Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
singularityhub.com
Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
1–10 of 155 posts
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#2I find it ironic that the article claiming that "Facebook is maimed" and "Twitter mortally wounded" is on a site that has "Like" and "Tweet" buttons, but no Google+ interaction at all.
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#3I just realized I can use G+ as a blog and just post those entries publicly... It would be even better if they'd implement tagging.
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#4I have to agree with you on a lot of your points (even though I haven't had the chance to use G+). I am actually happy that G+ is missing advertising, corporate pages, and widgets. These things are "social", but I truly believe a social network should be about people and not games and corporations.
However, put with words with friends on there, and I'll be happy!
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#5I just realized I can use G+ as a blog and just post those entries publicly... It would be even better if they'd implement tagging.
It seems they took a swipe at a lot of services. probably not intentionally, but by rolling up a lot of functionality that has been proven by others into one app.
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#6I have to agree with you on a lot of your points (even though I haven't had the chance to use G+). I am actually happy that G+ is missing advertising, corporate pages, and widgets. These things are "social", but I truly believe a social network should be about people and not games and corporations. However, put with words with friends on there, and I'll be happy!
You can't really believe that Google isn't going to throw in ads once it opens up wide?
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#7I find it ironic that the article claiming that "Facebook is maimed" and "Twitter mortally wounded" is on a site that has "Like" and "Tweet" buttons, but no Google+ interaction at all.
He talked about features not the situation NOW.
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#8I have to agree with you on a lot of your points (even though I haven't had the chance to use G+). I am actually happy that G+ is missing advertising, corporate pages, and widgets. These things are "social", but I truly believe a social network should be about people and not games and corporations. However, put with words with friends on there, and I'll be happy!
You can't really believe that Google isn't going to throw in ads once it opens up wide?
Yeah, I'm sure the ads will be similar to Facebooks soon. But possibly less annoying/more personalized.
I think this is the real concern for Twitter. G+ can kind of do what Twitter does, and G+ is much easier to monetize.
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#9I find it ironic that the article claiming that "Facebook is maimed" and "Twitter mortally wounded" is on a site that has "Like" and "Tweet" buttons, but no Google+ interaction at all.
He talked about features not the situation NOW.
In that case, shouldn't the author put his money where his mouth is and put the article on a site that has a +1 button?
Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?
#10The one problem I have with G+ is that sometimes there is gold in the junkstream. Sometimes someone does post something interesting and they would not normally share it with me.
How can we balance over-granulated sharing with under-granulated sharing?