# I wished more people used Google+



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

Because it's about a billion times better than fucking Facebook.

That is all.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 5, 2012)

Not using either works pretty well, though.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 5, 2012)

do you no longer wish this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2012)

http://www.rba.co.uk/wordpress/2012/12/04/another-reason-to-say-no-to-google/


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 5, 2012)

It's only better because most people who currently use Facebook don't use it yet.


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> http://www.rba.co.uk/wordpress/2012/12/04/another-reason-to-say-no-to-google/


Words usually work well with a link. I took a look anyway and it's hardly the most persuasive argument to stay away from Google+, her main complaint being that she couldn't be bothered to turn off a feature.


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

bi0boy said:


> It's only better because most people who currently use Facebook don't use it yet.


No, the layout and functionality is better.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2012)

she's also posted this little gem

http://www.rba.co.uk/wordpress/2012/01/30/and-the-next-google-killer-is-google/


----------



## stuff_it (Dec 5, 2012)

editor said:


> Because it's about a billion times better than fucking Facebook.
> 
> That is all.


I know but so few people use it I barely ever look.


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> she's also posted this little gem
> 
> http://www.rba.co.uk/wordpress/2012/01/30/and-the-next-google-killer-is-google/


I've no idea who she is or why you hold her words in such regard, but if you can't be bothered to describe what the link is about then I can't be arsed to look at it.


----------



## Manter (Dec 5, 2012)

is is very well laid out.  The tumbleweed scoots down the halls completely unobstructed


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

stuff_it said:


> I know but so few people use it I barely ever look.


It's particularly good for photographers.





> Photographers in particular have embraced the social network with enthusiasm, making use of the way it presents photos within news feeds and the integrated lightbox that makes it easy to browse entire galleries. This has led to not only grassroots-organized Google+ photo walks — meet ups of like-minded photographers who go out in the field and take photos together — but also a Google+ specific conference that is bringing amateur and professional photographers to San Francisco this week. “It’s exploded,” said conference organizer Scott Kelby about photographs flocking to Google+. “I’ve never seen anything like it.”
> http://gigaom.com/2012/05/22/google-plus-social-photos/


The events interface is much nicer on Google+ too but for now I'm still sticking with Facebook as that has far more people on it.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 5, 2012)

I do like Google + and use it fairly regularly - not enough people I know use it regularly though


----------



## marty21 (Dec 5, 2012)

I did share this thread on Google + though

seemed appropriate


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

marty21 said:


> I did share this thread on Google + though
> 
> seemed appropriate


Let me +1 that emotion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2012)

editor said:


> I've no idea who she is or why you hold her words in such regard, but if you can't be bothered to describe what the link is about then I can't be arsed to look at it.


while i don't much care whether you can be arsed to click on a link or not, for the benefit of other people who may be interested, the gist of the link is that google+ personalises google searches without much attention being paid to whether the personalisation is of any value to the individual google+ account holder. in the link, karen blakeman, who is a freelance information professional specialising in helping people find information using the internet, describes how google+ has decided that because she lives in reading she must therefore be interested in, among other things, reading fc. she describes some of the shortcomings of google+ as it affects use of google.


----------



## elbows (Dec 5, 2012)

I wish there was a viable social network with features more like Google+ than Facebook, but that was owned by its members.

I hesitate to promote Google+ because Google have more than enough info already thanks all the same. Too much power.


----------



## twentythreedom (Dec 5, 2012)

editor said:


> It's particularly good for photographers.



Well that's me convinced


----------



## editor (Dec 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> I wish there was a viable social network with features more like Google+ than Facebook, but that was owned by its members.
> 
> I hesitate to promote Google+ because Google have more than enough info already thanks all the same. Too much power.


Shame that the Diaspora Project turned out to be shit. Mind you, any site with a name as awful as that is destined for obscurity.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 5, 2012)

Manter said:


> is is very well laid out. The tumbleweed scoots down the halls completely unobstructed


if you add people to your circles the tumbleweed can disappear - trouble is most of the people I have added are people I didn't know before - that said, I have interacted with quite a few of them since.


----------



## maldwyn (Dec 5, 2012)

I think more people will use it when Google implement their planned linking of Youtube ID's to Google+


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 5, 2012)

I am not going with Google+ I am on Myspace, Facebook and Twitter. I already use gmail for my email, and run an Android phone. I don't want to get further involved with Google. I never use Myspace any more but can't close my account because the email I signed up with no longer exists. I am getting fed up with Facebook and although I never go on it still get messages from it via gmail advertising events from people on my friends list who are musicians just promoting themselves.

