Slashdot Mirror


Google+ Enters Open Beta

First time accepted submitter morgosmaci sends us a Google Blog post about the transitioning of Google+ from a closed "field trial" to an open beta. As part of the update, Google threw in a number of enhancements to the Hangouts feature: an Android client, named hangouts, integration with Google Docs, and a preliminary web service API. And you can finally search for users, posts, and other content.

42 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Google+ is a success by ge7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But probably not in the way they wanted it to be. It was a success in making Facebook to improve their service. Facebook has now taken all the good things Google+ offered - including improving their games platform streams and just last week they added circles (and it goes both ways, Google+ also completely ripped off Facebook's look and feel)

    What's even more worrysome for Google, and not just for Google+ but their entire search engine usage and YouTube, is that this week Facebook will announce a huge upgrade with among others music and video services inside Facebook. This means less time spent on YouTube listening to music (yes, people actually do that, a lot) and more time spent on Facebook. When you're listening to music on Facebook, your friends also see what you listen to - a feature teens especially love. Google+ is missing these things entirely, among the other ones Facebook has had for ages.

    Now that Google opens up the beta it means they've lost the PR effect of being somewhat mysterious social network. And frankly, it's quite dead there. I've said about this before too on slashdot, and then people suggested some random people who to follow (mostly IT geeks). The thing is, I don't want to follow those random people. It's not interesting. I want to follow my friends and relatives, and maybe some pages of my interest (like games, tv shows, bands etc). Which is yet again another aspect that Google+ is missing - pages. And event planning, and countless amount of other features.

    They had a good PR idea of keeping it mysterious in the beginning, but I really wouldn't want to be the guy who decided it's a good idea to go compete against Facebook with an unfinished product. They killed all the potential Google+ had.

    1. Re:Google+ is a success by bigredradio · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree. The big problem is overcoming the inertia of moving to a new service. For many, Facebook has become their family photo albums. Even if Google+ provides a better service, most do not want to start over. They also don't want to deal with moving all of their pictures over. The daily connectivity and communication is something that can quickly be overcome, but the archived photos and videos is the anchor that will keep people on Facebook.

    2. Re:Google+ is a success by Artraze · · Score: 3

      > They had a good PR idea of keeping it mysterious in the beginning

      I disagree completely. By allowing us to preview it, we could see the 'evils' of its real name policy, account tie ins (and bans), and so on. If they opened it straight away, everyone probably would have jumped on at once (new thing!) and they might have stood a chance. Instead they gave us time to mull over its fundamental design problems^Wgoals and Facebook time to upgrade, and now it's dead before it even lived.

    3. Re:Google+ is a success by MBoffin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It was a success in making Facebook to improve their service.

      Facebook still hasn't improved my trust in them, though.

      Facebook improving their "Lists" feature to act like Google+'s Circles doesn't make me any more inclined to use Lists. The fact is, Facebook lost my trust a long time ago and will never get it back. They have a long, long history of opening up your private information without your consent and then (sometimes) allowing you to opt back in to the more closed model.

      Lists are something I do not ever want to be public, but I have no assurance or trust whatsoever that Facebook won't one day decide to make everyone's lists viewable to everyone else. As much as I don't trust Google, I at least trust that they won't screw that up.

    4. Re:Google+ is a success by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Facebook lost 12 million members in May (6 million in the US alone) before Google+ launched. Meanwhile, in a limited beta, Google+ became the fasting growing social networking platform in history.

      Facebook is aping some of the features, but they'll never change in some the areas that matter. Facebook believes they own your data. They refuse to allow you to fully delete your account. They move privacy settings all the time and refuse to set sane defaults because they want to expose your data against your will. Facebook won't set sane defaults for apps because they want advertisers to have your data. Clicking on a simple link in Facebook can lead to spamming your while friend's list, and Facebook never intends to change that.

      Facebook has been around for over 7 years. It took 4 years to reach 100 million members. Google+ got 14 million in a few weeks in a closed beta. I wouldn't be shocked to see them reach 100 million in a year.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    5. Re:Google+ is a success by ge7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      That initial crowd was mostly just curious users. I wanted to see it too, but after that it hasn't seen pretty much any usage.

      What comes to sane defaults, Google+ has exactly the same problems. By default all your data is very open, and because it's tightly integrated into Google, your details go public the very second you just register to Google+, because everything is public by default. When you run some game or app it also asks all the same kind of permissions that Facebook apps do. Google+ apps can also spam your whole friend the very same way that Facebook apps can.

