×

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+ Growing As a Social Backbone

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the circles-of-life dept.

Google 267

OverTheGeicoE writes "The Wall Street Journal reports that Google+ has added 20 million users in just 3 weeks. According to the article, no other site has recorded such high growth in such a short time period. Twitter did something similar once, but in months, not weeks. It's especially surprising considering that access to Google+ is by invitation only. Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" A recent article at O'Reilly Radar offers a possible answer to this, calling Google+ "the rapidly growing seed of a web-wide social backbone," but one that requires openness from Google to really flourish and supplant Facebook. The growth of Google+ will be helped by their acquisition of Fridge, a startup company focused on group sharing. Meanwhile, recruiters and marketers are already eyeballing the growing social network and licking their chops.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

267 comments

For realsies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851006)

Can't say I'm super-impressed.

Leveraging. (1)

Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851208)

Google Plus is able to leverage the fact that there are a lot of Gmail users and a lot of people who use facebook--people already have a relationship with the company and already have familiarity with the kind of interaction they offer.

Plus, it's not orkut.

Re:For realsies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851854)

Really? How many users do you have on the social media site you created, then?

Re:For realsies? (5, Interesting)

molnarcs (675885) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851956)

Can't say I'm super-impressed.

Maybe you're not, but artists and journalists are flocking to Google+. Let me give you just one example of the former: read what Trey Ratcliff wrote [readwriteweb.com]. 40.000+ followers on G+ and half as many on his Facebook fanpage. As to journalists - countless examples. This video might explain why: Google Plus on Rocketboom. [rocketboom.com]. Pay attention to the twitter part, or to what Ratcliff says in the interview. Communication is simiply more fun on G+ - and far more effective. On facebook, you can't chose who among your 300 "friends" sees what you want to say. Facebook "filters" (well, censors) your post to a select people based on various past indicators. You have no control over this process whatsoever. On Google+ you are in control. And thanks to control over what you see (direct links to circle streams, the ability to "mute" discussions) you don't have to listen to the flood of stupidity that is overwhelming on Facebook. That also makes it easier to follow others, share content, etc. - as you can see in Ratcliff's example.

Still need another 80m users (2)

vakuona (788200) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851012)

Critical mass is important here, but looking good.

Re:Still need another 80m users (3, Funny)

xTantrum (919048) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851046)

Who cares. It's a sausage fest on there.

Re:Still need another 80m users (1)

dhalsim2 (626618) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851114)

I wonder if there is something inherent about its design that makes it a sausage fest. Similar to the way that guys prefer Android.

Re:Still need another 80m users (5, Insightful)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851120)

The first numbers were around 88% male, then down to 67% male (http://mashable.com/2011/07/16/google-plus-female/)(http://www.businessinsider.com/debunked-3-viral-google-myths-2011-7), and now around 57% male (http://mashable.com/2011/07/20/google-plus-stats/). So, no, it's not a sausage fest. I wouldn't expect the numbers to get much more balanced until the casual games start arriving.

Re:Still need another 80m users (1)

socz (1057222) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851886)

Yeah I don't know where these guys are at, but just taking a look at the "nearby" entries, there are some hotties (chicks) on there!

Re:Still need another 80m users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851710)

TFS is a bunch of crap - they evidentally cant read the WSJ article they linked which says: "Web-traffic watcher comScore Inc. estimated Google+ has had 20 million unique visitors since its launch"

unique vistors != users

Re:Still need another 80m users (2)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851722)

TFS is a bunch of crap - they evidentally cant read the WSJ article they linked which says: "Web-traffic watcher comScore Inc. estimated Google+ has had 20 million unique visitors since its launch" unique vistors != users

im not a coward i swear (just forgot to log in)

Re:Still need another 80m users (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851938)

Non-users hit an info page. Unless the metric is from that page rather than the log in page, then the poster is correct.

"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (5, Insightful)

cranil (1983560) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851058)

Maybe it's because it is invite only. I mean if something is exclusive, lot of people want in.

Re:"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (1)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851386)

Maybe it's because it is invite only. I mean if something is exclusive, lot of people want in.

...and my guess is that most of those are tech oriented folks interested b/c it's Google and not Facebook. The growth will not continue as rapidly but at what point will they level off? Hopefully enough that they challenge FB and aren't just a second social media account to keep updated.

