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

Google+ Opens to All

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 182 posts

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#111

Post by belthesar »

hasanove wrote: post #53

I find it interesting that out of ~50 comments in supposedly early adopter crowd, there is not a single positive comment about Google+. As much as I want them to succeed, this looks like a pretty bad sign. And yes, I am one of those who cannot participate with my Google Apps account.

I really wanted to like G+ too, but I think most news.yc users have migrated their email in one forum or another to Google Apps... muchly because it was the perfect thing for us bleeding edge users who fell in love with Gmail to be able to use a properly branded address for our mail.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#112

Post by Jun8 »

I didn't have a bad experience with G+. I didn't have a uniquely good experience either, though. My only friends over there are techie types. For my circles, after the initial chatter, the postings have decreased significantly, and coming to HN is better than the technology news posted there.

Many people talk about how quickly G+ achieved N million users, but the import part is the engagement from users. I don't think G+ has achieved anything like that yet. Many people start using it due to the integration with Gmail but then just stop and go back to FB and Twitter.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#114

Post by spokengent »

Kylekramer wrote: post #80

The fact that dozens of comments think 90 days is too long for a service to be invite only shows we are really in a instant gratification news bubble here. 90 days! People act like we are talking about Chinese Democracy or Duke Nukem Forever here (not to mention that for about 80 of those days getting in was merely a five minute search process for anyone who really cared). The majority of comments here are about too…

Just FWIW, I used Google+ for 2 weeks or so. Then I got bored and went back to Facebook. I think 90 days is certainly enough time to lose any early momentum you had.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#115

Post by ShawnJG »

willy1234x1 wrote: post #92
Kylekramer wrote: post #80

The fact that dozens of comments think 90 days is too long for a service to be invite only shows we are really in a instant gratification news bubble here. 90 days! People act like we are talking about Chinese Democracy or Duke Nukem Forever here (not to mention that for about 80 of those days getting in was merely a five minute search process for anyone who really cared). The majority of comments here are about too…

I think people are convinced that services must blow up immediately to be relevant. They forget that even Facebook took time to grow. I remember when it first opened to people outside of colleges and I was an early adopter, there were literally maybe only 30 people on Facebook I knew. I think Google+ is going to be a success and the reason for that is because of the integration with other Google services, as the plat…

i think you hit the button. there are a large group of people who are only aware of G+ in the periphery. But as people migrate to G+ and android phones become more prevalent, people will go with "integrated ease" it def has enough features so far to pique the layman's interest. not to mention as lil kids get on the internet do they want to be on their "parent's social site" or go to the hip new one?

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#116

Post by guelo »

ineedtosleep wrote: post #48
xnxn wrote: post #41

I'm alarmed that the comments here are so bitter. Am I the only one who's had a positive experience with G+ so far? (Is my perception rose-tinted because I really, really want Facebook to die?) The new Hangout stuff is great, and the addition of screen sharing has now obviated my need to use Skype. Maybe when On Air opens up I'll be able to broadcast my programming sessions.

Overall, (and, forgive me, since I'm going relatively OT here) I've noticed a lot of hostility towards Google in every Google post. I've not been with HN for too long, so I don't know if this is what partially defines HN, but I'm starting to get irked by it.

I think a lot of it has to do with the HN love for Apple. HN used to love Google until they became Apple's enemy #1.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#117

Post by dewitt »

joebadmo wrote: post #99
Kylekramer wrote: post #80

The fact that dozens of comments think 90 days is too long for a service to be invite only shows we are really in a instant gratification news bubble here. 90 days! People act like we are talking about Chinese Democracy or Duke Nukem Forever here (not to mention that for about 80 of those days getting in was merely a five minute search process for anyone who really cared). The majority of comments here are about too…

I agree. What do you think are the important issues? Mine are: - APIs (looks like there's significant progress) - Open-source/open standards/federation (nothing yet) (I think the second one would really sort of take care of the nymwars and the Google Apps issues, too.) I've got a ton of feature requests, but those two are what I would consider serious/disruptive.

Regarding the first (APIs), yes, we recently launched several Google+ Platform features, such as phase one of the Google+ API last week and today's announcement of the Google+ Hangouts API. Visit http://developers.google.com/+ to get started.

Regarding the second ("open"), we're taking our usual approach, building on open protocols wherever we can, and creating them when we have to. In this case, Activity Streams and Portable Contacts, with no doubt more to come as we launch new platform features.

As far as federation goes, love it, though one step at a time of course. Let's get the product itself off the ground and stable (today's open signups is a big step toward that) and we'll see what people want to do with it as a platform.

Thanks, Joe! The feedback is always appreciated.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#118

Post by ajross »

syeren wrote: post #87
andrewcooke wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's still not been fixed, has it?

I find this quite funny considering they are doing a world-wide unveiling of one of their new Hangout features with such a profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109351399938437494273/posts

You're missing the point, I think. "will.i.am" is a stage name, not an anonymous handle. Whatever you think of the validity of the rule, surely you agree that its spirit is to make sure you can always clearly associate the account with the real person it belongs to. Surely you agree that the existing name achieves that better than "William James Adams, Jr.", right?

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#119

Post by ajross »

brador wrote: post #83
ajross wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow your logic there. If you don't trust Google with your GMail account, why is losing it such a risk? Use a different provider or host your own mail if that's a serious concern. If you do trust them with your mail, then why don't you trust the same decision makers with your friend list? It's pretty clear to me that the account freezing thing was a mistake, and one acknowledged by everyone, including Googl…

For the record I consider Facebooks UI dated. It's ripe for a serious competitor to come along and take a slice. GMail by itself is fine. I do nothing that would cause it to be shutdown and I have not heard of anyones gmail being shutdown by using it. What I do have a problem with is taking on additional services which add little value to me personally, yet massively increase the risk of my very important email accou…

With all due respect, that makes no sense whatsoever. You're saying you trust Google never to shut down your gmail account under any circumstances imaginable, except for the case where you get your name wrong in google+, in which case you totally don't trust them at all and would never recommend using them.

... wat? Either you trust Google or you don't. What does Google+ have to do with it (other than being the handle on which you've hung your argument)?

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#120

Post by Dylan16807 »

ajross wrote: post #118
syeren wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this quite funny considering they are doing a world-wide unveiling of one of their new Hangout features with such a profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109351399938437494273/posts

You're missing the point, I think. "will.i.am" is a stage name, not an anonymous handle. Whatever you think of the validity of the rule, surely you agree that its spirit is to make sure you can always clearly associate the account with the real person it belongs to. Surely you agree that the existing name achieves that better than "William James Adams, Jr.", right?

They don't accept "the name most people know you by" either unless you're special enough. Look at Skud. http://infotrope.net/2011/07/22/ive-been-suspended-from-goog...
Post reply on HN