Slashdot Mirror
Google+ Registers 25 Million Visitors
hypnosec writes "Google Inc.'s new social networking platform Google+ is one of the first to boast of more than 25 million users in less than one month of the launch. Market research firm comScore in its latest report has revealed that Google+, which was launched to masses in late June, has managed more than 25 million visitors in a month and is recording around a million unique visits every day." I've been using G+ for awhile now, but since the grandparents will never leave Facebook, I'm still stuck with 2 systems.
Do as I did, only post baby photos on g+ and lure with hangouts with the baby :)
2 different accounts? Try having a work address that is hosted by Gmail and a separate personal Gmail. Then try using any Google services such as youtube. Completely impossible unless you use 2 separate browsers.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
The Start Google+ plugin links your g+ and Facebook accounts. What you post to g+ gets cross-posted to FaceBook, and it can integrate your FaceBook feed into your g+ stream. It's worked well for me so far.
2 different accounts? Try having a work address that is hosted by Gmail and a separate personal Gmail. Then try using any Google services such as youtube. Completely impossible unless you use 2 separate browsers.
THIS. Why, why, why is it so difficult to manage accounts?
I'm sure Google would say that they need to be able to manage each person with a single, dedicated account. However, that doesn't explain why they still offer their services to the anonymous masses, and it doesn't take into account your work situation. It also doesn't cover the "me and girlfriend use the same computer off-and-on all day long -- bouncing back and forth between accounts" problem.
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
This article seems to be confusing the number visitors with the number of registered users.
The source they're citing says visitors.
It's not much of a surprise that a new site by a popular brand would have a lot of people visiting their site in the first month.
If they boasted that many registered accounts in that time, it'd be even more impressive but, guess what, they didn't.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
It also doesn't cover the "me and girlfriend use the same computer off-and-on all day long -- bouncing back and forth between accounts" problem.
Multi-users on one pc is the responsability of your OS and nowadays which OS doesn't provide this?
I just hate the way they handle language settings.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Achilles heel.
Probably not in the short-term, the more (quantity) of popular competative networks there are the fewer TOTAL users to go between them- there may be. Part of facebook's draw was it's near-monopoly on "that type" of social network. Right now, "everyone" is on facebook- so the "pressure" to join facebook and be like the rest of the unwashed masses for some may be higher. The more people migrate and move to Google- the less pressure for those same people to join facebook. Since not "everyone" is on google- even if a lot of people are- the non uniformity of it means less pressure to join there. If half the people I know are on G and the other half are on FB- I'd be less inclined to join either- too much hassle for an anti-social nitwit with too little time to post on both- and the reward to post to just half my friends is... well half? The more major networking sites- the fewer the people they have which means the lesser the drive for non-inducted members to join. It may seem counter-intuitive but the best model Google and Facebook could have is to make their platforms open to each other- so posting in one posts to the other (if you have an account)- otherwise the total pool of available users will be less because there would be less incentive to join either one. As long as they block each other they are will be limiting their client base. If another major player enters the market it would fragment social networking completely. (and I'm not counting Twitter because it is a different niche). Full disclosure: I am not on any social network - I'm waiting for the invent of the anti-social network.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Google only blocks you Plus account. Mail and whatnot is still intact, unless you were spamming. Google has already commented on that. So how about reading up on the issue before panicking?
Google+ (at least for the meantime) does not have "apps" posting to everyone's wall/stream, so I consider that a big benefit. Also the "circles" concept was simple enough for my 60 year old mother to understand, but facebook groups was not. Google+ is not totally inundated with spam (yet). Aside from things like sunk cost and the network affect (everyone you know is already on fb) there's not much good reason to use FB in my opinion. The ability to download all the data you'll post to G+ is an additional big plus for me, even though it doesn't necessarily mean anything to average joe.
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
And as someone who often posts to Facebook/Twitter from places other than a desktop web browser (often Twitter first, with an FB app to pick it up), I find this a completely worthless solution. However, I have yet to hear of another option.
Has Google fixed the policy to ban an account Google-wide if the G+ account is closed? I've had an invite but haven't joined as I don't want my other Google products (blog, photo depot) to be at risk if some jerk(s) or computer bug decides my real name isn't real enough.
This seemed to make a big buzz a week or so back, then just die off, so I'm not sure if they fixed it or if, like most other social networking stuff, everyone just decided to live with the nasty policies.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
http://gigharbor365.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/fish-bowls-jumping-from-one-to-another.jpg
Vision with execution is hallucination.
So much for Facebook. It's dead. It's for "old people".
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
ah, so it's a Release Candidate now
The ease of circle management in G+ compared to facebook and not having to deal with the constantly moving target of facebook's UI is making me move away from facebook as quickly as my friends will join G+.
Thats completely wrong, I have three non-GMail domains hosted on separate Apps For Domains accounts, and my own Gmail account - all work perfectly fine under multi-signon. I have absolutely no problems at all switching between the sessions.
Thanks, I will check on this. I guess everyone else replying "it works fine, you are dumb", must have already gone through this.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
You're an ass.
I don't use it, but I'll be damn if someone else with the same name can use it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
So much for Facebook. It's dead. It's for "old people".
Just like email...
haha, "friends" are another matter, but I'm specifically talking about the type of woman who so desires to be popular, she goes down on everything but the Titanic.
Also, you remind me of 19th century toast, "to our wives and sweethearts.......may they never meet!"
You can already do that.
1. Edit your profile.
2. Click on the item that you want to edit, Occupation for example.
3. Click custom
4. Add circles or individuals to the list
Now only people/circles that you added can see that specific profile data.
I have google apps for personal and company mail and I have a std.
+1 unfortunate use of abbreviation
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
That's because Profiles are no longer available to Apps accounts. Convert and voila - profile goes poof. G+ is dependent on Profiles. Google says they're doing something special with Profiles for Apps users and will be available Soon. Suspect it might be related to G+ Organizational / Business accounts.
The killer feature would be differentiating relationship status ("married" / "single") depending on the circle ~