Re:"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (2)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851970)

considering I can use the Start Google Plus extension to allow me to post to Facebook at the same time I post to my circles in G+, even if you kept both accounts, it is pretty painless to post to FB from G+.

Re:"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (3, Insightful)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851456)

Maybe. Given that they had to shut down invites for a while, I don't think that's much of a draw. Google makes cool stuff, and they already have all of your email contacts (you have at least one google account, like the rest of the civilized world, right?), so they've got an actual chance to get enough people to hit critical mass. When they turn on apps access, it will open the next set of floodgates.

And, lets face it, Google+ is shiny to geeks and muggles alike - and shiny is the demographic for social networking.

Re:"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851954)

I agree. Only thing I'm waiting for is the access for google apps users. Right now it's somewhat irritating: if you have a gmail account via google apps (tied to your domain), you can't sign up for Google+...

Re:"Why is Google+ growing so quickly?" (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852112)

I suspect half of the people there have never been to facebook and have been waiting patiently for something like this.

why? (4, Insightful)

vvaduva (859950) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851124)

Why is Google+ growing so quickly?

Because it's not Facebook...

Re:why? (1)

Hsien-Ko (1090623) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851202)

I even seen Google+ mentioned and answered in a 2010 episode of Cash Cab.

WTF!? Whatever it is, Google is awesome at this "brand awareness" thing.

Tired and Flawed Reasoning (3, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851408)

Why is Google+ growing so quickly?

Because it's not Facebook...

I'm sick of people proffering this and only this as a reason to Google+ growth. There is something more to it, after all, iTunes Ping [wikipedia.org] isn't Facebook either. Why didn't they balloon up to 20 million in two weeks?

There's features that are importantly different like friends can't post on my "wall" in G+ and managing and restricting circles is easier for me in G+ than managing and restricting lists was in FB. Google did some things wrong at first and they've corrected some but I'm hoping for a much lighter UI at some point. Or even just the option to not have all the circle animations.

Furthermore the "autofacerecognition" crap that Facebook made opt-in by default was really scary for me personally. I don't doubt Google's ability to do something similar but so far the privacy problems have been negligible compared to getting Zuckerpunched with something worse and worse each month. All of Facebook isn't bad, in some ways G+ is much like it. But at least take the time to enumerate what the advantages are to you.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (1, Insightful)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851554)

I'm sick of people proffering this and only this as a reason to Google+ growth. There is something more to it, after all, iTunes Ping [wikipedia.org] isn't Facebook either. Why didn't they balloon up to 20 million in two weeks?

They didn't have massive coverage in global internet searches and services to leverage from?

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (2)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852016)

no... just massive global coverage of all things digital music and the single application used to access the devices that brought them to such a dominant position.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851558)

For one thing, Google+ is associated with a free service that people already use. People who don't buy into the iTunes ecosystem don't use iTunes Ping.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851560)

Why didn't they balloon up to 20 million in two weeks?

Because while iTunes Ping is also not Facebook, it unfortunately happens to be Apple.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851618)

Google added face recognition to Picasa in 2008.

I guess they don't automatically publish those tags though.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852050)

they don't... they also require you to name the people and the tags stay in your photo library on your PC unless you upload them to web albums, where the tags are not public in non-public albums.

Re:Tired and Flawed Reasoning (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852152)

I'm sick of people proffering this and only this as a reason to Google+ growth. There is something more to it, after all, iTunes Ping isn't Facebook either. Why didn't they balloon up to 20 million in two weeks?

Because Ping is a social network specializing in a niche - music interests. You don't post your every thought to Ping because it's not designed to be a Facebook or a G+. You don't post your vacation pics or your latest drunken brawl on Ping. And you don't go on Ping to find your old buddy from high school.

No, all Ping is for is to follow and share your music interests. Like an artist? Follow them and see what others who like the artist listen to.

Plus, Ping requires iTunes, which on Windows sucks (though I do use it since it seems to manage my music better and is less busy than Windows Media Player...).

If Apple wanted, they could expand Ping into a real social network rather than just music-oriented, but I suspect Apple likes it the way it is - good enough to not be troublesome and have privacy issues, and popular enough for the big artists.

Re:why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851650)

Mod this parent up.

