it? You do that to garner peoples attention to your product. By the time it's out of beta and open for the unclean masses, many of them will have forgotten all about it and moved onto the next 'next big thing'

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>