Google Plus

[sigil]

Meh... if I really wanted to stalk the stars I'd be on Twitter. 140 characters would probably be all I could stomach.

It's not been the stars so much as talented articulate people, I've had meaningful discussions on ethics, political process, music theory,  soccer and how to take beter photos.

Frankly the site it's making redundant is this one, but there's something about this lot of crazies that makes me stick around


How that will hold up to a mass influx of the general population I don't know, but given how you can really isolate things  with circles, I think that side will continue.

[Jherad]

Read #4.  G+ isn't for business yet.  I think they're trying to incorporate them in a different fashion, to split up personals from businesses. 

http://blogs.forbes.com/insidearm/2011/07/14/5-things-small-businesses-must-know-about-google-plus/

Thanks chap, appreciate the info.

[eldaec]

Remember when walled gardens and 'portals' were a stupid idea?

Good times.

[luckton]

If anyone's still using this, +1's got an upgrade

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20097244-93/google-beefing-up-its-1-button/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

[01101010]

If anyone's still using this, +1's got an upgrade

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20097244-93/google-beefing-up-its-1-button/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

...And continue to be buggy as shit.

[apocrypha]

Completely stopped using this because of them persisting with total lack of sorting and default stream filtering. The only people I know who haven't just gone back to Facebook are some of the f13 people.

[Tebonas]

To my defense, I have to because I hate Zuckerbergs views and therefore would never make a Facebook account.

[Numtini]

The only person I know who's using it is a Google employee. My perception is it was doing pretty well until the "real name" thing spooked enough people that their critical mass subsided.

[Quinton]

Speaking purely as somebody who uses the service and not in any other context...

With luck, they'll decide to abandon the silly "real names" policy and focus instead on building useful features like "let me determine which circles show up in my default stream" or "full-duplex inviteable 'shared' circles".

It's always frustrating to watch people get something really right in most regards and then hose it up in some way that wouldn't have been an issue at all if they had just left that bit alone.

[Yegolev]

I would assume you get better advertising ROI if you can guarantee you are showing ads to real people?  Not that I know anything about advertising.

[Quinton]

No clue.  I develop mobile OS kernels and device drivers for a living.  But I have a lot of friends who for various perfectly good reasons don't choose to use their "real name" as their identifier on the Internets, so from a personal, selfish point of view, a service that does not prevent them from communicating that way is more useful to me.  Hell, I don't use my "real name" here (though I don't go through any special effort to hide it) because in the context of online gaming "Quinton" is a far more useful identifier.

That's something which has always annoyed me about Facebook.  Perhaps 1/3 of my friends on Facebook are people I know primarily from various online communities and usually by some handle that does not match the name they use there.  Makes it damn hard to figure out who I'm talking to.

[Yegolev]

I agree.  Internet requires handles, same as CB radio.  My real name is far from unique, but Yegolev seems to be pretty rare.  This is why I am mostly friends with people who I know from RL on FB.

[Sky]

persisting with total lack of sorting

It's GOOGLE. Google searches, they don't sort. You're just doing it wrong, because nobody needs to sort information. Trust Google, they know better. They have lots of money. It's just in giant random piles because nobody can sort it. Who would want to?

[01101010]

persisting with total lack of sorting

It's GOOGLE. Google searches, they don't sort. You're just doing it wrong, because nobody needs to sort information. Trust Google, they know better. They have lots of money. It's just in giant random piles because nobody can sort it. Who would want to?

Me. I can deal with my circles being stupidly sorted by comment time rather than OP time. I can see its utility (still think failbook handles it better by notifying you when someone comments on anything you are tied to), and I can deal with it. I can not deal with the mobile app NEARBY window not sorting or at least having the option. There has been some interesting shit going on near me in the past few weeks that have gone completely unnoticed by me until I scroll through the 800 posts from weeks ago to get to those recent events posts which are now over. I do not even know how many feedback notes I have submitted on this issue... but I am starting to think those actually go no where and the feedback button is there to distract me, like having a stressball.

Of course, any and all of these google fanbois just start thumbing their noses at any mention of putting something like this into G+. Seriously gets to the point of me wanting to choke those people.

[Sky]

That's why I get sandy about it. I attended google apps training a little while ago and the trainer just kind of got a blank, uncomprehending look when I complained about the poor (or non-existant) sorting. Such a massive ball of under-delivering hype.

[Talpidae]

Um, sorry, what's the problem with Google Apps sorting ?

[naum]

While I think Google is out to lunch with the real name policy, the fixed header bars when scrolling I find to be most irksome and are keeping me away:



If you want to keep a narrow bar at the top, OK, I guess, not so intrusive. But really, keeping that fat icon header fixed to save me from tapping "Home" to get to the top of the page? What is this, like AOL browser or Word 97 reincarnated?

[Sky]

Um, sorry, what's the problem with Google Apps sorting ?

It's Friday and that was a while ago and I utterly ignore most of the apps. So just go ahead and call me a cunt now.

[01101010]

http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/08/26/7485475-google-gets-an-ignore-option-for-pesky-people

Fantastic... google putting in more useless shit.

[Ingmar]

Um, sorry, what's the problem with Google Apps sorting ?

Try to sort your mail by sender in Gmail. I don't use Apps but if it is similar... you can't.

[Talpidae]

I use a mail client to download it.

