21–30 of 152 posts
Some of this could also be "What did LiveJournal (and therefore also its clones) get right?" Oddly LiveJournal seems to always get left out of these discussions, even though it had more features than many later sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc). There's good reason to avoid LiveJournal itself these days, but the clone sites still live (e.g. Dreamwidth).
I used it in early 2000 and was blown away by what MySpace offered compared to LJ.
It's only now that I use Twitter on a daily basis that I realize the problem of having a single feed for your private life, work, hobbies, etc. It just doesn't work and is one of the main reasons why I unfollow people. I think the underlying functionality of circles and collections are a must but maybe they can be implemented in a better and easier to use way.
I think of the underlying problem as "the metadata delusion." We programmers look at difficulties users have dealing with large volumes of data and think, aha! I can solve this by giving them ways to add metadata to those data, so it can be more easily browsed/filtered/faceted/whatever. (We think that because programmers have an analytical cast of mind, which we then extrapolate from -- this would be useful for me ,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Google Cloud console. And Gsuite Admin. And Gmail. Well, maybe the latter isn't simple anymore
They seem to have lost sight on a big part of what made them attractive to begin with.
Somehow the rest of Google seems to ignore him.
The website felt slow and bloated performance-wise, despite the design being simple. YouTube feels like that now too.
The question is, what problem did Google+ solve?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think of the underlying problem as "the metadata delusion." We programmers look at difficulties users have dealing with large volumes of data and think, aha! I can solve this by giving them ways to add metadata to those data, so it can be more easily browsed/filtered/faceted/whatever. (We think that because programmers have an analytical cast of mind, which we then extrapolate from -- this would be useful for me ,…
It seems to be working for Instragram, but they implemented the simplest possible thing for stories - you can have your "everyone" group, or your "close friends" group. No custom labels, no additional groups, just those two and thats it. I see quite a few friends who never even participated on G+ or similar making use of it.
Aren't the circles really aimed at the spammer mentality? (e.g. I am broadcasting)
This seemed like a better way to control spam in the ~3 posts I made on Google+.
Some of this could also be "What did LiveJournal (and therefore also its clones) get right?" Oddly LiveJournal seems to always get left out of these discussions, even though it had more features than many later sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc). There's good reason to avoid LiveJournal itself these days, but the clone sites still live (e.g. Dreamwidth).
Wasn't LJ just a blogging platform? I used it in early 2000 and was blown away by what MySpace offered compared to LJ.
Seems to me it basically resembles the later "social networking" sites in features (and outdoes them except possibly Google+), just the tone was more focused on long-form blogging.
I guess the one thing lacking that people these days would expect was that you couldn't easily upload pictures and such (that was a paid feature IIRC; haven't checked how that works on Dreamwidth). But if you ignore that...
Peoples relationships and interests tend to be grouped by their circles. Whatsapp and Facebook groups seem to understand this which is why they are soo sticky.