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

Using Google without a Google+ profile

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 284 posts

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#21

Post by JoshTriplett »

marbletiles wrote: post #5

It's incredible how lightly they have thrown away the Google+ Account For Everything stance given how merciless they were in imposing it at the time. The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down. Kudos to them, but a lot of pain could have been avoided if they did all this listening back then, instead of waiting until their thing was clearly dead.

> The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down.

This isn't past-tense yet. Until this change, which isn't fully deployed yet (http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2015/07/youtube-comments.... , "in the coming weeks"), YouTube still requires a G+ account to comment or upload videos.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#22

Post by mkozlows »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #15
marbletiles wrote: post #5

It's incredible how lightly they have thrown away the Google+ Account For Everything stance given how merciless they were in imposing it at the time. The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down. Kudos to them, but a lot of pain could have been avoided if they did all this listening back then, instead of waiting until their thing was clearly dead.

Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy. Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out…

G+ has not required a real name for a while now.

The problem with a profile that spans unrelated services is that your persona on one shouldn't necessarily be tied to your persona on another; Google Accounts with different public-facing per-service personas are okay in a way that a single public-facing persona spanning all services isn't.

But it's still an underlying single Google Account, so Google gets its unified view of what you do, which is what they care about.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#23

Post by pachydermic »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #15
marbletiles wrote: post #5

It's incredible how lightly they have thrown away the Google+ Account For Everything stance given how merciless they were in imposing it at the time. The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down. Kudos to them, but a lot of pain could have been avoided if they did all this listening back then, instead of waiting until their thing was clearly dead.

Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy. Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out…

Eh I'm not sure about that. I think the real problem is that it was clunky and made people mess with something that they had no interest in using.

It was a weirdly forcing move which reminded everyone how much power Google wields in this kind of user/company relationship. People are probably generally okay with how that works, but only if they aren't made painfully aware of it (kind of like DRM - just look at Steam for an example of that).

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#24

Post by bad_user »

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #15
marbletiles wrote: post #5

It's incredible how lightly they have thrown away the Google+ Account For Everything stance given how merciless they were in imposing it at the time. The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down. Kudos to them, but a lot of pain could have been avoided if they did all this listening back then, instead of waiting until their thing was clearly dead.

Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy. Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out…

The Nymwars is why Google+ lost, but they'll never admit it.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#25

Post by theseatoms »

mkozlows wrote: post #22
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy. Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out…

G+ has not required a real name for a while now. The problem with a profile that spans unrelated services is that your persona on one shouldn't necessarily be tied to your persona on another; Google Accounts with different public-facing per-service personas are okay in a way that a single public-facing persona spanning all services isn't. But it's still an underlying single Google Account, so Google gets its unified…

> G+ has not required a real name for a while now.

Which is why he said, "Had they stopped the delusion from the outset ... "

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#26

Post by mkozlows »

uniformlyrandom wrote: post #14
beambot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grumble grumble... Google Reader... grumble.

The only social network from Google that had a chance... before they killed it off.

Google Reader never had many users. Feedly claims to have captured 80% of the Reader userbase when it shut down, and they have 15 million users. That is incredibly small by the standards of social networks, much smaller than even the pessimistic active-user estimates for G+.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#27

Post by msandford »

chc wrote: post #17
msandford wrote: post #9

Google's new motto: "Don't be evil, but only after trying really hard to be so, and then grudgingly accepting that perhaps your users have alternatives that they might avail themselves of, and capitulate" It's not as catchy, but perhaps a little more honest.

Your system of morality has an astonishingly low bar for "evil" if "requiring a Google+ account for access to a service" qualifies. I don't think something that harmless would go past "somewhat dickish" for most people. If that's evil, what's the word you use for people who kick puppies or otherwise cause harm to the world?

Is outing someone against their will and possibly ruining their life merely "somewhat dickish"?

http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-outed-me/

I'm not saying that annoying people by forcing G+/YT integration is evil. But presuming that an annoyance to you is an annoyance to all is faulty.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#28

Post by anon1385 »

chc wrote: post #17
msandford wrote: post #9

Google's new motto: "Don't be evil, but only after trying really hard to be so, and then grudgingly accepting that perhaps your users have alternatives that they might avail themselves of, and capitulate" It's not as catchy, but perhaps a little more honest.

Your system of morality has an astonishingly low bar for "evil" if "requiring a Google+ account for access to a service" qualifies. I don't think something that harmless would go past "somewhat dickish" for most people. If that's evil, what's the word you use for people who kick puppies or otherwise cause harm to the world?

In my opinion the use of 'dark patterns' to trick people into signing up to your money making service is 'evil'. The fact that there are worse things in the world doesn't change the fact that they were deceiving people for profit.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#29

Post by mkozlows »

bad_user wrote: post #24
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy. Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out…

The Nymwars is why Google+ lost, but they'll never admit it.

Facebook has, and has long had, a real name policy. If you want a reason why Facebook succeeded and G+ didn't, you'll need something that's actually different between them.

Re: Using Google without a Google+ profile

#30

Post by helly »

To me, the UI of Google+ feels so bulky and slow. Everything seems to be out of place.

It's a mystery to me, whom they are targeting.

Does anybody like their UI? If so, what device are you using? What do you think of FB vs G+?

I mainly use Firefox on the Desktop. And Facebook is somewhat ok. G+ feels completely out of sync.

Post reply on HN