    6. Re:Google+ is a success by Scottingham · · Score: 2

      If Google+ had an analog of the Events feature, all my friends would have jumped ship months ago. It's about the only useful thing on Facebook.

    7. Re:Google+ is a success by tycoex · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is untrue. Yes the default (you can uncheck it) is to upload all your photos to Google+, but they are not shown on your profile until you specifically go onto G+ and show them. Until you do this they are just hosted online for you to view privately.

    8. Re:Google+ is a success by pecosdave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At least Google+ lets me write half a book as my status update if I want to. Facebook makes me Tweet or write a note that no one looks at.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    9. Re:Google+ is a success by davegravy · · Score: 2

      I don't have the name anymore, but I found a tool that allowed me to easily (automatically) move all my pictures over. I don't believe there's much facebook can do to stop this, provided the tool runs locally on the user's machine.

    10. Re:Google+ is a success by znrt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, you better hope Google doesn't ban you for not using real time or if they even think you're not using your real name - Google+ ban isn't only to Google+, it's to all the other Google services like Gmail and YouTube too.

      not true. i'm banned from g+ because of name policy violation and can access gmail and youtube. ban only affects socalled social services like g+, picasa and buzz. besides, I can still access g+ in readonly mode.

      the naming policy is completely off. they really can't pretend to know better than me how I want to be named. I find it outright idiotic, so there goes g+ ... good sw, though. a shame.

    11. Re:Google+ is a success by bennomatic · · Score: 2

      That reminds me... I haven't checked FaceBook in a few hours!

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    12. Re:Google+ is a success by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google has never been able to fight off entrenched competition?

      Have you ever heard of Android?

      Microsoft also shut down their blogging product, because Google dominated that market. Google isn't first in every market, but that doesn't mean that Google fails in every market.

      Web mail numbers are always skeptical. How many people create throwaway Hotmail and Yahoo accounts simply because they can? How many spammers create Hotmail and Yahoo accounts?

      Google makes it harder to create throwaway and spam accounts, and thusly has fewer Gmail accounts. That doesn't mean the service is failing. I wouldn't be shocked if Gmail had more real users than Hotmail.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    13. Re:Google+ is a success by Riceballsan · · Score: 2

      They can, safely know that 95% of computer users don't know how to find or use tools to make their lives easier, and that 3/4ths of the 5% won't bother to move because they know there aren't many people they care about moving. That being said, I really like G+, the handfull of friends I care about have moved over there, The many I left behind on facebook, I really don't miss. Within the crew of friends I have, there is more sharing, chatting etc... going on that interest me, then there ever was on facebook.

    14. Re:Google+ is a success by ge7 · · Score: 2

      Google bought of Blogspot, they didn't make it. If Google wants to succeed in social networks market, they need to buy off Facebook, and that isn't going to happen.

    15. Re:Google+ is a success by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Funny

      Facebook can't possibly succeed as a new product, because MySpace is king!

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    16. Re:Google+ is a success by Riceballsan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not true, in both categories. Google+ by default lists the main parts of your profile, that is true, but as soon as you upload any content, comments, posts, pictures etc... the first thing it does is ask you who you want to be able to see it with the default being your circles (people you have added). Facebook 6 months ago, if you created an account, and uploaded 3 photos and made a status post without changing any options, all of that would have been public. Games take a list of people on your friends list, which makes sense, a social game should list your friends for the sake of knowing who's high scores to show you. Now if say I added a jerk to my friends who idiotically plays a ton of games and accepts every darn "tell your friends about the retarted cow you stepped on" update. Those go to the games feed. If I don't play games, I never click the games feed and thus I never even see the spam. It never mixes in with the posts and things my friends are sharing, etc... Facebook 6 months ago, if you had 2 friends who clicked every stupid share with friends in their games, your feed got so frickin crowded you couldn't find any of the non game-based posts until you started blocking the games, and then you have to block each and every game to keep up with them. Bottom line G+ isn't perfect, but it is leaps and bounds foward from facebooks defaults.

    17. Re:Google+ is a success by witherstaff · · Score: 2

      Google would fall under the safeharbor rules like ISPs and other hosting providers. Since you have to explicitly share any auto-uploaded photo there shouldn't be any 'oops' moments. It's almost like Google thought things through...

    18. Re:Google+ is a success by Fri13 · · Score: 2

      Did they know they can log in Google+ and their post are visible to Facebook as well? No need to double post but just single post.

    19. Re:Google+ is a success by shellbeach · · Score: 2

      If google plus dies, I doubt it will be because so many users are upset they had to use their real name.