When it comes to online security - I am worried about the future - and the data that is kept on me. It's important that I can trust who has my data. Facebook is NOT that company. If you trust Facebook, or don't care about the data they keep on you, then you are braver than I - or just don't think about the consequences in the future. If you're into social networking, then Google is a far better bet.

AC

XKCD got it right (3, Funny)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851154)

If you go over here, [xkcd.com], you'll find out the biggest reason it's getting popular.

Hint: It's not facebook.

since when (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851162)

Since when are unique visitors automatically assumed to be registered users? Don't get me wrong, I think Google is getting this one right... but this "unique visitors" info is getting misreported all over the place today.

Re:since when (2)

swv3752 (187722) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851600)

When I got in Google+ a few weeks ago, I had like maybe 5 other people already using it. Now, I have over 150, with 5-10 people joining a day.

Re:since when (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36852054)

When I got in Google+ the first thing I noticed was a number of (I'm thinking former) friends, and a few co-workers who didn't think to give me an invite. That realization made a decision point where I pretty much decided not to use G+.

Re:since when (2, Insightful)

tooyoung (853621) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852202)

Now, I have over 150, with 5-10 people joining a day.

I love this about the comments on slashdot. Rewind 2 months and comments look like this:

Facebook is stupid. People have 200 friends on their friend list. There is no way that people have 200 friends, they just add whoever. It is all just a popularity contest.

Now, after Google+ is introduced, I have seen numerous quotes like this:

I have 200 friends on Google+ and it is growing every day!!!!!

Please don't mistake me for defending Facebook or ragging on Google+, but some consistency would be nice...

Re:since when (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851986)

dunno, since they noticed that by making it a slashdot like publishing platform pushes the unique visitors through the roof(and crossposts to facebook. seriously, the most i've read people using g+ is them saying on facebook that they're on it, that they published something on it, that they can invite people there or asking for invites).

I'll use it the same way I use other social sites. (2, Interesting)

Seumas (6865) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851172)

I intend to use Google+ the same way I use every other social networking site. I'll create an account to claim my own identity, then disable as many features as possible, then post a message that states that I do not use the service and that if you want to talk to me, you should email me.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (4, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851318)

Bet you're just the life of every party!

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (5, Funny)

lpp (115405) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851820)

Why wouldn't he be? He shows up with his scale cardboard cutout model of himself, plants it in the middle of the room, attaches the sign stating "If you want to party with me, I will be at..." and of course he includes his home address where there is a party every night.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (3, Insightful)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852130)

When he does have parties, I bet they're vastly more interesting than the "let's invite everyone we've ever seen" parties.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851412)

I sure hope you posted your MySpace message using sparkly bubble text.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851544)

So, honest question, do you take pride in, "not really using any social networks but kind of sort of using them just so you can claim your online identity," or do you honestly see absolutely no benefit in being able to send out mass messages to friends conveniently segmented into various groups, being able to video chat with multiple people at once, being able to organize social events via a pseudo-permanent single web location, and being able to quickly, effectively, and openly communicate with various people on various shared interests with various levels of privacy?

I'm not asking to be snarky. I understand that you can do many of these things with e-mail lists and what not via some time and effort to set up. But is there absolutely no appeal to you to have such capabilities (and more) centered in one easy-to-use website location?

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

UberOogie (464002) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851732)

... with various levels of privacy?

And right there your argument, such as it was, falls apart. There are no "various levels of privacy." This is one:

None.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36852008)

Um, what? So do you not use e-mail because it's not private? Social networking sites act vaguely like lightweight e-mail lists (excepting, of course, Facebook's tendencies to change your privacy settings when they get bored).

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851974)

[..]to quickly, effectively, and openly communicate with various people on various shared interests with various levels of privacy?

Your statement makes zero sense to me. I can't openly communicate when there is no privacy due to lack encryption. It's also not effective in any way, the web is extremely limited - I can't quote as I can with e-mail, I can't use a decent editor (or maybe I could [mozilla.org], but It doesn't really integrate that well with the whole "Web 2.0" idea), I can't use all the mighty tools that I can use with Usenet, E-mail or IRC. Instead I have to use some shitty web interface that's meant to meet everyones needs. And I can't do anything quickly, because browsers are fscking slow.
All these new web-based, bloated, centralized services seem so inferior to all of the decentralized, standardized protocols that were already there 20 years ago that I really can't imagine why I should ever use them. /rant

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36852090)

I for one see no benefit in:

- Mass mailing my "friends" like they're members of my god-damn fan club.
- Joining a slow, buggy, and generally poor quality video chat, when I can just pick up the phone instead.
- Joining a Facebook group filled with screaming, mouth-breathing morons who can barely string together a sentence.