Google+ looks very useful but I don't like the way it can get a comprehensive list of information about everything you do and everywhere you go, if you really get involved via smartphone. I have decided to become an internet hermit and go without the up side in order to retain some privacy.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 5, 2012)

I have heard that google+ is supposed to be good for photographers, and as a gmail user google tends to log me into all sorts of things and the hints to g+ something are all over the internet. As it stands though I can't see the problem to which google+ is the solution.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 5, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I am not going with Google+ I am on Myspace, Facebook and Twitter. I already use gmail for my email, and run an Android phone. I don't want to get further involved with Google. I never use Myspace any more but can't close my account because the email I signed up with no longer exists. I am getting fed up with Facebook and although I never go on it still get messages from it via gmail advertising events from people on my friends list who are musicians just promoting themselves.
> 
> Google+ looks very useful but I don't like the way it can get a comprehensive list of information about everything you do and everywhere you go, if you really get involved via smartphone. I have decided to become an internet hermit and go without the up side in order to retain some privacy.


You've already told all on here, what more is there to lose?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 5, 2012)

A social network is only as good as the type and number of people on it. Google + is shite and a total waste of time.


----------



## Sirena (Dec 5, 2012)

Wasn't there a problem with them insisting you couldn't use a pseudonym?  It became quite popular with musos until some of them found they couldn't use their artiste name.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 5, 2012)

There was an idiotic policy but think they may have reversed or softened it.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 5, 2012)

Thing is, Facebook were the innovator that found critical mass and even they don't seem to have managed yet to make a social network pay its way. Why do companies like Google and Microsoft think it is so important to be followers who will not find critical mass and whose projects will fail?

Is it not more of value for google and microsoft et al to innovate themselves in some way and be leaders with first mover critical mass in a new niche that they developed themselves?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 5, 2012)

weltweit said:


> Thing is, Facebook were the innovator that found critical mass and even they don't seem to have managed yet to make a social network pay its way. Why do companies like Google and Microsoft think it is so important to be followers who will not find critical mass and whose projects will fail?
> 
> Is it not more of value for google and microsoft et al to innovate themselves in some way and be leaders with first mover critical mass in a new niche that they developed themselves?


 
It's about advertising and search. Google have no choice but to enter the social space because that's where advertising is going and it's also where discovery is going...


----------



## weltweit (Dec 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> It's about advertising and search. Google have no choice but to enter the social space because that's where advertising is going and it's also where discovery is going...


 
discovery?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 5, 2012)

weltweit said:


> discovery?


 
Yep, search but more relavent. The idea was you'd search for stuff and they'd sell you to companies but a funny thing happened, people started wanting to find stuff by people they knew or were connected with so search started to change, how you find stuff started to change. If that continues and Google aren't in the game they're fucked as a company. Hence G+ and it being tightly integrated (or forced down your throat depending on how you see it) in Google products.


----------



## elbows (Dec 6, 2012)

Except its far from proven that Facebook advertising etc is all its cracked up to be either.


----------



## Ax^ (Dec 6, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> A social network is only as good as the type and number of people on it. Google + is shite and a total waste of time.



No that's facebook


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 6, 2012)

Google is under investigation by The FTC and the European Commission for allegations that it has unfairly manipulated its search results to favor its own services; that it has used patents to thwart smartphone competitors. The possibility of massive antitrust suits has appeared on the horizon.

Given that most people here won't drink anything but Fairtrade coffee etc, what's the rush to give even more business to such a company, until these various allegations have been cleared up one way or another?


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

Maybe it's not quite as moribund as I thought:


> According to Google, their Google+ network is continuing to pick up steam. With over 500 million total accounts, over half – 235 million – are active, making G+ the fastest growing social network around.


http://www.androidguys.com/2012/12/...-network-now-235-million-active-users-strong/

Here's what's new: 


> *With Google+ Communities there’s now a gathering place for your passions, including:*
> 
> Public or private membership to support all kinds of groups—from topics and interests to local neighborhoods to regular poker nights
> Discussion categories to find the conversations you care about most
> ...


----------



## Firky (Dec 6, 2012)

I was on G+ but I succumb to loneliness. Haven't used it for at least two years and back then there was only Larry Page and Marty21 on G+.


