The crazy thing about Google+ is that ordinary people are already actually using it. I have a ton of non-tech savvy friends on it already, and people are making posts that get 5-10 replies. This isn't just "yet another social networking site". I think Google finally managed to pull it off this time, and if they ride the wave of positive sentiment they've gained as a result of Android and other successful ventures as of late, they'll probably be able to get people to trust them with their data much more than Facebook ever could.
> if they ride the wave of positive sentiment they've gained
It's interesting to consider what the impact of the goodwill many people feel towards Google will be on Google+. With traditional commodities (e.g. cars, detergent, etc.) companies are keen to maintain trust, a positive image, and so on, amongst consumers.
That seems to have been less a factor in the success of companies like Facebook, perhaps because what they offered was so new and compelling that many people were willing to overlook trust issues, ethical and privacy lapses, etc.
Perhaps social networks are now becoming a commodity, and as a result, these factors may end up being much more important. It would be fascinating if Google+'s success was less about the technology and more about how people feel towards the company - if people say, "I can get the same experience from product X as I can from product Y, but I trust the company that makes product X more."
> "With Google+ in the open, Facebook finally needs to watch its step. ... Google is the only web property which can even begin to threaten Facebook’s supremacy. ... That’s the problem with monopolies, and the reason they’re illegal: if you have nowhere to go — if there isn’t an alternative service that you can switch to — the monopoly can simply milk you and stretch you without recourse. But now there’s Google+. With Big G hulking menacingly in Facebook’s shadow and just waiting for a misstep or mistake, Facebook needs to be careful. Mess up now, Zuckerberg, and Google will gladly gobble up droves of discontented denizens."
>The crazy thing about Google+ is that ordinary people are already actually using it.
No its not. I've been seeing a lot of "Oh look, even the plebs are using it" attitude about g+. Of course they are, its GOOGLE plus not some obscure startup only techies with their ear to the ground have ever heard of.
I consider myself as tech-savvy, and although I have a G+ account, I hardly use it, and none of my friends used it as well.
I don't really know what to do with that G+ account. To share my news? I can do it better with facebook, with far more likes than the total number of my friends in G+.
Tech-savvy != early adopter. It's true that tech-savvy people are usually early adopters, too, but it's not always the case. For example, I'm also tech-savvy and I have a very good sense of when a technology has huge potential - and I felt that about Twitter in its very early days, because I knew it is going to be big. I even made an account. But I've never really used it, mostly because I didn't really get what it's for and how I should use it. Similar story with Facebook. But I've never really liked the product, either, so I used it, but mostly by forcing myself to use it.
On the other hand, I'm an early adopter of Google+, and so far I love using it. I suppose its purpose is similar to Facebook and Twitter, so you can use it in a similar way, but like I said, I just don't like those products. Google+ is much better designed and easier to use, even for non-techies.
I'm really curious as to what all the fuss is about, but google+ isn't going to be available on Apps accounts until Q3 2012, at least... It's unclear as to how they hope to drive business adoption (i.e. monetisation), if they're going to lock out all business accounts!
I think one of the main reasons why Google+ is doing so well is that they have taken time to produce a really well designed user interface. Facebook's UI is really poor in comparison. As a user, interaction should come natural and with Google+ it does. This is highlighted by positive interaction from 'non-techy' users. It is actually a pleasure to use. I could happily create and delete circles all day long :)
there was a number of forecasts and predictions for some sort of lite interface that was to be crossbreeding of twitter and facebook UIs, in some shape.
This one might just be the winner. Time will tell... or maybe it will just find a niche and rest of the world will quickly move on.
The fact that random peoples' posts on Google+ show up as 'google.com' here and elsewhere is not good for Google's ownership of its messaging. On the other hand, their use of the blogspot.com domain for official news suggests they don't care, but on the other other hand, what is 'googleusercontent.com' if not a separation of what's Google's from what's everyone elses?
This got me thinking that gplus.com would be a good domain to put all the G+ content. Unfortunately it's taken, and is used for a community site: https://www.gplus.com/About-Us
I sense a lawsuit in G+'s future
This is more a bug in Hacker News than a bug for google. HN should definitely be displaying subdomains, at least for google properties. They have so much under that umbrella it doesn't help me ever to see that a post is from google.com.
Orkut was huge in the beginning too. I mean plus is a nice and clean interface and I am all for people to use that all kudos to Google for doing it.
There was Facebook Lite that somewhat resembled this (imo) . Maybe google has gotten the 'lite' ingredients just right. Because if they didn't - you know how light mayonnaise tastes like ;-)
(There's a menu in the top right of posts (under an icon that looks like a circle with an down arrow) that has a "Link to this post" option. Saves having to click the "Expand this post »" link.)
How many are actual users? About 50% of my friends in Google+ have no info, posts, pictures, etc., up. They're on Google+ because they got an invite and that's it. What's the use of having that many users if half of them don't use it?
Now that they have a profile, if they are loggued in there google account, as soon as some people in their social circle starts using it, the cost of interacting will be very low (because of the g+ toolbar).
That's likewise true for facebook users, or users of any online service. There's a long tail of people who sign up then walk away. But services include it in "user" counts anyway. So it's still apples-to-apples for comparison purposes.
I was having a conversation with my non tech-savvy roommate last night about G+, and one of the things we noticed was that the name itself is just completely uncompelling. What does G+ mean? What does it imply? We concluded it would be a great name for a new calculator.
Facebook at least has the tangential meaning originating from printed college 'facebooks' which a substantial portion of the (American) population is familiar with.
I had no clue what a printed facebook was until recently. I went to a community college that didn't have one of these and have never actually seen a real one. I'd be willing to be that the substantial portion of Americans which you speak of is actually the minority when it comes to knowing about the etymology of the word facebook.
On the other hand Google+ sounds like a better version of Google. Which I feel is more in line with their vision than merely an attempt at a Facebook killer.
This is funny, because I haven't received an invite yet (and I'm a longtime GMail user). A couple of my friends have G+, but never use it. They created profiles with great excitement, but in a couple of days it petered away.
Until I can try it out it's hard to believe all these numbers. Only time will tell, I guess; but one should be wary of the people who chase the next shiny thing, for they are fickle indeed.
Yes, but I feel the same way about Facebook. You don't see everything that your friends post, and they don't see everything you post once you get above a few dozen friends. At least G+ is allowing you to teach it what your friend lists are and use that information to target your posts to relevant interest groups.
