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

121–130 of 182 posts

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#121

Post by lreeves »

pilif wrote: post #81
binaryorganic wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. They must have really backed themselves into a corner somehow when they were building Google Profiles. I. Will. Not. Open. A. Secondary. Account. Ever.

I had my Gmail account way before they even introduced Apps accounts, let alone before I migrated my company mail to Google Apps. So, let me tell you this: You made a good decision. While dealing with multiple accounts on the desktop is annoying, it's utterly terrible on mobile because their slow-as-hell multiple sign-in feature doesn't work on mobile . Yeah. While on the desktop it's annoying but not that much of a…

I actually keep Atomic Browser installed on my iOS devices, and sign in with my work account there and my personal GMail account in Safari.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#122

Post by joebadmo »

dewitt wrote: post #117
joebadmo wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Thanks, Dewitt! I love what you guys are doing, and I'm glad to hear some acknowledgement of an open and federated future for G+. I'm happy to be patient, but I was a bit worried since the launch seemed distinctly different in approach from Buzz and Wave. But I think nailing down the user experience first is probably a good idea.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#123

Post by finisterre »

0x12 wrote: post #108
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…

You can't simultaneously have an invite system and a huge marketing push. It's like pretending that you are classy and telling a lot of people that they are not part of the crowd you consider good enough to make it through the front door. You have one chance to launch a service like this for a large audience. If you want to do an invite only private beta to get the kinks out then you would probably have to do that un…

> You can't simultaneously have an invite system > and a huge marketing push.

I don't think Google has done a huge marketing push, yet, considering how big a product this is for them.

They've done little press and haven't bought advertising online or in the real world - something they did for Chrome. They've so far done pretty much the minimum a company of such scale could do for a product this big. It was inevitable that a lot of people would want to join as soon as they heard of Google's plans.

I have a feeling that the marketing push is very much still to come.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#124

Post by calloc »

muyuu wrote: post #97

Google+ first didn't let me to use a different name for my account, and then showed me a nice dialog, in words to this effect: "do you want to link Picasa to your account? (yes) (cancel Google+ account creation)" So long, Google+

Picasa is what is used for Google+'s photo backend. You are not required to share anything from Picasa on Google+ and vice-versa.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#126

Post by calloc »

I've been using Google+ since it was first made available, I've got may main personal account on there, and several accounts for fake persona's and a business account for my business (still hasn't been tagged or removed by Google for not being a real name).

The only people who I've seen are affected by the "nymwars" seem to be celebrity accounts or people that like to go by pen names on social networks. With my various fake accounts I have had no issues yet, most likely because they don't get a ton of traffic and fly under the radar. It is not like Facebook hasn't had these issues either, whereby they will lock people out of their account until they send in a photo ID (locking out out of your Facebook mail/text messaging stuff as well).

I keep hearing stories about how people consider it a desert or that certain articles and stories are claiming that there is 40% less activity. I've noticed that I have started to become more careful as to who gets to see my posts and if they are allowed to share them. More information is shared in specific circles rather than publicly. I've also found that there is much more engagement on Google+ than any other social service.

When I post something on Google+ I get more feedback, more people commenting on my posts and more people having intelligent discourse than on Facebook or Twitter, or even my blog. Since I can target specific circles I am able to categorise my friends based on what I think they would be interested in, so instead of having non-tech friends get techy stuff from me and thus becoming disinterested they only get my personal stuff that they might find interesting, like how it is going in my life.

Yes, Facebook has had that for a while as well, however it was always more tedious to set it up, get people into the various circles, and now that it has been made easier they have cocked it up royally:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3018403

For me so far Google+ has become more interesting, more targeted and has much less noise compared to the signal. Will that change as more people join? Maybe, I'm not so sure, as I think people will realise that with circles they don't have to include me in a conversation (nor will it show up in my stream) with a mutual friend... (public walls ...)

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#127

Post by ellyagg »

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…

If it's true that the widespread HN resentment over Google Apps[1] and other issues is overblown, then you must consider that the widespread HN excitement over Circles and privacy features is irrelevant. Regular users don't care.

[1] And you can count me as another victim, here. I'm frankly dumbfounded that they'd keep thumbing their noses at the users over this, and I can't believe they either 1) still didn't understand that this would be the first thing folks commented on or 2) don't think it's important. To me it just smacks of unprofessionalism.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#128

Post by ajross »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #120
ajross wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The point was more subtle than that. It's not merely "most people" in this case, it's a public account for a celebrity. The overwhelming majority of people, and essentially all of the target market, have no earthly idea what his real name is and don't care.

Regardless of what you think about whether this is a good or bad rule (and I tend to agree it's a bad one), no one is served under any interpretation of the rule by disallowing celebrities from posting under their stage names.

Basically, if it's an exception to the rule, then it's a sane and well-justified one. If it's a subtle edge case, then so be it. I think it makes very bad evidence of hypocrisy on Google's part.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#129

Post by toyg »

muyuu wrote: post #106
willy1234x1 wrote: post #72

Maybe I'm just missing something but does anyone else here not give a flying fuck about the "real name fiasco"? What's so damn bad about using your real name? Can't be an internet tough guy when you have to use your real name? The most I think all Google should do is allow you to use a screen name for following purposes but still show your real name as well (kind of how Twitter has the screen name and name fields.)

- Privacy considerations - Identity theft - Stalking

Yeah, because Facebook is SO private, and completely devoid of impostors and stalkers.

Honestly, if this is the worst that anti-googlers can come up with, well... it isn't much.

Re: Google+ Opens to All

#130

Post by brown9-2 »

Hisoka wrote: post #44
kadabra9 wrote: post #19

Too late, guys. Facebook is already copying the features that make G+ cool/useful (circles, etc), and the one big, inherent advantage you had in your favor (Your user base, e.g every Google account) you alienated by keeping it "invite only" for too long. Either open it to everyone sooner, or hold off on this prolonged "invite period" so you don't risk confusing / alienating people that want to try G+ but can't. G+ fe…

yup, I agree. Part of me thinks Google needs some crazy PR gimmick to get G+ long-term traction. You can't do with feature like Circles(I mean, seriously?) You're Google, go out and do something CRAZY that will get America talking about, and all the news outlet buzzing about it. I don't care if you're an engineer-oriented company. If you wanna compete with Facebook, do something absurd.

When has a PR gimmick ever translated into long-term success for a social network? I can't think of any instance of this.
Post reply on HN