Can Google+ Succeed Merely By Being Not Facebook?
from the it's-possible dept
Like many folks, I've been playing around a bit with the latest attempt by Google to offer "social networking" features, Google Plus. Given the underwhelming performance of Orkut, Buzz, Wave and other attempts -- combined with the inability to do anything useful with the purchased companies Jaiku and Dodgeball -- I really didn't expect much. However, after playing around with it a bit, I have to admit that my first reaction, like some others', is that it's surprisingly well done. I can't quite explain why or how, but it feels like Facebook, without everything that makes Facebook feel clunky. Not surprisingly, xkcd sums it up best:
The current key difference with Google+ is in the "Circles" functionality, which better lets you compartmentalize who you're sharing with. Rather than sharing with all your "friends," Google lets you classify them into different groups, and makes it easy to choose who sees what. It's one of those features that makes you wonder why Facebook never offered it. It also has a funky "hangout" feature, that basically makes video conferencing quite simple and convenient. Some, of course, will complain about yet another centralized social networking service, but as Rick Falkvinge points out, that really doesn't matter to most people. And, to Google's credit, it makes it abundantly clear within Google+ that you can export your data and delete your account at any time. In fact, the delete button is so easy to find, I got nervous that I'd accidentally click it (though, I'm guessing there's a confirmation step somewhere).
That said, there are obviously still lots of challenges. Actually getting people to use the service is a big one (especially while Google is still trying its increasingly tiresome "you need an invite" launch method). Separately, I'm curious to see how well this plays with others. Will developers be able to build apps for it? How will those work? Will other services be able to integrate? The first thing I did was look to see if I could feed my Twitter feeds and Techdirt blog posts into my profile, but I couldn't figure out a way to do either (the tools may be there, but I couldn't find them). And, just in general, I think plenty of people feel a level of fatigue around the idea of starting up with another social network (even if Google makes it easy). I could definitely see Google+ not getting the kind of traction it really needs. But, I will say, that unlike some of its other attempts (especially Wave), my initial impression was that this is something worth playing with some more, and it's something I could see myself using regularly. And, to be honest, a part of that is just the feeling that it's not Facebook.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: google plus, social networks
Companies: facebook, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
A little addition
And if someone could send me an invite when the system is back up, that would be super.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A little addition
True, but there was a tonne of buzz around Wave (no pun intended) and people were scrambling for those invites - but it still never took off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A little addition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: A little addition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A little addition
Google+ is in public beta. They have done things like this before with other apps and services. Expect them to open G+ up in a month or so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: A little addition
Truth be told facebook is like Lotus Notes, it does everything, but it does nothing really well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A little addition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A little addition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://phandroid.com/2011/06/29/will-google-win-and-do-you-have-a-google-invite/
look at the results of the surveys here, for example. While a small subset of people it's pretty clear how that group feels about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The often-discussed Techdirt philosophy is to give away the infinite goods and to sell the scarce ones instead of creating artificial scarcity...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Marcus.. that artificial scarcity is exactly what made FB so popular to begin with.
Google is trying to add the 'cool' factor to the launch of Google+. They have succeeded so far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I highly doubt this. Google is not going to back out of their plans because of a lack of server resources - it's freaking Google. You can bet they launched with a clear idea of their resources, the number of invites, the expected response, and their timeline for all of it. If they really could not "keep up with demand" then I'm fairly certain it was by design, not by mistake.
Essentially, if Google had wanted to launch with no invites and free registration for all, they could have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"There was an error posting your update. Please wait a moment and try again."
Fuuuu.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's for the purpose of testing your new application or service with a small number of people to find bugs, test infrastructure, etc.
Why would Google who wants to try and become the next Facebook launch their product to the masses without external testing first?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Like I said, I just don't believe that they shut off invitations because of some sort of unexpected surge in signups that they weren't prepared to handle. It's clearly intentional. That's what I'm saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Traditional beta testing works with a fixed or somewhat flexible number of invites. That's not the issue here. Google has blocked existing invites with the excuse that they can't handle the demand. That's what I find hard to believe.