I think I'm getting old or something.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852156)

I have absolutely no idea what most of the things you said mean, and the half I did understand I don't care about.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (3, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851688)

I am new to social networks, with Google+ so this may be the naivety that speaks, but I don't think you have to disable your account just to use e-mail. You can have lots of benefits from participating in Google+ to see cool things that scientists and techies (in my case) share with others, to get updates from family members and see a cute video of your friend's newborn. None of these has to replace personal e-mails.

For me, it's lots of fun following Sergey Brin, Linus Torvalds and a number of scientists or science writers and even science comedians. These people are truly creative, in the way that I can appreciate.
This didn't change my e-mail usage patterns one bit.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851758)

Great idea, in reverse. I'll set up an email auto-responder that if you want to talk to me, message me on Google+.

I can tell you and I will be great pen pals... sorry you'll be the only one of us getting all the spam.

Re:I'll use it the same way I use other social sit (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852158)

Why not just ignore G+ and let your friends add you to a circle by e-mail... then they can share stuff with you and G+ will send it to your e-mail address.

How many are like me ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851178)

- Signed up because a friend sent me an invite.
- Turned-off all email notifications since it got annoying
- Never returned and kept on using Facebook.

I still don't get Google+ What's the selling point ? What do they offer besides thinking I want to add every single person I've ever e-mailed as a friend ?

Re:How many are like me ? (2)

Lance Dearnis (1184983) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851230)

Their selling point is, basically, that they'll respect privacy and all those other things that we, the tech geeks, care about. After that, they'll use their Google brand, the widespread dissastisfaction with Facebook's frequent UI and ToS changes, and our own social pressure to pull people in. But really, see Swordgeek's post. http://xkcd.com/918/ [xkcd.com] is exactly what they offer. And why they've got all these people interested.

Re:How many are like me ? (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851506)

Their selling point is, basically, that they'll respect privacy and all those other things that we, the tech geeks, care about

Not quite, some of us actually care about privacy from google as well, and we still aren't racing to create google+ accounts.

Re:How many are like me ? (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852194)

please... tell me where Google has violated your privacy? They do not share your data with advertisers or partners. they make it easy for you to hide information, they provide the ability to remove your data. they give you a dashboard that covers all the services they provide and let your remove data.... they even let you hide your profile from search results on Google, Yahoo, Bing, et al.

Re:How many are like me ? (3, Funny)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851260)

I still don't get Google+ What's the selling point ?

It's not facebook...

I know why! (1)

Chardansearavitriol (1946886) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851190)

Apparently, if you throw enough money at something, it happens. Especially if someone can operate at a loss until it prospers. Microsoft and their X-Box strategy was a good example.

Re:I know why! (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851378)

Actually, no. It only works because Google has an enormous installed base of email users, and email is one of the original social network protocols on the internet. And for the most part, their free "services" they offer are all pretty damned good (maps, apps, email, voice). Neither Apple nor Microsoft couldn't have pulled it off with 10x the cash that Google is throwing at this. Remember the millions of real dollars Bing threw at store discounts two years ago trying to get people to use their search. Are they number one in the search engine field, or grabbing users from the search engine leader in great shovelfuls? Yeah, not exactly.

Google, because of their track record on other types of apps (yeah, buzz...everybody has a couple of duds), and the massive email base, are the only ones that have a real fighting chance to overtake FB in its current incarnation.

Maybe people want something different (1)

xzvf (924443) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851216)

Facebook, Linkedin and MySpace fill some need, but people want something different. If Google+ is just the same again, maybe it'll fail. There may be something important with exclusivity: a social network that is more tribal and walled could be what people are looking for.

google+ is used to publish to "everyone" (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851292)

that's a difference from what most people use facebook for. even with it's circles. it's handy in the way that you don't need to have a g+ account. just like for twitter you don't actually need a twitter account, you'll be linked the good stuff anyways.

