Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing the new Google+

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 300 posts

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#121

Post by Animats »

6d0debc071 wrote: post #88
FoeNyx wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A picture is worth a thousand words"

Depends on the words, the picture and the audience. I wouldn't attempt to understand your API's system contract via a picture of the computer. One of the concerns I have is that we may end up moving to a very image-oriented media that finds it difficult to meaningfully communicate certain thoughts - and perhaps encourages an audience largely unable and/or unwilling to meaningfully attempt to understand them.

That's television. The web is a step up from TV in that regard.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#122

Post by gravity13 »

kin wrote: post #57

Collections is kind of like Pinterest. Communities is kind of like Reddit. Plus was kind of like Facebook. Buzz was kind of like Twitter. They really need to stop imitating and start innovating. At this point I don't even think they know who they're targeting they're just trying to do a little bit of everything but they don't do it well enough for me to want to use it.

>At this point I don't even think they know who they're targeting they're just trying to do a little bit of everything

They're basically trying to brute force their way by now.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#123

Post by yid »

toyg wrote: post #33
rogerbinns wrote: post #16

Google seem to keep making worse the thing that matters most to me. What I want is to conveniently read. I want to see content, from a variety of sources. I want density. I want to catch up and be aware. It was like that in the earlier days. Every update kept reducing the amount of visible content, and severe reductions in density. Here is a screenshot of my screen - http://i.imgur.com/fM2WIVf.png (1920x1200) - almos…

It's not just a Google thing. Recently there was a HN thread on devmag.io -- they have the same problem. I measured it: in the same space HN gives me 18 stories, Devmag.io gives me barely 2. Unfortunately, I think Google people know and they just don't care. They don't want people who know what RSS is, people who care about information density; they are going after the Pinterest crowd, the sort of people who read Cos…

> Unfortunately, I think Google people know and they just don't care.

If this is the case, then it probably means that a majority of people find the less-dense layout easier to read. It would also explain why Reader didn't have enough usage to keep Google interested.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#124

Post by macintux »

efuquen wrote: post #114
kin wrote: post #57

Collections is kind of like Pinterest. Communities is kind of like Reddit. Plus was kind of like Facebook. Buzz was kind of like Twitter. They really need to stop imitating and start innovating. At this point I don't even think they know who they're targeting they're just trying to do a little bit of everything but they don't do it well enough for me to want to use it.

There were many well established search engines readily available when they launched search to.

There were exactly zero good search engines at the time, however. Google was exponentially better than anything else from day 1.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#128

Post by bobwaycott »

DanBC wrote: post #51
toyg wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just a Google thing. Recently there was a HN thread on devmag.io -- they have the same problem. I measured it: in the same space HN gives me 18 stories, Devmag.io gives me barely 2. Unfortunately, I think Google people know and they just don't care. They don't want people who know what RSS is, people who care about information density; they are going after the Pinterest crowd, the sort of people who read Cos…

Hang on, the problem with Pinterest is the aggressive user hostile "sign in" stuff on the apps and mobile pages. But Pinterest is, for what it is, really freaking good. If you want humanitarian faces or Japanese ceramic or Scandi Furniture or etc you'd be daft to ignore Pinterest.

>> the problem with Pinterest is the aggressive user hostile "sign in" stuff on the apps and mobile pages.

Spot on. Desktop pages are just as bad. It seriously annoys to no end. If it was a paid service, I could understand.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#129

Post by caf »

macintux wrote: post #124
efuquen wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were many well established search engines readily available when they launched search to.

There were exactly zero good search engines at the time, however. Google was exponentially better than anything else from day 1.

At launch, the actual search functionality wasn't noticeably better than Altavista. It was, however, much faster and aesthetically pleasing.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#130

Post by fredkbloggs »

yid wrote: post #123
toyg wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just a Google thing. Recently there was a HN thread on devmag.io -- they have the same problem. I measured it: in the same space HN gives me 18 stories, Devmag.io gives me barely 2. Unfortunately, I think Google people know and they just don't care. They don't want people who know what RSS is, people who care about information density; they are going after the Pinterest crowd, the sort of people who read Cos…

> Unfortunately, I think Google people know and they just don't care. If this is the case, then it probably means that a majority of people find the less-dense layout easier to read. It would also explain why Reader didn't have enough usage to keep Google interested.

> If this is the case, then it probably means that a majority of people find the less-dense layout easier to read.

Maybe. But the service doesn't exist for the people using it to read, or to post either for that matter. They're not paying for it. If Google knows people would rather a different layout but don't care, it's because the people who are paying for it prefer it this way.

Post reply on HN