So I can.

 

[Talpidae]

Um, sorry, what's the problem with Google Apps sorting ?

It's Friday and that was a while ago and I utterly ignore most of the apps. So just go ahead and call me a cunt now.

I don't do that.  It's possible you're thinking of someone else.   

[HaemishM]

I would assume you get better advertising ROI if you can guarantee you are showing ads to real people?  Not that I know anything about advertising.

Not necessarily. It's not like you are targeting individuals with ads anyway, you are targeting demographic profiles such as age, browsing habits, in the case of Google+ probably interest demographics based on keyword density, linking history and composition of circles. Forcing real names on people doesn't really do shit for any of that.

I stopped using it mainly because I'm comfortable with Twitter for my social media needs and I'm really not that goddamn sociable anywhere but here.

[Xanthippe]

I never quite started using it, but their Real Names policy ensures I won't use it at all.  I don't want to have everything I ever write associated with my real name.  Why anyone would, I don't know.

The more public my identity is, the less I want to share my thoughts.  Who knows who will see it (potential employers/clients, colleagues, or children's friends' parents or who knows), and why would I want to limit my (or more importantly, my childrens') future options in that way?

An excellent but very long essay on Pseudonymity, Privacy and Google+:
http://www.marrowbones.com/commons/technosocial/2011/07/on_pseudonymity_privacy_and_re.html

(tl;dr version:  "Here lies the huge irony in this discussion. Persistent pseudonyms aren't ways to hide who you are. They provide a way to be who you are. You can finally talk about what you really believe; your real politics, your real problems, your real sexuality, your real family, your real self. Much of the support for "real names" comes from people who don't want to hear about controversy, but controversy is only a small part of the need for pseudonyms. For most of us, it's simply the desire to be able to talk openly about the things that matter to every one of us who uses the Internet. The desire to be judged—not by our birth, not by our sex, and not by who we work for—but by what we say.")

According to this, Google+ is primarily an “identity service."
http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/its-official-google-wants-to-own-your-online-identity/

Google+ doesn't serve me and my interests.  Until they do, I won't be using it.

[sigil]

I"m wondering how many of the people who  are citing this as an issue are also using Facebook, which has a similar policy.

[Lucas]

Ok, enough. Really fed up with FB and its stealth updates, clunky interface, viruses, chains and so on (yep, I realize the last three are more about the people using it, but still...). Will move to Google Plus permanently.

[Tale]

According to this, Google+ is primarily an “identity service."
http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/its-official-google-wants-to-own-your-online-identity/

My Google+ profile (with goofy holiday pic) and my public Google profile (different thing) became the top two search results for my name. My Facebook has public search visibility switched off, meaning people can find me on Facebook but can't find my Facebook by googling me. Google+ didn't have this option and professionally it was better to have LinkedIn as the main search result, so I've deleted both my public Google profile and my Google+ account. All other Google services still work as before, including my Android phone. I liked Google+, but it was pointless to maintain and I didn't want it as the main thing about me on search results.

[Lucas]

New improvements to the "hangout" feature; also, it looks like Google+ will enter "open beta" within the next day; no more invitations required (scroll down to the end of the article):

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/google-92-93-94-95-96-97-98-99-100.html

[naum]

Added search (may take a while to roll out to all) of Google+ posts and ability to save searches.  Big plus over FB, though I think most of my RL "friends" have totally shunned Google+ except for a few.

[Salamok]

Has google plus resolved some of it's account type issues?  I use a google pro or business or whatever they friggen call it account for various reasons and last I checked this is not compatible with google +. 

Sure wish google would fix their account issues and quit cockblocking this half from using those services and that half from using these services.

[01101010]

Added search (may take a while to roll out to all) of Google+ posts and ability to save searches.  Big plus over FB, though I think most of my RL "friends" have totally shunned Google+ except for a few.

Fuck searches. There is nothing I want to search for on a social network. I want to see what the fuck is going on right now and backtrack a day maybe. I do not give two shits about something that happened 4 days ago to someone's dog named Sampson. Sort > search. I know it might be google's thing, but there are things (LIKE EVERY GOD DAMN FORUM) that need sort by: as a condition.

Seriously... I like google+ but the lack of simple functions is grating to the point of not even fucking with it anymore save for the local stream and tagging a location of where I am to it.

[Ingmar]

I find it incredibly annoying not to be able to sort by in Gmail as well, it is really the one big problem I have with the platform.

[Lucas]

Actually, I agree about your requests, but have you tried the new search enhancements? Because I just did it and they seem quite powerful and handy to me.

[apocrypha]

Their obvious insistence that search was what we were getting and fuck all us who want sorting is what's led me to remove the G+ bookmark from my browser now.

Really, it's useless for what I want it for. It doesn't replace Facebook or Twitter and is less functional than either. It's downward spiral has started and 6 months from now it'll be lumped in with Buzz as another failed attempt by Google to kill Facebook.

[01101010]

Their obvious insistence that search was what we were getting and fuck all us who want sorting is what's led me to remove the G+ bookmark from my browser now.

Really, it's useless for what I want it for. It doesn't replace Facebook or Twitter and is less functional than either. It's downward spiral has started and 6 months from now it'll be lumped in with Buzz as another failed attempt by Google to kill Facebook.

So Facebook = WoW and Buzz = War and G+ = Rift?