Do you honestly believe that Google "accidentally" ran out of server resources on a product launch this important?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Granted, it may be that they want it to look like it's grown bigger then it really has. I admit that I didn't care nearly as much about it until I read that they stopped accepting new users due to overload.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I really want to clarify this because a lot of people obviously disagree with me (and I in no way claim to be sure) but all I am saying is this: I really don't buy that they unexpectedly ran out of server resources.
This is Google we are talking about! Managing server resources is a massive part of what they do. They own, if not the most, then surely near to the most server farms and bandwidth of any company on the planet.
So really, that's the only thing I'm not totally buying - the idea that Google was caught off guard in any way. Your explanation that they are intentionally keeping it to a smaller audience so they can monitor it makes more sense to me. Other than that I'm not really trying to make any strong point at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google (or at least its front page) has become increasingly irrelevant as a place to stay. If I had to categorize it, it would be like an office. You go to it to get what you need done. You leave as soon as you're finished.
Google has a ways to go before it can even convince me to look at its demo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You fool! Did you think you were in charge of your life?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't have facebook anymore, to me, it became too much like a mall. Too many annoying schoolchildren making noise that doesn't add anything of value to anything. I'm not an old man, I just know that my time is too valuable to listen to garbage just for the sake of listening to garbage. To me, Facebook lost that "Cool hangout" vibe a long long time ago...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I really like the circle options, from what I've heard. Not many of my friends share ALL of my interests, and to be able to converse with a subset is something I've wanted from facebook for a long while.
When they do open it completely to the public, I'm at least interested enough to sign up and play around with it for a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What did Facebook expect?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What did Facebook expect?
Google might have the edge on FB for monetization too. They already have a huge ad network so they don't need to open up your privacy like FB does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What did Facebook expect?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What did Facebook expect?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What did Facebook expect?
If only it was that easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Facebook does offer it
Facebook does have that. I have a group specifically for people from work and a group that's specifically family, so I can share old family photos with just family, for example. Maybe Google+ makes it more obvious, but Facebook does have this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
For me, the reason was obvious. Facebook flat out made it difficult to create and use groups. Maybe you figured it out so that it would be useful or maybe they've made it easier since the last time I tried, but I recall trying to set up a group a while back and eventually asking myself why was something that should be so simple, so hard?
I'm not sure where I picked this up, but I seem to recall one of Zuckerberg's driving principles for Facebook was openness. Everybody should share everything. While this may have worked at the beginning to get people onto the site, I think that this "principle" lies at the room of a lot of the privacy concerns people have with Facebook. So, if Google can take the lessons learned from Facebook and address one of its bigness weaknesses (privacy and controlling one's own online persona), then they're on their way to success.
Also, I don't see the transition from Facebook to another service being that big a deal. As long as my close circle of friends have accounts -- i.e. the people who post updates that I actually want to read about rather than ones about someone I knew in highschool eating a ham sandwich today with mustard instead of mayo -- then I could see myself using the service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
When they added it, it was easy. Then it was hard for a while. Now it's easy again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Facebook does offer it
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-06-smartphone-app-automatically-tags-photos.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Facebook does offer it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Finally!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Finally!
There is an alternative.
Call, Text, go See a person.
Have coffee, lunch, or a drink.
In other words the alternative to social networking is actually being social.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Finally!
I get it. I still feel the divide. Others I know feel an even bigger divide. But others - especially people who have had the internet around for their whole lives - seem genuinely confused by the notion that using facebook would be considered anything other than socializing.
Not long ago, phone calls weren't considered "real" socializing. Very VERY recently, texting was not considered real socializing (and still isn't by many many people). How can you draw a line in the sand where you got comfortable? The world continues to change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nope.
The Social network bubble is about to burst anyway. Google might be able to survive because they are so massive, but people are already leaving Facebook by the truckloads. Like someone said, it's just a fad. Bring on the next big thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Watching the demo videos, Google+ does a lot of the stuff that I've wanted Facebook to do (or do better) and it's by a company I trust a lot more than Facebook. Considering how much I use other Google products, it will likely interface more easily with my digital life than Facebook ever did.
