Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google To Challenge Facebook Again

Posted by Soulskill on from the clash-of-the-titans dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Google is set to make a fresh attempt to gain a foothold in the booming social networking business, seeking to counter the growing threat that Facebook poses to some of its core services. USA Today reports that the search giant is upgrading Gmail to add social-media tools similar to those found on Facebook, including photo and video sharing within the Gmail application, along with a new tool for status updates. According to reports, Google is planning to give Gmail users a way to aggregate the updates of their various contacts on the service, creating a stream of notifications that would echo the similar real-time streams from Facebook and Twitter. Google's decision to exploit the heavily-used Gmail service as the basis for its latest assault on the social networking business partly reflects the failure of Google's previous stand-alone efforts to enter the social networking sector. Its Orkut networking service, though launched before Facebook, has failed to gain a mass following in most parts of the world, despite success in Brazil, and its acquisition of Twitter rival Jaiku ended in failure after it scrapped development of the service." Update: 02/09 19:32 GMT by KD : It's been announced as Google Buzz; CNET has a detailed writeup.

13 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. privacy is key by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This might be interesting if they manage to get the privacy thing right. If they don't, I see it as a disaster. I use gmail to communicate with a much wider audience than Facebook. If somehow they managed to let me easily and effectively segment users into different groups, with STRONG WALLS between groups, then it might be interesting.

    Although it would take quite a few HCI PhDs to figure out how to do it all without cluttering an already cluttery gmail UI.

    --
    An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
    1. Re:privacy is key by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 3, Informative

      ...if they manage to get the privacy thing right.

      LOL

      Just to be clear, I meant privacy in terms of your friends. In terms of Google, privacy was pretty much given up a long time ago.

      --
      An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
    2. Re:privacy is key by mrboyd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Relax, I don't know what's going on in your life for your first thing on your mind to be about cheating swinging gay porn and whatnot but most of us just want to avoid their close friends, vague relation and coworker to mix it up too much.

      We all have pro-email and personal email but I'd bet that the majority of us had to give out the personal one away in a professional context for whatever reason (file size limit, exchange server bogged down, msn/google chat, etc..) and we really don't need our clients and recruiters to know about the boozing festival we had last week end for our childhood friend's birthday. It's not that we're ashamed of it. It just none of their business.

    3. Re:privacy is key by ztransform · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wouldn't you really just need to have two accounts, your real life account and then your second one for all the naughty stuff you don't want people to find out about?

      The person you're being naughty with has a friend who has a friend who is your real-life serious friend.

      Facebook does not hide friends lists. So the circle can easily be followed.

    4. Re:privacy is key by gartogg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And clearly the sample of stories that are told is representative of how thing go wrong in peoples lives.

      The separate domains of my life shouldn't overlap. The stories are re-told because they are sensational, not because they are likely, or frequent, or representative of what people should worry about. The fact that you have things that you do not want others to know about isn't about hypocrisy, it is about privacy. Privacy allows for hypocrisy, but the fact that something is private, or even would be embarrassing, does not imply that it is wrong or hypocritical. Internal memos about client plans would be embarrassing if leaked, but there is no shame in having them. I don't want clients seeing my work life, I don't want anyone able to see what is going on with my love life (even though I am doing nothing I am in any way ashamed of,) and I don't want the wider world who I've emailed once seeing my private life at all.

      --
      I'm a concientious .sig objector.
  2. Your lives belong to us by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think many people (though probably not enough) already worry about what Google and Facebook separately know and track about their online and private lives. Putting them both together under the control of just one of those companies? No thanks. A million times no.

  3. Google Fail..... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Where Google can offer clear cut advantage, it's easy to see them dominating. Online search was ripe for such a revolution. Other things like answers.google.com just didn't make 'em enough money. Social networking needed a revolution and Facebook emerged as the winner. Friendster couldn't do it and MySpace became irrelevent through obsolescence. What I think had made Google such a success has been it's openness towards developers and Facebook beat Google to that game by allowing developers to use it's services (which is torn from Google's own playbook). Google can try but I think they're gonna fail on this one, Facebook people are way too entrenched in it now. I, for one, will avoid Google simple because I just don't like how big they've become.

  4. Laziness by jimbolauski · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google will fail to get a foothold for one reason laziness, the masses will not want to change over their account to something else. There is little innovation to be had in social media and the little tweaks that facebook does not copy from google will not be enough for people to deal with the hassle of changing.

    --
    Knowledge = Power
    P= W/t
    t=Money
    Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
  5. Less, not more! by symes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really do not want a constant flow of inane jibberings from every person in my gmail contact list day after day. This would drive me totally mad. Presumably there will be an opt out?

  6. No Farmville! by e2d2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I will not use this until I can play Farmville on it and send people were-pigs and pork-knights so they can defend themselves properly.

  7. Re:Facebook : 2010 :: CB Radio : 1975 by bberens · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you're crazy if you believe that the 13-20 crowd is even vaguely aware of the concept of online security. In my experience they view privacy and security as hurdles, not assets, for the products they use online.

    --
    Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  8. Re:Will there be any difference? by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Facebook wants to sell the data to anyone/everyone (currently that's mostly just advertisers). Google is the advertiser. The data they collect is not resold ad nauseaum.

    --
    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
  9. Re:Facebook : 2010 :: CB Radio : 1975 by Chapter80 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe I should rephrase it.

    I think that security is one niche that Google can exploit, since Facebook has failed on that front, and Google has a good reputation in that area.

    Really, though, there needs to be a "feature" that is exciting for the young crowd.

    Imagine something like Webkinz, where kids under 13 are already addicted. Funnel those kids into a social network when they reach 13, duplicate facebook's features, and then they'll never need to join fb. In 5 years, you have 13 to 18 year olds hooked on your fb replacement.