----------



## magneze (Dec 6, 2012)

editor said:


> Maybe it's not quite as moribund as I thought:
> 
> http://www.androidguys.com/2012/12/...-network-now-235-million-active-users-strong/
> 
> Here's what's new:


Strange. Some sites are reporting 135m active, and some 235m.
http://mashable.com/2012/12/06/google-plus-500-million-members/
Quite a difference!


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

magneze said:


> Strange. Some sites are reporting 135m active, and some 235m.
> http://mashable.com/2012/12/06/google-plus-500-million-members/
> Quite a difference!


It's still doing OK (once you try to not think about Facebook!)


> Google's user growth is certainly impressive, though at 135 million monthly active users, the social network is still behind competitors like Facebook, which now has 1 billion monthly active users, and Twitter, which passed 140 million monthly active users in March.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 6, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> It's about advertising and search. Google have no choice but to enter the social space because that's where advertising is going and it's also where discovery is going...


 
Data mining is also where the money is. I think it's being kept under wraps cos of ethcal concerns but my theory is that it's as big a money spinner, if not more, than advertising.


----------



## geminisnake (Dec 6, 2012)

I tried a while ago to sign up for Google+, it wouldn't let me get anywhere without knowing my mobile number. I don't fecking think so!! Apparently others don't have this issue with it but that was my sticking point. I don't give out my number unless I want to. Anything that requires my number won't get me signing up for it.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Dec 6, 2012)

I got a G+ account when it first launched, added some urbans, looked for some other people but...when most people you want to keep in touch with aren't on it - I've lost interest. If it wasn't being bankrolled and integrated with Google services, its user base would be a fraction of what it is.

Honestly I don't have a problem with facebook. It does everything I want and reaches out to almost everyone I need without having to share stuff on multiple social media platforms. Fragmenting the market just means less group interaction, more ballache to post things on different sites, more power over everything to Google, and in the end every platform suffers because people simple won't be arsed with it all.

I rather like that this is what makes facebook work: one company coming along and doing it more effectively than everyone else (myspace/bebo etc), and the fact they're not Google, and they're not Twitter - and each business dominates its own market, is healthy. Paradoxically, because these things work best if one company is the _de facto_ service, so there needs to be a monopoly of sorts. Having Google monopolise the search market sits ok with me, because they don't don't dominate social media and neither suffer for it. Same reason why I like that Twitter isn't owned by neither Google or Facebook too.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 6, 2012)

8115 said:


> Data mining is also where the money is. I think it's being kept under wraps cos of ethcal concerns but my theory is that it's as big a money spinner, if not more, than advertising.


 
I think it is but not in advertising terms. We'll see if Google gets Big Data (the new oil if you ask me)...


----------



## Greebo (Dec 6, 2012)

geminisnake said:


> I tried a while ago to sign up for Google+, it wouldn't let me get anywhere without knowing my mobile number. I don't fecking think so!! Apparently others don't have this issue with it but that was my sticking point. I don't give out my number unless I want to. Anything that requires my number won't get me signing up for it.


That's odd, because as I've said before, I didn't add my mobile number and it still allowed me to sign up.


----------



## Yata (Dec 7, 2012)

If they push it more on Android phones it might get more popular but at the min I'm the only person I know who even has an account. One thing that might help is if they had one of those Whatsapp/Ping type things and tied it in with a Plus account as they seem pretty popular at the minute. Right now they just seem to be doing their best to add whatever Facebook already has like Communities/Groups Games etc when they really need something new to stand out.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 7, 2012)

I don't know why they don't force all Android users to have G+ as their primary google account.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Dec 7, 2012)

I dunno... I use 'social media' extensively though havent seen the benefits of G+
Most of my contacts don't use the service. I remember being all excited to get an early beta invite and thought it may be the 'new thing'.....
imo I remain to be convinced as to it's purpose and value? Perhaps I'm not using it right?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 7, 2012)

You are using it right, there's just not enough interesting activity on there to keep interest...


----------



## Greebo (Dec 8, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> You are using it right, there's just not enough interesting activity on there to keep interest...


Agreed.  eg if most of your contacts are other urbanites, you can already say what you need to say either on the boards or in PMs, so not much need for G+.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Dec 8, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Agreed. eg if most of your contacts are other urbanites, you can already say what you need to say either on the boards or in PMs, so not much need for G+.


