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

What did Google+ get right?

write.as

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#31

Post by fold_left »

arkitaip wrote: post #3

It's only now that I use Twitter on a daily basis that I realize the problem of having a single feed for your private life, work, hobbies, etc. It just doesn't work and is one of the main reasons why I unfollow people. I think the underlying functionality of circles and collections are a must but maybe they can be implemented in a better and easier to use way.

An option that can achieve something like circles on Twitter is to not follow any accounts but instead assign them to Twitter's "lists". You can create lists for work, hobbies etc and view whichever one you're interested in at a given time.

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#32

Post by ocdtrekkie »

gipp wrote: post #25
40dslf wrote: post #4

The website felt slow and bloated performance-wise, despite the design being simple. YouTube feels like that now too.

What feels slow in YT for you? I've never noticed myself being bothered by it.

The top question you should ask is what browser you use. If you use Chrome, and the parent uses Firefox, that's why. (Not because Firefox is slow, but because Google uses a lot of Chrome-specific hacks.)

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#33

Post by eitland »

WorldMaker wrote: post #13
arkitaip wrote: post #3

It's only now that I use Twitter on a daily basis that I realize the problem of having a single feed for your private life, work, hobbies, etc. It just doesn't work and is one of the main reasons why I unfollow people. I think the underlying functionality of circles and collections are a must but maybe they can be implemented in a better and easier to use way.

I find Mastodon's Content Warnings an interesting/useful model for mixing such content, and it's interesting the number of folks I follow that are falling into a "CW everything" philosophy for this sort of reason. The "Show More" to expand a subject/topic is an interesting "pull" mechanic, as contrasted to Circles' larger focus on "push".

> I find Mastodon's Content Warnings an interesting/useful model for mixing such content, ...

Same here.

I also hope circles and collections will come to the fediverse. Pixelfed already had circles as one of four options for what to focus on in coming iterations.

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#35

Post by eitland »

bilalq wrote: post #14
eitland wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for that. I host it with write.as, and I guess they might have some scaling problems or something. It is a just a small (but very cool IMO) startup.

Hey, I'm pretty sure the parent poster was referring to Google+, not the site you wrote on.

Thanks, good to know, but it still doesn't make sense to me :-)

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#36

Post by ocdtrekkie »

jpswade wrote: post #19

The question is, what problem did Google+ solve?

Google didn't have a social network, and their competitors did. /s

Seriously though, I really liked the Twitter-esque default-public interaction model, but with long form posts. Just doubling Twitter's character count has helped a ton with this. Public interaction still feels like an oddity on Facebook.

And then the ability to divide out people I was following was super nice, although I eventually filtered it down to two groups: One which I read religiously and had notifications of in my email, and one I would scroll through when I was bored and had time.

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#37

Post by LanceH »

erikig wrote: post #30

Circles Peoples relationships and interests tend to be grouped by their circles. Whatsapp and Facebook groups seem to understand this which is why they are soo sticky.

This. I have family, military friends and recruiters and I don't want those conversations crossing over. With facebook, I have no idea what will leak across various groups of friends.

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#39

Post by ocdtrekkie »

WorldMaker wrote: post #13
arkitaip wrote: post #3

It's only now that I use Twitter on a daily basis that I realize the problem of having a single feed for your private life, work, hobbies, etc. It just doesn't work and is one of the main reasons why I unfollow people. I think the underlying functionality of circles and collections are a must but maybe they can be implemented in a better and easier to use way.

I find Mastodon's Content Warnings an interesting/useful model for mixing such content, and it's interesting the number of folks I follow that are falling into a "CW everything" philosophy for this sort of reason. The "Show More" to expand a subject/topic is an interesting "pull" mechanic, as contrasted to Circles' larger focus on "push".

I don't mind CWs as much since they finally added a global "show all" setting you can set in your profile. There's definitely some nice uses beyond "trigger warnings", like keeping a long post from dominating your feed view, or as a spoiler tag for discussing movies.

Re: What did Google+ get right?

#40

Post by CodeCube »

LanceH wrote: post #37
erikig wrote: post #30

Circles Peoples relationships and interests tend to be grouped by their circles. Whatsapp and Facebook groups seem to understand this which is why they are soo sticky.

This. I have family, military friends and recruiters and I don't want those conversations crossing over. With facebook, I have no idea what will leak across various groups of friends.

I 100% agree, however I really didn't like manually curating those circles ... I share a relatively diverse set of things/interests, so would have loved to leave it up to the other party which facet of my "feed" they could have subscribed to.

This isn't my use case, but a perfect example is people with kids. They're gonna share pictures and stuff of their kids, but as I'm sure you've seen, tons of people make comments like, "I wish I could just filter out pictures of babies and dogs!".

Post reply on HN