OK, what about stats on posts? (2)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851306)

Users are great, but posts are the lifeblood. I've not seen any posts in my Google Plus circles that weren't either meta or cross-posted to Facebook.

Re:OK, what about stats on posts? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851458)

Sounds like you're hanging out in the wrong circles. Right now whenever I find some random interesting person, I follow them and about 50% follow me back. That percentage may change in the future, but for now it's a good way to get interesting stuff into your stream.

Re:OK, what about stats on posts? (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851522)

Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the jury is still out on this one. As soon as I start seeing something that isn't just repost of something I've already seen on Facebook from the same user, I'll be more convinced. Right now my Google+ home page looks like pared down version of the Facebook main page. There's nothing wrong with the service, and several things I like a bit better, but until the people are there and posting stuff that isn't mirrored on FB it's not really doing much for me.

Re:OK, what about stats on posts? (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852232)

why?because people are using Start G+ to feed their Google+ posts to facebook, somehow Facebook is the better site?

Re:OK, what about stats on posts? (1)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851534)

Users are great, but posts are the lifeblood. I've not seen any posts in my Google Plus circles that weren't either meta or cross-posted to Facebook.

+1. I think most are just using it as a second social media site that needs to be updated along with FB until we get some apps that will feed all of them. I don't see (many) users leaving FB for Google+ en mass and closing their FB accounts. Most just keep both.

The majority of FB users didn't migrate from MySpace, they are new to the social media networks and will likely stay with FB, if they update at all, since everyone else is there and it is where they started when friends encouraged them to join. While I and many love G+, face it, there just isn't that much value added currently that will make a whole lot of common people want to switch to a whole new service.

Wasting more time, with Google+ (1)

HKcastaway (985110) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851328)

o I think it is pointless to use it as many of my friends will never join Google + due to privacy and tracking issues of putting your data with Google...

So that means I will have to check two sites or choose to cut off the people that matter,, something I would rather not do, so.

  I won't sign up with Google+

Re:Wasting more time, with Google+ (1)

Lance Dearnis (1184983) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851446)

...So, wait, lemme get this straight. Because of privacy and tracking issues, they'll deal with Facebook, but not Google? Here's some links from approximately ten seconds of searching one reliable site.

http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/05/understanding-the-latest-facebook-privacy-train-wreck.ars

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/privacy-groups-complain-to-ftc-over-facebook-privacy-tweaks.ars

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/12/ftc-complaint-says-facebooks-privacy-changes-are-deceptive.ars

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/10/more-privacy-headaches-for-facebook-gay-users-outed-to-advertisers.ars

http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/08/privacy-groups-facebook-already-facing-off-over-places.ars

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2007/11/facebook-reevaluating-beacon-after-privacy-outcry-possible-ftc-complaint.ars

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/04/suit-accuses-blockbuster-facebook-of-privacy-law-violations.ars

I mean, google ain't a saint. They've got tons of ammunition that can be pulled up ALMOST as easily as Facebook, but, well, Facebook's got at least a 3.5-year track record since Beacon of violating your privacy in a way that a prison boss could only envy with it's depth. If you tell me I've got to give that information to one of them, I'm picking Google any day of the week. They let me delete more stuff.

Re:Wasting more time, with Google+ (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851704)

Agreed there, also for the few people who will argue, but Facebook only has access to your social network profile, Google has trackers on the e-mail and other webpages, I recommend for you to try out the plugin ghostery for Firefox or chrome, yes Google has a ton of trackers, but Facebook has just as many. I would say about 75% of pages that aren't owned by Google, have Facebook trackers on them. Basically you are deciding between a company that has been spying on you for years, and uses sells and claims ownership of your information (facebook), and a company that has been spying on you for years and just uses your information (google). Personally I would rather my information on google where at least I know who has it, rather than facebook where you know they have it, and lord knows who many people they have shared it with.

Re:Wasting more time, with Google+ (1)

sl149q (1537343) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851636)

StartGoogle+ chrome extension... brings Facebook and Twitter into Google+ for reading and posting. Best of all worlds (to some definition of best.)

No thanks, Google. (3, Interesting)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851330)

After it was revealed that Google would remove ALL your Google accounts -- Gmail, Adsense, Docs, etc. -- for violating the Google+ TOS, it became clear to me that this was a Friendster clone I was better off not using.

