231–240 of 269 posts
- Google is afraid of Facebook - Google wants more users in Google+ - People don't care about Google+ - This doesn't change the fact that Google is still afraid of Facebook and wants more people to use G+ - Google will try to do everything it can to drag you into this service which you won't use anyway What's so strange about this?
-100% true
-100% false for people using Google+ (absolute percentage unknown)
-50% false
-80% true
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really goddamned frustrating and just shows how hollow google is as a company. They have search and ads, and an utter inability to actually build anything else or connect with a customer base. For a company this is like having cancer. It's astounding that they can ignore the situation to such a degree. Youtube is already an amazing force in the world, and that's with google half-assing so much of it. With enough…
"Google is chasing facebook when they should be chasing HBO, and amazon, and the discovery channel. It's like they live in a giant mansion with a huge lawn where a bunch of super talented people have been camping out for a while, trying to figure out how to make the next generation of video work. And everyday google gets out of bed, looks out over that scene, grunts, scratches its ass, thinks maybe they should just c…
But that's pretty much exactly it. Google managed to build something early on that is difficult to compete with, and now they are resting on it. The company revenues are split up into 3 parts: search/ads, backbone internet, and "other". Where "other" is a tiny fraction of the whole that is almost inconsequential to their profit margin.
It's a "problem" that a lot of companies have where they are in a position where revenue is actually too easy. That may seem like a blessing but it has many downsides and typically chokes growth potential. The consequences for failure at a functional company are usually pretty significant. If SpaceX builds a rocket that doesn't work or if Toyota builds a car that absolutely nobody wants that hurts the bottom line. And it drives the company to do better. But at google what are the consequences? If someone at google makes an unprofitable product, well, that's the norm. It just gets tossed in the "other" bin with everything else and everyone laughs and goes back to their free lunches and complementary massages.
It's a romper room filled with nerf toys. And many folks at google are seemingly content to luxuriate in that environment. Why would anyone at google willingly push themselves out into the cold, unforgiving, and desolate world of real-world business where actions have serious consequences when they can just futz around in the "other" play room, slap ads on their "products" and call it a day?
Google has no drive to make youtube the best it can be. And the same goes for gdocs, gmail, app engine, or any other thing they make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no post API and all sharing is done manually so spamming anyone with G+ is impossible unless you actively use it. I think what they're effectively trying to do boils down into unifying the Google account: instead of every Google product maintaining its own divorced account/sharing infrastructure they're effectively retconning all of their products so they're now all based off one source, the Google+ Profile.…
There's no post API and all sharing is done manually so spamming anyone with G+ is impossible unless you actively use it. That's a little naive. Of course there's an "API", it's what your browser uses to post something. Just because it's not designed for automated programs it doesn't mean it can't and won't be used.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Google is chasing facebook when they should be chasing HBO, and amazon, and the discovery channel. It's like they live in a giant mansion with a huge lawn where a bunch of super talented people have been camping out for a while, trying to figure out how to make the next generation of video work. And everyday google gets out of bed, looks out over that scene, grunts, scratches its ass, thinks maybe they should just c…
I had typed up something similar already but abandoned the post. But that's pretty much exactly it. Google managed to build something early on that is difficult to compete with, and now they are resting on it. The company revenues are split up into 3 parts: search/ads, backbone internet, and "other". Where "other" is a tiny fraction of the whole that is almost inconsequential to their profit margin. It's a "problem"…
Another example would be the entertainment industry. Or I guess advertising industry or sports team...
Creative or highly competitive. Because you can't hit it so big that the losses don't matter. You are only as good as your last hit film, tv show, or game win.
Google has this tremendous cash cow.
Warren Buffett has plenty of cash. But for him the game is taking that cash and trying to get more cash. (And of course keeping up the image of being Warren Buffett drives him as well). And he has competition for his investment dollars as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had typed up something similar already but abandoned the post. But that's pretty much exactly it. Google managed to build something early on that is difficult to compete with, and now they are resting on it. The company revenues are split up into 3 parts: search/ads, backbone internet, and "other". Where "other" is a tiny fraction of the whole that is almost inconsequential to their profit margin. It's a "problem"…
I've always had this theory that a company that operates as you say with the examples of SpaceX or Toyota, one that life is never easy for (that can't rest on their laurels) really operates in a way that is much more motivating. Another example would be the entertainment industry. Or I guess advertising industry or sports team... Creative or highly competitive. Because you can't hit it so big that the losses don't ma…
But then they succeeded so quickly that they haven't had that same level of hunger to actually do something risky that needed to succeed. Today google is just as likely to shut down an old project than to launch something new.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, there has always been people complaining in forums. I've seen steps to recover some of the lost stuff, but I no longer bother. My original account predates the Google acquisition and I lost everything when they made the username -> Google Account transition years ago. Probably my fault because I always decline these things until Google forces the integration upon us anyway.
you can keep saying no. they keep pleading for me to use my "real" name and I keep switching it back to my artist name. its amazing that they host video by artists and yet do not allow the artists to use their artist names. all in the name of stamping out comment wars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If I go to a viral video, and I see comments on it from people I actually KNOW, I personally think that would be really cool. That was completely impossible, the old way." I keep seeing companies pushing this idea on us, but I just don't get it. The math doesn't work. There are umpty millions of pieces of "content" that might be reviewed. I have at most a few hundred actual friends. (I imagine those who push beyond…
I think you're completely wrong. I share videos with my friends and family, and seeing their comments at the top of the list of comments on those videos would be great. Also, I could probably list 1,000 videos that most of us have seen. Never Going to Give You Up. Gangnam Style. The list goes on and on. And then there's professionally. I know hundreds of people from former and current jobs who tend to be interested i…
I've pretty much given up. Google has deleted my playlists and favorites countless times. Every time they try to integrate YouTube with one of their services/account management, I end up losing everything. My only consolation is that Google+ is accumulating a lot of vitriol and hate across the web. It's shaping up to be the most hated "social" product in the entire Internet.
"The most hated social product in the entire Internet" is a pretty big claim. I personally have never had a single problem with G+, though I've had plenty of issues with Facebook. My YouTube and G+ accounts merged just fine, and I've never lost a playlist, favorite, submission, comment, or anything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the thing that bothers/scares me the most about this balkanization of the internet that's happening. You end up getting forced into bubbles that someone else has decided you belong in. And if you don't know it's happening, you can't even try to stop it. For me, I have not found utility in the things that have been selected for me, so most of these services are becoming useless. All those "smartest guys in the…
> You end up getting forced into bubbles that someone else has decided you belong in. You are not forced into anything, if you don't want to be put into "bubbles" use other services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're completely wrong. I share videos with my friends and family, and seeing their comments at the top of the list of comments on those videos would be great. Also, I could probably list 1,000 videos that most of us have seen. Never Going to Give You Up. Gangnam Style. The list goes on and on. And then there's professionally. I know hundreds of people from former and current jobs who tend to be interested i…
I think you missed my point that you can only see comments that are made . Unless your friends and families have a grossly atypical comment rate, you're still not going to see very many things very often. It is well known that forums designed for interaction still have a terrible poster/lurker ratio, the internet at large is far worse.
But if you Share with a Community, and the people comment on the video, it would work.
Insert clever emoticon which indicates shrugging.
I'm frankly stunned to see people complaining about the death of the previous YouTube comment system. Remember that one insightful, helpful, or funny YouTube comment that you saw that one time? Me, either.