Please keep in mind that Compete's data is from ISP data, so any http request to plus.google.com will count as a visitor. Which is why sites like, atdmt.com [1], have more "visitors" than google plus. I wouldn't trust compete's data for Google vs Linkedin because, the "uniques" could be coming from integrations with other google properties.
Google+ grows 43% in June
71–80 of 190 posts
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#72Given the way Google has been using high-pressure onboarding through several of their existing customer bases, I'm not surprised. And "visitors" likely counts people who got linked to a single post.
It's akin to a grocer refusing cash and instead only accepting payments made with their branded store card, for the customer's benefit. I'm surprised there hasn't been a legal challenge to this.
Not sure why you have been downvoted.
What Google is doing is very much reminiscent of what got Microsoft into so much trouble. Using a monopoly in one area to extend into another.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#73Sigh. We're drawing conclusions from Compete again? I've said this before and I'll say it again; using Compete for quantitative traffic comparisons is flawed, particularly with social sites that utilize embeddable content. Their data has been proven wrong countless times. Until recently, Compete claimed Reddit ( http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/ ) had less traffic than Digg ( http://siteanalytics.compete.c…
Seconded. Compete's numbers are just made up. I know for sure they are off by more than an order of magnitude for reddit (or at least were a year ago).
Compete's numbers are pretty good, you just have to understand the source. Digg showed more traffic, because Compete's datasource is US ISP logs, and any site with a digg button was added to digg's traffic.
The comparing reddit/digg on compete doesn't make much sense because of the digg button penetration. Just like comparing linkedin to google plus is stupid because many google properties make requests to plus.google.com.
Compete is a valuable tool, you just need to learn how to use it appropriately. Learn when it is reasonable to compare sites using it.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#74Yes, but I know dozens of people on LinkedIn. I know one active Google+ user and he's a bit of a Google fanboy to begin with. None of the non-techie people I know use Google+ or even mention it at all.
Obviously anecdotal. One explanation might be G+ international popularity. A quick look at "what's hot" and you'll see plenty of center and eastern asian names on the comments. The Android developer relations team makes weekly public hangouts in different time zones. I tried a few different ones out of curiosity and noticed that both the Indian and Brazilian ones are much more popular than the american hangout (which…
> One explanation might be G+ international popularity
Google have been doing a TON of PR in Japan. They're doing a collaboration[0] with Japan's top J-Pop group (AKB48, with 200+ members) where they gave them all high-end Samsung phones and G+ accounts to post on. Some popular members used to post on Twitter and Ameblo, but this has extended to all members. They've also done exclusive G+ live streams of concerts, and when the group had their yearly popularity contest, Google+ had a live stream with live +1 buttons that graphed the mood over time[1].
I imagine they've also been recruiting other celebrities in Japan to drive adoption.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#75Sigh. We're drawing conclusions from Compete again? I've said this before and I'll say it again; using Compete for quantitative traffic comparisons is flawed, particularly with social sites that utilize embeddable content. Their data has been proven wrong countless times. Until recently, Compete claimed Reddit ( http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/ ) had less traffic than Digg ( http://siteanalytics.compete.c…
Agreed. According to one of Google's own services, google+ is pretty much dead: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=google+plus&graph=wee... compare with fb: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=facebook&graph=weekly... edit: thank you downvoters for illustrating the bias on HN. A fake stats piece promoting google as #1 on the frontpage? This place is turning into /. but with more google employees. I'm out.
if you look the number on the axis they are pretty much the same, but facebook didnt have any spike...
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seconded. Compete's numbers are just made up. I know for sure they are off by more than an order of magnitude for reddit (or at least were a year ago).
Most of the traffic tracking on the web involves plugins (generally in the form of a toolbar). I don't know about you guys, but I haven't had a 3rd party toolbar in my browser interface in a long time. Compete, Alexa, etc. they're all tracking people who don't understand technology.
Compete buys samples of traffic from ISPs as its primary datasource. Your toolbar theory is incorrect.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think G+ is going to worm its way in by offering add-ons that actually draw people in. The two major examples for me are Hangouts and the fact that G+ posts from 'important' people appear in Google News rollups about a particular story. Hangouts are really the only reason I've ever seen a non-techie use G+, and they work really well. People seem to try Skype and then realize that there are weird rules about having…
I'm also seeing more google results to G+ pages instead of the wikipedia page when searching for names, famous people, topics, places and so on. Coincidence?
Are you seeing them as organic search results, or as "social search" features added into the mix?
I can't say I've seen a lot of G+ pages as organic results, but they do seem to feel free to inject links to social media profiles when they're related in some way to a search result.
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#78Wow. Lots of impressions here. MySpace is so small now! And shrinking! Let us never forget that history. Tumblr and pinterest are adding a lot fewer users than I thought. Gosh just look at the page. Google+ looks very clean and beautiful compared to Facebook these days. I'm reminded of when everybody used to say "Facebook looks very clean and beautiful compared to MySpace these days". Google has a big leg up here as…
> MySpace is so small now! And shrinking! Let us never forget that history.
So telling that you ask me not to forget MySpace's history, but Friendster is no longer mentioned - so I guess this means that we only remember one social network back ;)
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#79Somewhat off-topic, but this has been bugging me for years: for countries that use , instead of . in decimal numbers, how do they pronounce it? ie For the number 12.3 million, I could say "twelve point three million" or "twelve dot three million." For 12,3 million, do you say "twelve comma three million"?
Yes, in Norwegian you would say "tolv komma tre millioner".
Of course if I'm speaking English I would use "point".
Re: Google+ grows 43% in June
#80Wow. Lots of impressions here. MySpace is so small now! And shrinking! Let us never forget that history. Tumblr and pinterest are adding a lot fewer users than I thought. Gosh just look at the page. Google+ looks very clean and beautiful compared to Facebook these days. I'm reminded of when everybody used to say "Facebook looks very clean and beautiful compared to MySpace these days". Google has a big leg up here as…
First, the OA's comparison is meaningless. It focuses on vanity metrics rather than engagement or retention. A lot is written on that topic, so I won't repeat (see Tim Ferris: http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/05/19/vanity-metri... ). This article is excellent optimization for link baiting. And it doesn't matter because most of these sites don't compete against each other. Each of these media sites has a diff…
Claims of G+'s amazing growth always looks silly when I run this bookmarked Insights:
http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=Google%20Plus%2CIns...