Needs a better name and it needs a USP.
Bradley Horowitz on ailing Google+: Islands in the stream, that is what we are ...
Google product veep Bradley Horowitz is now heading up the ad giant's fading fast Google+ service, but its name appears to have put the willies up Mountain View's execs lately – to the point where they simply don't mention it any more. Horowitz confirmed in a short statement that he had, in effect, taken over from the "network …
COMMENTS
-
Monday 2nd March 2015 11:31 GMT Metrognome
The sooner it gets decoupled from other services and stays optional, G+ may be fine.
There are people who would still like to use it and appreciate the flexibility of circles etc.
So long as membership to it, isn't tied to nearly everything in the G universe, G+ may do just fine for those that want it. Ramming it down peoples' throats just isn't going to cut it (just ask Sinofski).
-
-
Monday 2nd March 2015 12:44 GMT Robert E A Harvey
Tried it, it's stupid
The basic concept of g+ as a bit of social media is fine. But it seems to have gone all wrong.
* Hundreds of asians stealling and re-posting other peoples pictures, with no copyright traceability. They get "auto enhanced" every time till they end up looking like crayon images
* Snotty self-opinionated people setting up groups and then arbitrarily moaning about what you post.
* '+1' ing has become an end in itself. Loads of people trawling for likes
* I have not had a decent converstaion on it with anyone. Even facebook is better for that, and Usenet remains king for sensible discussion
*
-
Monday 2nd March 2015 13:40 GMT Robert E A Harvey
Re: Tried it, it's stupid
Hmm. A number of lines of text seem to have vanished. Suffice it to say I went on to criticise the inability to make nuanced reports. You can "report" a post but not offer any explanation of why, and anything reported just vanishes. There does not seem to be any attempt to correlate reports and build up a view on the originator, who seems free to do the same again straight away.
-
Monday 2nd March 2015 14:52 GMT DrXym
I don't see the point for it
Facebook and Google+ are basically the same thing - a wall to post stuff on and (assuming you're interested) follow other people and see their posts in aggregate form. The problem for G+ is that Facebook got there first and it doesn't really have a differentiator. It's just another social wannabe with a fraction of the content.
It also copies the most annoying and evil aspects of Facebook. It nags you to provide more personal info. It nags you to connect to people "you may know". It nags you to join groups. It doesn't provide options to stop nagging you. It throws the switch on all the security / privacy settings and ensures the settings are deliberately vague or confusing so you're never quite sure if you are secure or not.
If G+ were NOT evil, or had a simple to control privacy, or if it acted more like a traditional home page where I could add feeds and other things of interest then I might use it. But as it is, it's just an intrusive bore.
-
Wednesday 8th April 2015 15:18 GMT Patrician
I actually quite like G+; when I look at my FB wall all I see is multiple variations of, "Mrs Thingumy is taking her dog for a walk" or "Mr Whatsits is settling down with a pint"! Completely mindless drivel in the main and of no interest. On G+, however, I've "followed" N.A.S.A., Hubble, ScFi (discussion), Phil Plait, Discworld (discussion) and so forth.
There in much less inane, mindless drivel on G+ than there is on FB, or there is in my feed and I have had, and do have, quite a few interesting discussions there whereas on FB, nada ...
-
Thursday 9th April 2015 09:06 GMT Richard Cranium
A friend who works in broadcast media says of all the social media comments they receive in response to their programming, those using G+ are the most likely to provide intelligent and considered feedback.
Sure there's scope for improvement but G+ has been described as "facebook for grown-ups" and facebook as "where you go to spy on your kids".
-