If I wanted a bureaucracy to decide for me what's appropriate for me to say and do, and punish me severely for violating the rules, I'd build a time machine and go back to the Soviet Union.

Re:No thanks, Google. (1)

downhole (831621) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851906)

Hadn't heard that - where did you read about it? (I suppose it would be a little ironic to just google it)

SO? (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851346)

You know, I have all the google services. You know how much I use them? Except for Docs and search, almost never. Registering for a service does not mean using it.

In addition to this users versus people who actually use the service, there is an issue of how many protocols end users will tolerate. Twitter has at least a 100 million users following at least on account. If I am a bussines I might register with google in case it takes off, but would continue with Twitter because that is where my customers are. Facebook probably has the same number of really active users, but in that case the 500 million number is reasonable to quote because that is the number of people who can acess facebook content.

This is not like the growth of android because buying an Android phone does not mean that you can't communicate with Apple or MS users. Sure a MS phone can consolidate all the incompatible services, and there are apps that consolidate on other phones, but users are not flocking to MS phones, and Twitter and Facebook are pushing proprietary apps to stop the consolidation.

In the end Google+ is just another attempt by Google to create a monopoly on the web browser by provided all the services a user will need in one place. This is not a bad thing, but I do not believe in consolidation for the sake of consolidation. It is better to encourage the best products.

That is what will ruin it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851352)

"Meanwhile, recruiters and marketers are already eyeballing the growing social network and licking their chops."

They will ruin it, that and farmville.

Must use real name? No thanks (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851370)

I liked it at first when I got an invite. However they then suspended my account because I wasn't using my real name, I was using an Internet monicker I've had for awhile. I personally still do not want to give my real name out to any social media site and would like to continue to blog/tweet/share/whatever under my Internet pseudonym so I can further control who I want to see the things I share. I know I can limit stuff with circles in Google+ but I want that extra level of privacy.

I understand it's their service and they can enforce what they want and they can feel free to choose to do so. However I disagree with them so will not be continuing with their service. Back to just Twitter for me.

File a p/k/a or d/b/a (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851664)

To use your Internet moniker on sites that require a legal name, file a "professionally known as" or "doing business as" form with the state to link your Internet moniker with your primary legal name. I presume that's how Lady Gaga gets away with being "Lady Gaga" and not "Stefani Germanotta", a name she doesn't use in part for fear of being confused with Gwen from No Doubt.

Still no google apps users, though. (1)

Xzzy (111297) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851392)

It'd grow a little faster if Google would get off their butts and port Profiles over to Apps.

They've only been promising it's "right around the corner" for 2 years now.

My question: how is it growing, not why (2)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851452)

What I want to know is, how is it that google+ keeps growing? I thought they stopped accepting new users. I don't have an invite yet, but I haven't really tried to get one, because every time I've gone to the website in the last few weeks, it always says "Already invited? We've temporarily exceeded our capacity. Please try again soon." So if they aren't accepting even invited users, how is it that they continue to grow? Is there some secret way to get in now?

Re:My question: how is it growing, not why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851574)

...every time I've gone to the website in the last few weeks, it always says "Already invited? We've temporarily exceeded our capacity. Please try again soon."

If you actually have an invite it lets you right in. Enter your name and gender and you've got an account.

Re:My question: how is it growing, not why (1)

puck01 (207782) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851788)

I've invited about 70 people since early this month and as far as I know they all registered without a problem. It did take me 24 hours after my invitation was received to be granted access.

Re:My question: how is it growing, not why (1)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852134)

The site is no longer invite only. I know this for an absolute fact, since I have a Google+ account but never received an invite.

As far as I can tell, they are turning on and off the ability to register several times a day, or perhaps it has something to so with which server you get connected to. Regardless, I did need to try several times to avoid the "temporarily exceeded our capacity" message.

Interesting, but not convinced. (1)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851478)

Google+ may be invitation only, but once you're in you can invite anyone you like so it isn't like there's any real limitation. Of course, so far I've only invited close friends and I might keep it that way.

Pages in Google+ load far, far quicker than Facebook. The contact circles has me intrigued, especially if it will allow me to target messages to specific groups. And so far there are no social games. Those are all great points, but so far Google+ isn't terribly different than Facebook and so there's no real compelling reason to use it. Especially since the vast majority of my contacts are on Facebook and I'm not about to send out a bunch of invites.