Unfortunately, Google is a little slow sometimes with releasing a good Android app for its services, but when it finally does, the app is better than most of the third-party apps that came out first to fill the gap.
Best of all, I've never given Google a dime of my own money. That's using "free as a part of a business model" FTW.
People reference Google Wave as a failed social network, but I never got the impression it was an attempt at creating a social network. It was collaborative software, which it actually did well. I used it for a few projects with coworkers and it was great for tracking decision-making and project version history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Somehow I can actually see this one succeeding somehow, as opposed to Buzz, Wave, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Is that why Google now has that ugly ass black banner at the top of the page? I thought something was wrong with my monitor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But yeah, that's why.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I guess this also explains those stupid-looking "+1" buttons that appeared next to every single search result the other day, but are inexplicably gone now.
Normally I'd just use www.google.com/custom so I don't have to look at all that meaningless garbage, but it's been giving me "automated query" errors for days now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google makes people think carefully about sharing something to specific people instead of the whole world.
Facebook makes people think carefully about sharing something with the whole world instead of specific people.
And we all know which of these two tactics Facebook has had its eye on for ages now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While it sounds like a good starting point...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know, it's my baggage, but in the end, I've lived a happier life knowing that I've never felt forced to interact with people because of some smartphone or website poking me at all hours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google's Fourth?
Will they make it a success this time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Google's Fourth?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Google's Fourth?
Twitter is basically shouting into a desert full of other shouting people.
Facebook creeps into your life, reads your letters and looks in your drawers to see if you have something interesting in there for their advertisers.
Myspace is pretty much a music portal now.
Friendster only limited popularity.
Same with Orkut.
I don't see how Google's Google+ or even Diaspora are going to bring to the table that makes it actually relevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The things I hate about facebook ...
Everything that should be simple in facebook and one click takes digging through level upon level of crap. Its not intuitive. I think this is where google+ is going to win.
Farmville, Mafia wars, Would You Sleep With Me, etc ... ick ... I see these moving over to google after apps are allowed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seems like a good shot.
The article and comments all seem to assume that their only way forward would be to convert Facebook users to their new offering. Facebook users are still a small minority of computer users. There's a huge uncommitted market of folks who might be interested in what Google Plus has to offer without the well-placed fear of privacy invasion, out-of-control spam and scam, information selling, and all the other impressions that keep people away from Facebook.
If I were Google I'd sell this as just another Google service you can trust. You don't have to talk about it being another Facebook, because Facebook users don't have to be the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Buzz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How is that at all similar to this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thoughts on Google+
The reason Circles differs from FB friend Lists is that Google have made Circles central to the entire experience. Yes, FB has had Lists for a long time, but they've always been an optional extra that most people ignore. G+, by contrast, gives people 4 Circles by default (Friends, Family, Acquaintances, Following), makes it easy to create new ones, and provides a nice, oddly *fun* interface for managing them. The *only* way to connect with someone is to add them to at least one of your circles (like Lists, the details of the circles themselves are private, but you can choose to share the aggregate information as to who is in your circles).
They still have some kinks to work out in the way the privacy settings, sharing and circles interact, but what they have now is an *excellent* starting point in helping users to feel in control of who can see what they post (and doing so in a way that is more straightforward and integrated than the FB Lists experience).
They also make it easy to list your non-G+ using friends for your own benefit, so you can automatically connect with them if they join up, as well as easily passing information along to them directly via email when that is appropriate (although again, here, some of the defaults need tweaking to avoid inadvertent spamming by inexperienced users).
As to why they shut invites down, my assumption is that it is the feedback system that was dying rather than G+ itself. I never noticed any problems at all with the actual site, but the feedback tool was definitely struggling at times (and, of course, dealing with all that feedback is ultimately constrained by the number of *people* Google have available for the task rather than anything to do with how many servers they can through at the problem of allowing people to accept it).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If they released it to the general public as it stands right now, they'd just have another Buzz fiasco on their hands.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There was an invite Loophole
I am looking forward to trying out G+ - FB is slow, cluncky and far to open for my liking. I would be more interested in a desentralized social network, but currently there's not one that I know of that has enough of a userbase to look into
[ link to this | view in chronology ]