      I'm not so sure. In the beginning, g+ had enormous momentum and excellent press. The media picked up on the concept of a new social network that wasn't the Big Bad facebook, and loved it for that reason (and that reason only). How many times did you read about how wonderful circles were, compared to g+ being fantastic because it "wasn't facebook"? If they'd made g+ public after the first month of great press and in the midst of all the hype, I suspect g+ would have had an excellent chance of sending facebook the way of myspace.

      But it all went wrong when nymwars started -- suddenly the media coverage was unfavourable, and Google was being associated with being evil. And more specifically, they were being associated invading privacy, which is also the reason people hate facebook. Ultimately, why would you go to the trouble of switching social networks if you still ended up with someone trying to use your private details for profit?

      Google has made potentially the worst marketing decision in their life here. They could have secured a monopoly on social networking, and combined with a monopoly on search and an approaching monopoly in the smartphone market they would have been unstoppable. Instead, they blew it by revealing their evil colours too early, before everyone was helplessly hooked.

    20. Re:Google+ is a success by LingNoi · · Score: 2

      You can move your stuff over using this app.. http://move2picasa.com/

      Not the point you were making but I figured someone would like this.

  2. For the impatient... by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Informative

    go to google.com/+ and you can sign up through there.

    Or you can read the article and eventually find the link.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  3. Still no Apps for Domains by Imagix · · Score: 5, Informative

    And yet you _still_ cannot join Google+ if you have a paid-for Google Apps for Domains account.

    1. Re:Still no Apps for Domains by AngryNick · · Score: 2

      Granted, I have a small brain and limited understanding of the ways of the Google...but WTF? They made us convert our accounts months ago so we could use new products and the first new product out the door isn't available to our now converted accounts. Google Apps has been great for my domain, but this is really annoying and creates administrative headaches.

    2. Re:Still no Apps for Domains by EricTheGreen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I share Imagix's annoyance. No excuse for this "we're working hard on bringing Google Apps support" bollocks, given that (on the whiteboard, at least), the apps-centric domain user ID is now properly recognized by the great majority of legacy Google services.

      Apps were well-established long before Plus development started. Why wasn't the ID management system in Plus implemented with Apps support from the ground up?

    3. Re:Still no Apps for Domains by grasshoppa · · Score: 3, Informative

      You know, it's annoying that it's not available but my main issue is the lack of communication from Google on this issue. What timeline do we have for this being implemented? "Soon", for the past 6 months we've heard that. What does "soon" mean? Tomorrow? That's soon. Or is it "Google Beta" level soon, where it could be YEARS before they get around to fixing it.

      As an administrator of a number of paid for Apps domains, I find their behavior on this issue to lack any kind of competence or professionalism. I am regretting my decision to recommend google web base email and am actively exploring alternatives because of their behavior.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  4. Re:never invited to Gmail by hedwards · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, if you'd stop posting Goatse links, perhaps people would want to spend more time around you...

  5. Re:open? by trunicated · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think you're starting to get into the "Free as in freedom or free as in beer" territory. This is open as in "available to everyone", not open as in "open source".

    --
    There's a reason there is no "Disagree" mod...
  6. Re:open? by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, the next time some says, "Can you please open the door", I am going to punch them in the face.

  7. Facebook's own two and a half year field trial by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Facebook has been around for over 7 years. It took 4 years to reach 100 million members.

    That's because Facebook spent its first two and a half years, from February 2004 through September 2006, in a closed field trial: first college students and then high school students were allowed in. Graduated before February 2004? The only way to get an account was to go back to grad school.

  8. Re:open? by robot256 · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure the patent on doors has expired.

  9. Re:open? by kevinNCSU · · Score: 2

    Can we stop calling things "open" which are actually proprietary?

    I agree! I mean just the other day I passed a breakfast diner that had the GALL to be claiming they were open with a red and blue ELECTRIC NEON SIGN right there in the window!! This term has just become meaningless and shameful pandering, I mean how the fuck do you open source a steak and eggs breakfast anyways?!

  10. Re:open? by tgeek · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure the patent on doors has expired.

    But just wait until I have the knob patented! I'll be having so many papers served on my patent infringers! When the process server comes knockin' at the door they had better open . . . um, maybe I need to think about this some more . . .

  11. Rumours of G+ Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated by ezh · · Score: 2

    You guys seriously did not expect Google to have an insta-win over Facebook, did you?