The Android app looks quite sloppy, although I realize we're at the early stages right now.

For now I'll just wait to see where this goes, but I'm not yet convinced that Google+ is going to unseat Facebook. Google has probably already gotten too big for it's own good and is afflicted with some of the stigma that Microsoft has faced for a long time and now Facebook is experiencing.

Given Apple's unreal marketing machine I wonder what would happen if they introduced a proper social network. In the eyes of consumers they seem incapable of doing any wrong.

Re:Interesting, but not convinced. (1)

tycoex (1832784) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851912)

Actually my favorite part about Google+ is the android app. Not necessarily the app itself, but using it on my android phone in general. Facebook (the mobile site or the app) loads PAINFULLY slow on my phone, even over wifi. In contrast, the G+ app loads extremely fast, and the G+ mobile site loads almost as fast as the app.

The Answer (1)

Subratik (1747672) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851562)

There are just a lot of well-informed nerds in the universe now, especially with the development of web pages like slashdot, arstechnica, gizmodo, wired, lifehacker exc exc. And so, it's a good product. Yeah. Google + has a couple of bugs, but it is getting tons of publicity. ...and there are a lot of tech geeks out there and if they have a couple friends, and those friends have a couple more friends, if one goes, two will too. Eventually. Maybe a celebrity, that's 100,000 more. To be truly exclusive, it must have an awesome fan-base. Let's see if it breaks 50 million.

Facebook Hate (2)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851632)

You know, I am starting to think that a lot of folks only opened up FB accounts begrudgingly. I know a number of people that preferred MySpace over Facebook until MySpace decided to start cloning Facebook's "features" and UI. I also know a number of people who only started a Facebook account to be in on various party/event invitations and only started using it as their primary social media platform when everything else became too bloated and kludgy to use.

Finally, a number of folks I know never started their own accounts. Rather, their girlfriends or friends or family members started one for them, and they only took it over to keep the originator from jacking up their reputation by posting random stuff under their identity.

I wonder if a large portion of FB users never really wanted to use FB at all, but only got pulled into the service by what they would consider, "not their fault," circumstances. It would explain the large love-hate relationship that recent statistics seem to imply, along with the wholesale, "Fuck you Facebook!" movement that is coinciding with G+'s birth.

And they're every bit as evil as Facebook (2)

J'raxis (248192) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851640)

My profile was suspended because they insist on people using their "legal" names. They tell users signing up to use the name that people know you by, but their appeal form demands you either provide a government ID or some other "official" evidence of your name like a link to a college directory.

I then go to the discussion board about profiles and virtually every recent thread is people complaining about being suspended.

Good job, Google. Just as evil as Facebook. More interested in being able to connect everyone's doings with their "legal" identity than they are at creating a social networking site for their users.

Re:And they're every bit as evil as Facebook (1)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 2 years ago | (#36851772)

I've got news for you: there's no such thing as anonymity on the Internet.

Just ask Anonymous who found out the hard way earlier this week.

Besides, if I'm doing anything online I don't want Google to track, I sure as hell aren't going to be logged-in to my Google account while I'm doing it, will make sure I'm tunneling my connection through several remote proxies, and would probably be using a Live CD distribution of my favorite Linux.

Even then, I'm still not 100% anonymous. Only obfuscated enough to hopefully make it not worth anyone's while to track me down.

I'm sure members of Anonymous did something similar. Only difference was, what they were doing WAS worth somebody's "while" to track them down.

When I got onto G+... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36851720)

When I got onto G+ I saw the large number of "friends" and colleagues who were there, none of whom had bothered to give me an invite.

It actually had a bit of a chilling effect on my feelings for certain individuals, and specifically, members of the team I work on.

( Google Apps customer ) Wow, that must be nice... (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852064)

As a google apps customer, I don't have access to profiles...which means I don't have access to google+.

Let me be clear; I am a paying customer, and I don't have the access the freebie users do.

Re:( Google Apps customer ) Wow, that must be nice (1)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 2 years ago | (#36852230)

You don't have access to integrated profiles, but the last I knew there was nothing preventing you from using your apps email address to create a standard Google Account (just like a Yahoo mail user would do), and create a profile using the Google Account, rather than the Google Apps Account.

Is that no longer possible?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...