Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services • Hacker News Board

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#41

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 2:38 AM UTC

stevenj wrote: post #25

andrewljohnson wrote: post #24

Most businesses can't "die" suddenly. It's very hard to turn a $850,000,000 business into a $35,000,000 in just a couple of years, unless something truly catastrophic or industry-changing occurs. The exception to this rule is social internet companies. Social companies are built in a day and can die in a day - we've seen it happen again and again, and Facebook's scale is no protection. To beat Verizon, you need a net…

I think unseating Facebook is much harder than you think. Not impossible, but very hard. I'll make a friendly $100 wager with you that Google will not have more active users on Google+ than Facebook has -- as reported by each company, a reputable publication, or measured by a public analytics firm -- 5 years from now.

[deleted]

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#42

Post by knowtheory » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 2:39 AM UTC

DrCatbox wrote: post #31

knowtheory wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd put you on the losing end of those odds. Google's key to driving adoption is going to be integration of all of their services into Google+, which means that they have very natural and robust funnels for acquiring a userbase, so long as their tools are integrated properly. Given the money that Google is pouring into this, and the incentive structure for engineers and teams at Google, i have no doubt that they will…

'Social' is the new 'cloud' buzzword. What does it mean to have social products? To tap into a users social network? That is what Facebook offers to any company that wants, and that is why 2/3rds of websites now have a Like and Facebook Connect button on them, it is very easy for any service to attempt the social route by tapping into the thing that only Facebook so far has, the social network. Google cant engineer a…

Wait, why does Google have to do what Facebook has done to have a successful social platform?

Facebook's goal is to supposedly map out all real world social connections, and i would first say that such a goal is a pipe dream, and second that if you judge facebook by that criteria, that almost all services will fail to meet it.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#43

Post by nextparadigms » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 2:59 AM UTC

I find myself spending a lot of time in Google+ and eventually running out of content that I can see from my friends or even incoming shares. I want to discover new content and new people in Google+ the same way I discover it on Twitter.

So I hope Google will make the search bar work for content shared within Google+ as well, not just for people. Doing this would get people to spend even more time on Google+, reading other people's opinions or discovering their shares, and perhaps even meeting them through it.

I want to read more content from other people on Google+ and I can't right now because I don't really have a good way of finding them. I hope Google was already thinking of activating this, but they didn't because at launch there wouldn't have been much content anyway.

And before anyone starts saying I should use Sparks, it doesn't work the way I'm suggesting. Sparks is more like a Google search. What I'm asking for is searching within Google+ for shares and people, just like on Twitter.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#44

Post by Eliezer » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 3:12 AM UTC

You will hear nothing about Google+ a year from now. You heard it here... well, probably not first, but you heard it here.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#45

Post by CamperBob » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 3:34 AM UTC

stevenj wrote: post #25

andrewljohnson wrote: post #24

Most businesses can't "die" suddenly. It's very hard to turn a $850,000,000 business into a $35,000,000 in just a couple of years, unless something truly catastrophic or industry-changing occurs. The exception to this rule is social internet companies. Social companies are built in a day and can die in a day - we've seen it happen again and again, and Facebook's scale is no protection. To beat Verizon, you need a net…

I think unseating Facebook is much harder than you think. Not impossible, but very hard. I'll make a friendly $100 wager with you that Google will not have more active users on Google+ than Facebook has -- as reported by each company, a reputable publication, or measured by a public analytics firm -- 5 years from now.

I'll take some of that action, if we can stipulate that the particular service that beats them might not be called "Google+." Google's style is to zero in with artillery strikes rather than an all-out nuclear attack. Every time they reload and fire a new volley, they get a little closer to the target. Orkut, Buzz, Wave, and now Plus.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#46

Post by kmavm » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 3:59 AM UTC

nextparadigms wrote: post #17

bonch wrote: post #9

Just not interested in Google+. It was enough of a struggle to coax me onto Twitter and Facebook. I don't hear non-techies talking about Google+--it's all dedicated bloggers and people in the "Twittersphere" (ugh). Not to mention that I heard all sorts of revolutionary praise for Wave when it was released.

Did non-techies hear about Facebook in the first 2 years of its existence? Techies know about it first because they are up to date to such things. Once people on radio and TV start talking about it, they'll know about it, too. That's how the mainstream works, otherwise it wouldn't be called mainstream anymore.

> Did non-techies hear about Facebook in the first 2 years of its existence?

Every single human attending Harvard in 2005 heard of thefacebook, and almost all of them were active users. This pattern continued as it expanded to other colleges, and eventually high schools. Facebook had a steady, population-representative mix of non-technical users from birth; it was never techies'-little-secret in the way that Twitter, Foursquare, and Quora were.

Warning: I work at Facebook now, but did not back then. This is just my second-hand understanding.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#47

Post by wisty » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 4:20 AM UTC

stevenj wrote: post #25

andrewljohnson wrote: post #24

Most businesses can't "die" suddenly. It's very hard to turn a $850,000,000 business into a $35,000,000 in just a couple of years, unless something truly catastrophic or industry-changing occurs. The exception to this rule is social internet companies. Social companies are built in a day and can die in a day - we've seen it happen again and again, and Facebook's scale is no protection. To beat Verizon, you need a net…

I think unseating Facebook is much harder than you think. Not impossible, but very hard. I'll make a friendly $100 wager with you that Google will not have more active users on Google+ than Facebook has -- as reported by each company, a reputable publication, or measured by a public analytics firm -- 5 years from now.

I'll wager you that Facebook may have more active users, but Google+ will have more active users and perhaps more activity.

I'm betting that Google+ will get more than just the early adopters.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#48

Post by william42 » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 4:26 AM UTC

stevenj wrote: post #6

Thus far, I've only heard industry insiders and participants praise Google+. In technical fields, like medicine, or even computer science research, I'd pay close attention to such commenters. But a product like Google+ was made for the masses. Just like Google.com was. Just like Facebook was. So until my non-tech friends start praising Google+ as if it's a must-see movie, or a song I have to hear, or a restaurant I h…

That's because Google+ has only been released to industry insiders and participants, if I remember correctly.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#49

Post by roc » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 7:46 AM UTC

nrbafna wrote: post #22

Google+ does make everything fit in so well. 1) Picasa, just received a shot in the arm. Integrating it with Google+, would definitely see a surge in its adoption. Also, since people are going to use it anyways, they might seriously consider backing up all their images to Picasa. Fits right in with the Google's cloud philosophy. 2) Huddle - This is Google Talk for mobile done the right way. Given that iOS app is on t…

I've been wondering lately if Google killed Wave prematurely. If they'd polished the interface a bit more, Google+ notifications would've solved the problem of updates. They could also have dropped bot and widget support into Huddle. Imagine a robot that could parse a "what's for lunch" comment into a sort of multi-user UrbanSpoon widget with voting/vetos/suggestions/etc.

Re: Tom Anderson: Google+ makes Google a better, more integrated set of services

#50

Post by clawr » Sun, Jul 03, 2011, 7:47 AM UTC

Nemisis7654 wrote: post #36

Lewisham wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Invites were not random. Google chose those to invite.

Would you happen to know how they chose? I am just curious.

I work at Google. An invite form was sent to employees prior to launch.