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

Google+ broke our trust

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 251 posts

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#241

Post by sesqu »

MicroBerto wrote: post #197
tedks wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem was the G+ was pitched as a social network. It grew, like a cancer, into some weird meta-project that defies description Really? It was a single sign-on system to Google properties, tied to a social networking thing. accounts.google.com came not far after plus.google.com. Google wanted to avoid becoming MySpace and wanted to mimic Facebook, and miscalculated slightly. Personally, I really like being able…

I agree on the real names. It truly cleaned up the nonsense and brings more peace of mind to those who scyually make YouTube money - the popular channel operators. We get way less idiocy now.

See, I don't see that as a user. The bad comments sections used to be full of bad puns and arguments, but now they're just smaller and full of contentless "watch this" mentions. On channels where the comments used to be good, they are now rare and inaccurate.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#243

Post by joeevans1000 »

wfjackson wrote: post #13

If there's one video that shows off the purposefully confusing Google+ and Youtube integration mess, its this one of a woman literally crying because of it. Warning: Strong language https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccxiwu4MaJs

I guess I can't comment on the video to support her.

I don't have google+.

In this case, google is creating a system where eventually the only discussion that can go on within the system will be by those who have google+. Those who disagree with google+ enough to not have it will not be able to participate in the discussion. I'm sure there are places and ways one can, but not in the comments to this youtube video.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#244

Post by joeevans1000 »

Htsthbjig wrote: post #8

What made Google special in the past was having principles and walking the talk. Those days when Altavista wanted to force people into watching noisy pop up advertisements with annoying colors before you could search anything, and this small company decided to just display text. The days when everybody was onto portals to make the web enclosed inside gatekeepers hand and Google brought freedom. Those days are over. J…

I downloaded the new Firefox and made DuckDuckGo my default search engine in it, and it's actually working great. I figure I'll keep chrome going as well, but I'm starting the weaning process. The new Firefox is much better than the one out a couple years ago. Actually, it's very good. The google+ nagging freaked me out, as well as the fact that I somehow have thought it's been ok for them to scan.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#245

Post by cromwellian »

nacs wrote: post #229
cromwellian wrote: post #196

I think it is pretty refreshing for an executive to be self critical and admit big mistakes. Sergey sounded authentic in that interview. Scott Forestall was axed for Apple Maps, but seriously, you rewrite a Maps service from the ground up from scratch and race to release it in iOS6, of course it's going to be beta quality for a long time, since these things take time to mature. I highly doubt the decision to include…

Agreed on the admitting mistakes part but mentioning Scott Forstall as an example doesn't follow. From what I've read, Scott Forestall was fired less for the issues in the Maps application and more for his refusal to sign any sort of apology afterwards for its shortcomings. I'm sure there were other internal factors for his firing but his refusal to publicly admit a mistake was a significant part.

Maybe he felt he didn't need to apologize because he was forced to rush and release in iOS6?

What if the following conversation happened internally:

Scott: "Maps is not ready" Cook: "Maps must ship as part of iOS6, it's the headline feature. We are committed to this time table." Scott: "But there are lots of issues, lots of bugs." Cook: "Fix as many as possible before release, but we are shipping."

Then, after the fiasco, he is asked to apologize, wouldn't you feel that the people who didn't take your advice should be the ones to apologize?

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#246

Post by joeevans1000 »

We are google's product. We are bundled and cleaned and sold to advertisers. The google+ process was just a plan to tell their customers that they had a nice, leaner, more refined product. Previously, their customers were complaining that the product wasn't as verifiable. This is a bit like the organic food certification process.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#247

Post by brownbat »

brownbat wrote: post #230

Using and loving G+ and Hangouts to this day. I like how easy it is to get a group chat or a video chat going in the browser, and I like the increased control over sharing I have, especially relative to FB. (I can even share with people who don't want to log in because they hate the service. My FB friends cannot.) I'm trying to sift through the complaints to see if they're relevant to me, but haven't had much luck so…

I suspected there weren't very many legitimate criticisms, that this was mostly emotional iconoclasm.

Silent downvotes are a sort of confirming evidence.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#248

Post by taejo »

maxerickson wrote: post #152
taejo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail insists on respelling the name of one of my contacts; it's only one letter different, but it's slightly embarrassing that I seem not to know his name after eight years of working together.

Having never experienced anything like this from Gmail, I wonder if you have the misspelling stored in a contact. I even have a sort of contrary anecdote, I added an accent to a contact name a few years ago and it has always just worked.

The misspelling seems to come from a (automatically created somehow?) Google+ profile.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#249

Post by mreiland »

cerberusss wrote: post #234
mreiland wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could find a good alternative to gmail, I'd take it in a second. Over the years, I've really started to dislike gmail, and most of google's services.

Did you mean a good _free_ alternative? Or just a good alternative?

Just a good alternative, I'm willing to pay, I just get scared sometimes that I'm going to lose out on quality by moving away from gmail.

But the more time goes on, the more I hate the interface changes to gmail, and IMAP to my local client is something that can happen with just about any service.

Re: Google+ broke our trust

#250

Post by MicroBerto »

sesqu wrote: post #241
MicroBerto wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree on the real names. It truly cleaned up the nonsense and brings more peace of mind to those who scyually make YouTube money - the popular channel operators. We get way less idiocy now.

See, I don't see that as a user. The bad comments sections used to be full of bad puns and arguments, but now they're just smaller and full of contentless "watch this" mentions. On channels where the comments used to be good, they are now rare and inaccurate.

The "watch this" mentions are something different - that's Google's way of trying to make things go viral (or something like that) on their social feeds, and I believe is completely unnecessary.
Post reply on HN