    The success of G+ is going to take time, but it will happen. Think about it: you already have an account, one day you'll find someone or something worth following on G+. You'll comment, your friends are going to notice. And believe me, they WILL notice, since there is a G+ cross-integration over the whole array of Google products (Search, YouTube, Docs, Gmail, etc): this black top bar with this red square and number in it will keep haunting you. You'll get hooked in. You'll start checking it out. Eventually momentum will turn. Google cannot and will not give up on G+ now - they have put everything on it. G+ is no Wave, it is no Buzz. The G-train will keep pushing. Until it hits your G-spot (sorry for the innuendo :-)

    Google keeps on adding awesome features at the great speed. Facebook will have a hard time to follow due to its size if Google keeps pushing like that. Now that G+ API have been published, the evolution is going to start even faster with input of 3rd parties.

    And what can you expect from Facebook in the nearest future? Even more integration with Skype and Bing. Have you really been enjoy these two products lately? Really? FB will keep pushing you to open even more of your private data by default to make advertisers happy. You like that future? Really?

    Don't worry, the inert mass that are typical Facebook users will take their time. They will even keep using FB for the next few years, but the tide will slowly turn in G+ favour due to its convenience, simplicity, and speed. One day, while searching for Facebook in Google for 1000th time, average Joes will discover this red square on top, and click it. And chain reaction will start.

    Now, don't get me wrong, Facebook will still keep growing and have a very successful IPO at the end of 2012, but after that - the game is on.

    I'll leave you with this thought - the fall of a former giant called MySpace also took some time...

  12. Too late, I've lost interest by Oidhche · · Score: 2

    I was pretty excited by Google+, but the whole "real name" fiasco turned me off completely. Not that I really care that much about using a pseudonym vs my real name, but I think that it just isn't Google's damn business what somebody wants to call themselves.

  13. Re:open? by Merk42 · · Score: 2

    I mean how the fuck do you open source a steak and eggs breakfast anyways?!

    Give the recipe with the meal

  14. What G+ is Really Lacking by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As excited as I am about this platform being opened up to more users (I am getting tired of seeing nothing but CmdrTaco and Lady Ada updates), Google+ is still lacking the one thing that would help it dominate in the social networking market: scantily clad 16 year old girls.

    Say what you want about how annoying 16 year old girls are on the internet (OMGPWNIES layouts and such), but they really are the catalyst to social networks taking off. Once high school girls start to establish a presence on a website, other high school girls want to join to keep up with their friends, and every male on the internet wants to join so he can creep on those girls' profiles and fap to their bikini pictures. That may sound offensive to some, but it is the one truth of social networking.

    Until Google has a large userbase of skanky girls to lurk on, it will not take off as the dominant social platform.

  15. And it is still not integrated by brunes69 · · Score: 2

    And Buzz posts still don't show in the plus stream

    And companies are still not able to create Plus profiles

    And there is no way to integrate Plus and Twitter without hacky browser extensions.

  16. Google, allow me to control my circles! by Fri13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (I am sorry of my terrible english skills!)

    I got Google+ invitation at same day when Google opened it. I were there just few weeks until I dropped off. I simply used Google's download utility to download all my data from Google Services (backup) and then I deleted my Google+ account (leaving my Google profile).

    There were actually three reasons for that:

    1. Google+ look was too Facebook like. I never registered to Facebook, I have never used facebook more than 2 minutes on my friend computer just to check out something. The facebook interface is terrible. Please, let me to theme and re-organize panels and parts of the interface, choose what parts I want to see and where. Without that I need to use third party browser addons etc.

    2. Circles was great idea and the usability how easy it was to make circles. But really.... DOES EVERYONE IN THE FUCKING CIRCLE NEED TO SEE ANYONE ELSE?
    What I expected, was that I can make circles as mailinglists. That when I add 5 person to circle, they dont know anyone else on that circle. Then when they comment my posts, they dont see other persons posts there. More like Email system but in social and visual way.
    I have have lots of contacts what I need to deal all the times. Thats why I still use email as it really allows me to limit what others see what contacts I have. Some of my friends can be enemies to each other, but still they are my friends from same circle.
    Like I have seven friends from same school, from three of them, hates each other (2 vs 1). But still, those 3 and all 7 are my friends. When I am contact with them, I know what and from whom I can talk with them. I dont say anything about that 1 to those 2 or vice versa as they dont care and they dont want to hear. I am diplomatic person, I dont make a stand or follow policy "my friends enemy is my enemy". If someone is asshole to me, then I simply ignore him. If someone teases my friend without reason, I will stand between. If my friend teases someone else, I will stand between as well. I can say to my friends to shut up or when they do wrong. Friendship does not mean I need to support everything what others does just because they are my friends.