 
If that was the case, choice of social network would be the least of your problems.


----------



## Firky (Dec 8, 2012)

G+ is like a newly built Chinese town, it is planned well and has everything and more you'd expect but the problem is attracting people to it.


----------



## Greebo (Dec 8, 2012)

Maurice Picarda said:


> If that was the case, choice of social network would be the least of your problems.


Many a true word in jest


----------



## weltweit (Dec 8, 2012)

I use google, I use gmail, I use the google toolbar. Google tracks me around urban. I think my exposure to google is probably enough at the moment.


----------



## Firky (Dec 8, 2012)

I am not that bothered if Google track me, they're not interested in individuals but huge groups anyway.

I know Google have shit business practises and ethics but I still quite like their services


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 8, 2012)

firky said:


> I am not that bothered if Google track me, they're not interested in individuals but huge groups anyway.
> 
> I know Google have shit business practises and ethics but I still quite like their services


 
Way of the world, morality has no place in these consumer decisions...


----------



## Mungy (Dec 10, 2012)

i really would like to use google, but i've only got about 8 people i know on it so it's quite boring. three of them don't even use it


----------



## Firky (Dec 11, 2012)

Google Talk

Brilliant little IM when they were still popular. Tiny foot print and much better than MSN, Skype, ICQ and so on.

No one used it.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 11, 2012)

magneze said:


> Strange. Some sites are reporting 135m active, and some 235m.
> http://mashable.com/2012/12/06/google-plus-500-million-members/
> Quite a difference!


 
The numbers of accounts is misleading too, now they've integrated everything you have a G+ account whether you want it or not so they get to show massive growth even though most people aren't using it (as shown by the the disparity of active users)...


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 11, 2012)

firky said:


> Google Talk
> 
> Brilliant little IM when they were still popular. Tiny foot print and much better than MSN, Skype, ICQ and so on.
> 
> No one used it.


 
You're right, that was actually my fave IM for a good while but they didn't twig that people would be moving to mobile and things like WhatsApp so lost out.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 11, 2012)

editor said:


> Shame that the Diaspora Project turned out to be shit. Mind you, any site with a name as awful as that is destined for obscurity.


 
https://tent.io/about is more technically competent.


----------



## Firky (Dec 11, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> You're right, that was actually my fave IM for a good while but they didn't twig that people would be moving to mobile and things like WhatsApp so lost out.


 
Have you tried Kik? I use it to send teeps' messages to her iPhone from my Android phone, it's great and so far I have experienced no delays or down time. I prefer the UI to Whatsapp


----------



## editor (Dec 11, 2012)

Crispy said:


> https://tent.io/about is more technically competent.


That site looks like a dating service for people who love to rub up to diodes and get jiggy with NFC swipes.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 11, 2012)

editor said:


> That site looks like a dating service for people who love to rub up to diodes and get jiggy with NFC swipes.


And?


----------



## editor (Dec 11, 2012)

Crispy said:


> And?


Phwwoaaar!


----------



## Firky (Dec 11, 2012)

Crispy said:


> https://tent.io/about is more technically competent.


 
Day Z uses Tent IIRC.

Still a bit too far ahead of the crowd yet but give it three or four years and I think Tent will be much more common.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 11, 2012)

firky said:


> Have you tried Kik? I use it to send teeps' messages to her iPhone from my Android phone, it's great and so far I have experienced no delays or down time. I prefer the UI to Whatsapp


 
Nope, would check it out but everyone I know is hooked on WhatsApp now (having friends with BB's, Android phones and iPhones it's a godsend) so doubt they'll be changing any time soon...


----------



## mao (Dec 11, 2012)

How I do I stop Google+ sending an email to ALL my friends every time I upload a picture? It's really annoying.


----------



## dervish (Dec 12, 2012)

I have been using G+ since the beginning and have always liked it. Since the inclusion of communities it has become much better I've been using it a lot more, since ingress has started I've been on it almost permanently.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Dec 12, 2012)

Authorrank.

Look upon it and despair, for he who controls the SEO, controls the web.


----------



## editor (Dec 12, 2012)

Bob_the_lost said:


> Authorrank.
> 
> Look upon it and despair, for he who controls the SEO, controls the web.


You're forgetting Facebook.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Dec 13, 2012)

editor said:


> You're forgetting Facebook.


Am I?


----------

