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

If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

marketingland.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#11

Post by ry0ohki »

freehunter wrote: post #3

First, Google has made moves to indicate that Google+ is not a finished product, or even a 1.0 release. Their recent overhaul shows that. Their lack of public APIs shows that. Secondly, Google has made it pretty clear that Google+ does not stand on its own. The "plus" is in the name after "Google". It's Google, plus. Google+ is just a frontend, an entry point. It's the Yahoo landing site for all of Google's services.…

"Google+ is not and never will be (and never wanted to be) a Facebook"

Tell that to my new Google+ Cover Photo....

Even if all of your points are valid, you must admit they keep releasing numbers trying to show it's this super fast growing network, and yet you can see just by the number of sites that have a G+ button, that people are not even engaging in that level of activity. Pinterest on the other hand, which has actual user engagement is already starting to overtake Google on these little + buttons.

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#12

Post by nextparadigms »

lmkg wrote: post #5

So Google's argument is that because G+ is pervasively integrated, you can use it without being on plus.google.com. While this is technically correct[1]... they're still being evasive. Not everyone using G+-enabled Google products is using the G+ bonus features. Rather than dancing around the single "user" number, Google could give more direct usage stats by breaking it down by feature. 20MM on plus.google.com, anoth…

Isn't Facebook doing the same thing and reporting active users as people who use the like button or post comments through their commenting system on 3rd party sites?

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#13

Post by Steko »

Me, yesterday:

"Seems to me that continuing to count everyone who gets an Android phone or signs up for Gmail as a G+ user just invites people to pile on and point out how underwhelming G+'s userbase has been to date."

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3829846

You can defend G+ being a beta release or fundamentally different from facebook and twitter despite aping tons of FB and Twitter features. What you can't really defend imho is the continued exaggeration of G+'s userbase. I'd guess over half of the claimed G+ userbase has never touched it. Many have probably never heard of it.

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#14

Post by recoiledsnake »

bishnu wrote: post #7
lmkg wrote: post #5

So Google's argument is that because G+ is pervasively integrated, you can use it without being on plus.google.com. While this is technically correct[1]... they're still being evasive. Not everyone using G+-enabled Google products is using the G+ bonus features. Rather than dancing around the single "user" number, Google could give more direct usage stats by breaking it down by feature. 20MM on plus.google.com, anoth…

"I am inclined to agree with the conspiracy theory that if these secondary stats were any good, we would be hearing about them." I don't think it's that simple. Google publishes very few figures that have to do with its core profitability. For example, number of searches a day is not reported. I doubt it's because that figure isn't any good.

That is because they have little to gain by announcing the number of searches because they're already way on top.

On the other hand, if G+ numbers were good, they would definitely announce it to increase the hype and get more people to check it out, out of curiosity.

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#15

Post by pavanky »

I have to ask, what was the point of the post ?

It just looked like an endless rant deviating from the numbers that google was not publishing to the comparision with Facebook to the actual realization that G+ may not be a _ghost town_ and back to more google bashing.

-1 if I could, but I can not.

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#16

Post by freehunter »

rbarooah wrote: post #10
freehunter wrote: post #3

First, Google has made moves to indicate that Google+ is not a finished product, or even a 1.0 release. Their recent overhaul shows that. Their lack of public APIs shows that. Secondly, Google has made it pretty clear that Google+ does not stand on its own. The "plus" is in the name after "Google". It's Google, plus. Google+ is just a frontend, an entry point. It's the Yahoo landing site for all of Google's services.…

Sure, but by their definition someone who visits Google+ once and then never does anything with Google except search for the rest of time still counts as an active Google+ user. Those people simply aren't engaged in any kind of social layer, and yet Google is reporting them as if they are. It might not be correct to measure Google+ as if it were a direct equivalent to Facebook, but that doesn't make the numbers they…

If Google+ runs as deep as Google seems to imply it does, anyone using Google search while signed in is "using" Google+. I know when I do searches, I get results based on what people I know have been sharing. If I search for "putty", my top result is the PuTTY client, because lots of Google+ users have visited the page or liked it or shared it or something. I can see under the search result how many people +1'd it.

