Live data from Hacker News

Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

singularityhub.com

51–60 of 155 posts

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#51
post #25

The Google+ circles concept is powerful and easy to use. It represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking. If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform. Unfortunately for Facebook, moving to this new paradigm will not be possible overnigh…

In fact, Facebook lists already do everything he praises Circles for in this article. They might even do a little more (e.g. share with List A, excluding anyone in List B). As he correctly notes later in the article, the lists feature is not prominent on Facebook, and therefore few use it (or maybe few people actually want it?). But it definitely will not require a major architectural overhaul by Facebook.

Lists are not available on the Android app (not sure about iOS).

I think the reason it isn't prominent is because it's not the direction the company wants to go. Every since Twitter became popular Facebook moved to become more like Twitter; more public and less private. They stuck the list feature in to placate those complaining about the removal of privacy but they never really wanted people to use it. Now with Google+ taking over the area of private social networking it would be interesting to see if Facebook does an about face and goes back in this direction.

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#52

I don't have a G+ account, so forgive me the question: since everything seems to be cataloged based on circles where you put people, how does it work for unapproved followers? Is there an 'empty' circle for them?

No. They will read only things you post to Public, and not to a specific circle. You will not read any of their posts.

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#53

The Google+ circles concept is powerful and easy to use. It represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking. If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform. Unfortunately for Facebook, moving to this new paradigm will not be possible overnigh…

[deleted]

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#54
post #25

The Google+ circles concept is powerful and easy to use. It represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking. If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform. Unfortunately for Facebook, moving to this new paradigm will not be possible overnigh…

In fact, Facebook lists already do everything he praises Circles for in this article. They might even do a little more (e.g. share with List A, excluding anyone in List B). As he correctly notes later in the article, the lists feature is not prominent on Facebook, and therefore few use it (or maybe few people actually want it?). But it definitely will not require a major architectural overhaul by Facebook.

[deleted]

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#55

I don't have a G+ account, so forgive me the question: since everything seems to be cataloged based on circles where you put people, how does it work for unapproved followers? Is there an 'empty' circle for them?

You can share with them by making your post "Public". Conversely, there's a wild-west "Incoming" section you can browse which contains posts by everyone that has put you in a circle (whether you put them in a circle or not).

To be clear: it's asymmetric so you don't have to "approve" followers or not. Feel free to put anyone in your circles, and you'll see their posts if they make them public, or if they post them to a circle they've put you in previously.

You get notifications when people add you to a circle, so you have the opportunity to add them to a circle if you want, but it's not required. Whether it's socially expected (as it seems it used to be on Twitter), is something of a debate among G+ users currently.

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#56
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, Facebook lists already do everything he praises Circles for in this article. They might even do a little more (e.g. share with List A, excluding anyone in List B). As he correctly notes later in the article, the lists feature is not prominent on Facebook, and therefore few use it (or maybe few people actually want it?). But it definitely will not require a major architectural overhaul by Facebook.

Lists are not available on the Android app (not sure about iOS). I think the reason it isn't prominent is because it's not the direction the company wants to go. Every since Twitter became popular Facebook moved to become more like Twitter; more public and less private. They stuck the list feature in to placate those complaining about the removal of privacy but they never really wanted people to use it. Now with Goog…

it's not the direction the company wants to go

Nor has it ever been. While lists might appear to work now, I would not at all be surprised if lists are a leaky abstraction with all sorts of holes that would require the codebase rearchitecting that the original story believes.

When you have such a fundamental design decision baked into everything you've ever done, it can't change overnight. Perhaps they've been working on it for months or years, but certainly its only in the last year that anyone has been talking about this problem earnestly.

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#57

The Google+ circles concept is powerful and easy to use. It represents the defining, foundational difference between Google´s and Facebook´s vision for social networking. If this new model takes off with users, then Facebook will find itself in the uncomfortable position of having to replicate these features within its own platform. Unfortunately for Facebook, moving to this new paradigm will not be possible overnigh…

Facebook has "circles" but they are called "groups." I have sources that say, unofficially that: 1) They were not blindsided at all. They worked hard to compete on major features before g+ ever came out. 2) "Groups" has more or less similar functionality, and the feature is known to have a poor UI right now. The point though is that FB thought about this and even though they aren't up to the same polish with that fea…

Is it really just UI polish? Google+ makes you choose who you're posting to on every post. Does Facebook? Isn't that a pretty big difference; on Facebook it is an optional entity that you must seek out and on Google+ it is a feature built into the posting architecture. You cannot post to Google+ without choosing a circle (even Public is presented as being a circle, reiterating the importance of the concept).

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#58
post #36

Leaving the emotion of Google+ being awesome out - what is preventing facebook from copying this? They have a huge number of users who are not going to leave overnight. Facebook we all know can turn on a dime to get products/features out. If these features are really that sought after and good they could just implement them and give it to their users. Why won't that work? Also facebook is a platform as much as a soci…

Facebook has a recent history of bad products. Their last hit was the Like button and how long ago was that now?

Re: Google+ is Awesome. Facebook Maimed, Twitter Mortally Wounded?

#59
post #54
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, Facebook lists already do everything he praises Circles for in this article. They might even do a little more (e.g. share with List A, excluding anyone in List B). As he correctly notes later in the article, the lists feature is not prominent on Facebook, and therefore few use it (or maybe few people actually want it?). But it definitely will not require a major architectural overhaul by Facebook.

[deleted]

[deleted]
Post reply on HN