Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
1–10 of 271 posts
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#2Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#3Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
Anecdotally, Google+ failed for me because I got stuck in an authentication loop for a business page. It wanted to verify the business, but the link to do so always errored out, which made it impossible to ever change the page content beyond what I initially put in. I stopped using both sides of it at that point, and it wouldn’t surprise me if others ran into similar rough edges. In true Google style, there was absolutely no route to support either.
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#4Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
After a brief recitation of facts it ends on a critical note, on par with the title:
> Social media consultant Zoe Cairns said she thought the network would have to grow its numbers quickly in order to prove itself to be a viable alternative to the giants.
> "It's going to need a lot of money ploughed into it," she said.
> "People are so used to social media being free. I think businesses might pay for it, but people are so used to having news at their fingertips for free."
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#5Not to dive into semantics, I guess it's more of a Reddit rival? Meaning that I would be happy if it can be a fairly good news aggregator, and it doesn't need a huge critical mass.
Facebook is for baby pictures of friends, angry old relatives and instant messenger for people that you want to keep at a certain distance :-)
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#6Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
Google+ only had that many users because many other Google properties (YouTube being the biggest) were lumped in together. I bet the majority of Google+ "users" weren't even aware that the platform existed.
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#7Thousands! Thousands of users, I say!
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#8Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
There are dozens of us! Dozens!
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#9Thousands! Thousands of users, I say!
hundreds of thousands at the moment
Re: Thousands flock to Wikipedia founder's 'Facebook rival'
#10Is that headline damning with faint praise? Mere "thousands" doesn't seem like enough to get critical mass on a social network. For comparison Google+ had something on the order of 300 million users and failed to get traction.
Google+ only had that many users because many other Google properties (YouTube being the biggest) were lumped in together. I bet the majority of Google+ "users" weren't even aware that the platform existed.
everyone I knew had a Google+ account and none of them knew it.