I'd consider that "using" Google+ the way I understand Google+ to work. You don't need to use it as a Facebook in order to experience the "plus" in Google+ (criticisms about SPYW aside).

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#17

Post by lmkg »

bishnu wrote: post #7
lmkg wrote: post #5

So Google's argument is that because G+ is pervasively integrated, you can use it without being on plus.google.com. While this is technically correct[1]... they're still being evasive. Not everyone using G+-enabled Google products is using the G+ bonus features. Rather than dancing around the single "user" number, Google could give more direct usage stats by breaking it down by feature. 20MM on plus.google.com, anoth…

"I am inclined to agree with the conspiracy theory that if these secondary stats were any good, we would be hearing about them." I don't think it's that simple. Google publishes very few figures that have to do with its core profitability. For example, number of searches a day is not reported. I doubt it's because that figure isn't any good.

But in this case, Google is publishing numbers. Numbers that by their own admission aren't even trying to measure the right thing, and which seem to over-count that wrong thing anyways. Given that they're publishing any numbers at all, why are they publishing those numbers in place of more relevant ones?

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#18

Post by rbarooah »

freehunter wrote: post #16
rbarooah wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but by their definition someone who visits Google+ once and then never does anything with Google except search for the rest of time still counts as an active Google+ user. Those people simply aren't engaged in any kind of social layer, and yet Google is reporting them as if they are. It might not be correct to measure Google+ as if it were a direct equivalent to Facebook, but that doesn't make the numbers they…

If Google+ runs as deep as Google seems to imply it does, anyone using Google search while signed in is "using" Google+. I know when I do searches, I get results based on what people I know have been sharing. If I search for "putty", my top result is the PuTTY client, because lots of Google+ users have visited the page or liked it or shared it or something. I can see under the search result how many people +1'd it. I…

Ok, but that definition still renders the numbers meaningless - it's just a box you happen to see forever onwards if you've ever said yes to one of their prominent enticements to find out what Google+ is.

If they told us how many Google+ members use those results, and how often they are picked in comparison to the non+ results, that would tell us something that justifies using that definition.

As it stands, the numbers only tell us how many people clicked through a very prominent ad.

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#19

Post by betterth »

capo wrote: post #6

As I see it 90% of Google+'s purpose is to get users to create profiles and then these popup within Google properties in the form of picture thumbnails when the user comments or uploads stuff, etc. Which is perfectly reasonable as almost all web apps now operate around user profiles (mostly Facebook's), what I find to be unreasonable however is the seemingly heightened intolerance some pundits have developed towards…

Did you read the article? Most of these pundits don't hate G+, or Google's business model here, or what they're doing with social.

They hate the PR nonsense that Google's feels is neccesary to abstract away the fact that they're tiny compared to Facebook.

I do too, it feels dishonest. You don't need to post the same numbers as Facebook. No one is expecting you to. So stop lying with statistics. It's like, Do No Evil is officially gone. Maybe a few white lies here and there never hurt anyone, right?

Re: If Google's Really Proud Of Google+, It Should Share Some Real User Figures

#20

Post by dirtyaura »

nextparadigms wrote: post #12
lmkg wrote: post #5

So Google's argument is that because G+ is pervasively integrated, you can use it without being on plus.google.com. While this is technically correct[1]... they're still being evasive. Not everyone using G+-enabled Google products is using the G+ bonus features. Rather than dancing around the single "user" number, Google could give more direct usage stats by breaking it down by feature. 20MM on plus.google.com, anoth…

Isn't Facebook doing the same thing and reporting active users as people who use the like button or post comments through their commenting system on 3rd party sites?

Clicking the Like button falls definitely into the "actively uses Facebook" slot, but commenting on 3rd party sites is indeed a gray area. But I'd be surprised if there is a lot of people who use Facebook only that way. Anyone has any numbers that could shine light on this?
Post reply on HN