    3. Real full name. Even that I dont have problem to show real name. I like my privacy. I have few persons who I dont like (Ex-*friends), real nasty people or so on. I want to control who can find me and who does not.
    Thats why I really logged out as I want that Google adds feature when someone search your name, you do not show up on the list. But you get notification that who made the search of your name/address. And then you can choose can that person find you or not. If you allow the query, then the searcher will get notification that result is added.
    Simply: I search person John Smith. I only receive those who allows to be found by default. But every John Smith out there will get notification that I made query with their name. Then John Smith who I know, can choose to be founded or not. If he choose to be found few days later, I get then notification that "John Smith permits your search". And then I can add him to my contact list.

    If points 2. and 3. would be fixed, I would join back to Google+.
    And I bet many other would as most of my friends would really much have same features when I told them my opinion. They want to list all their friends to single place. Then group people to lists and post something only those lists and individuals, without anyone else to see who else got the post. And when they comment my post, no one else should see that they have answered my post.

    So simply, email and postlists are still the best and only way to well socialize virtually with the people. You can even encrypt your mails.

  17. Re:Rumours of G+ Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerat by horza · · Score: 2

    Wow you have completely the opposite take to me! With G+ forcing me to use my real name, tracking my emails, tracking my browsing habits, that little red dot is a constant reminder that Google is no longer just sifting data to serve me ads but is constantly watching ME. Not some hypothetical concept of 'me' but one that can be linked to my parents, my friends, my work colleagues.

    Not that I'm going to stop using Google for search, I love it too much. Instead I do the same as I do with Facebook, I keep multiple profiles using Firefox extension "Cookie Swap", and will do so until both Facebook and G+ are consigned to the dustbin of history by the next service that "gets it".

    Phillip.

  18. They need to get their act together by crossmr · · Score: 2

    Google's personalization as a result of creating a google+ account is just terrible.

    Despite creating my account in Canada, using it for years in Canada, I added Google+ to my account while I'm living in Korea. This immediately broke my news archive searches. They would only search Korean language papers in Korea, they wouldn't even search any of the major English language Korean papers in Korea. my account was fully set to English, and I even went through and purged all mention of Korea from my profile, no change.
    Logged out my searches were fine. I encountered a google employee on here a few weeks back who said he'd submit a bug report

    I was just doing a google news archive search (logged out) this morning, and suddenly I'm getting nothing..only korean results. Yet I'm logged out. Great they must have added some kind of persistent cookie to screw with me I thought. This is despite being at the Canadian portal, google.ca and having clicked the button to "Serve me in English". I logged in to try clearing any residual cookies (log in then out) but upon logging in, suddenly I was getting full english archive search.

    They reversed the behaviour. Logged in, I get proper archive searches, logged out, now suddenly I can't search the archives of any English news source from Korea. Absolutely stellar. This is the kind of work I'd expect from some start-up being run by one guy in his basement that doesn't quite have a full grasp on what he's doing. The result of this is anyone who travels to Korea will not be able to do a proper news search in Korea unless they've logged into google+. Business traveller? Don't have google+, hope you don't need to look up an old news report while you're here.

    This is pathetic really.

  19. Re:Rumours of G+ Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerat by ezh · · Score: 2

    Google actually back-pedalled on 'real name' policy. It has to be a name you are known by, which could be pretty much anything. See will.i.am on G+, for example.

    As for Facebook, it continuously pushes its users to put more data in the open, it has been caught selling private user data to advertisers. FB partner sites can access your info just because your friend visited it while logged into FB, by extracting their list of friends (unless you found your way in a myriad of FB privacy settings and clicked all the correct options - and there is no guarantee FB won't come up with another way to screw your privacy over next month). On top of that, FB founder openly called FB users 'stupid fucks'. Tell me how can you trust such company? And what good can your cookie scrubbers/swappers do, if your FB friends tell a lot about you without even realising it?

    I am not saying Google is an angel. But it has much better track record when dealing with private user data. Lots of people use Gmail, but a lot more still use Yahoo & Hotmail. FB also has built-in email. And for many people, FB messages have replaced any other form of IM and even email. So Gmail is far from being a dominant email out there.

    So, out of the two, I consider G+ a lot less evil than FB, and wish it every success. Don't get me wrong - I'd be more than happy when a better service comes along. But until then anything that changes the current state of things in social networks world is good.