How Steve Jobs Changed Google Plus

Anthony_Cargile writes "Everyone thinks of Google Plus as a social networking website competing with Facebook, but that is no longer the case — even Google recognizes its failure in that regard. But in a meeting with Sergey Brin and Larry Page shortly before his death, Steve Jobs gave key advice as to what direction to take their company with regards to Google Plus, as is evidenced by their controversial new 'umbrella' privacy policy that went in effect this year. Privacy advocates beware, as the problem is almost certainly worse than ever anticipated."

Comments

Let the guy fucking rest already...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, he died months ago, we can stop jerking off all over his legacy now...

Re:Let the guy fucking rest already...

[Anonymous Coward]

he invites this treatment with his historical treatment of others, and his arrogant narcissism.

Re:Let the guy fucking rest already...

[Anonymous Coward]

Even dead, Steve is far more interesting than all of /. commentators put together, more interesting than almost every CEO in the entire tech industry.
[snip]

Think about it next time you bash Apple.

That's what they said about Aristotle every time someone challenged some aspect of the great man's system. Maybe that's why it took 1800 years for the heliocentric model of the solar system, and the experimental basis of science, to gain any traction.

Just because someone has impressive stature doesn't mean that everything s/he did has to be worshipped and parrotted.

Re:Let the guy fucking rest already...

[Anonymous Coward]

Even dead, Steve is far more interesting than all of /. commentators put together, more interesting than almost every CEO in the entire tech industry.

CEOs are not so important as they (and you) think.

Steve & Steve (Jobs/Woz) formed the very computer industry you are enjoying now. No, it was NOT IBM. Their PC came out AFTER the Apple I/II as a response.

There were also Kenbak, Micral, Altair, Atari, Commodore, Sharp, Tandy/Radio Shack, etc... producing computers at that time.

Steve was tremendously influential in the Music, Movie, Smartphone, Computer, Retail sections. Apple haters tend to loath him and Apple. But you totally underestimate what a world without Apple would look like today. It would be frightening. The PC wouldn't exist (probably) as the PC-standard was only invented as a quick&dirty effort as response to the Apple 2.

I'm not an Apple hater, but you're exagerating. Saying that the IBM-PC was an answer to the Apple ][, is as saying that the Apple ][ was an answer to IBM's 5100. The IBM-PC was an answer to all 70s microcomputers.

The GUI wouldn't be there where it is now. (and not Xerox wouldn't have sold it. They had only a raw prototype and their own managers said it wouldn't be marketable)

Perhaps VisiOn or one of the other projects at the time would have happened.

Smartphones would still be in the iron grasp of carriers, filled with bloatware and branded to death. The iPhone was the first one were the carriers had ZERO influence.

That is very US-centric. Here in this part of Europe, the carriers never had any influence on smartphones at all.

Tablets would probably still be synonymous with failed Tablet-PCs featuring WinXP.

So you admit that tablets were happening before jobs. WinXP tablets were more popular than Apple's Newton. iPad was more popular than WinXP tablets.

etc, etc. No, Steve was not holy, innocent or a general good guy. Nevertheless, should he be recognised as one of the greatest figures in IT history. Yes he was that important. And no, it is not natural that someone else would have come along and did the same as Steve. Otherwise there would already be the next Rockstar CEO somewhere. But there isn't. Think about it next time you bash Apple.

Jobs was important to IT history. But he was not as important as you make him. And don't worry, new rockstars pop up all the time - they will as long as there are fans.

Re:Let the guy fucking rest already...

[hairyfeet]

The Apple I couldn't even be truly considered a kit as it didn't come with all the parts needed to make a functional system, not to mention there were only a few hundred made and sold in a very limited geographic area.I wouldn't exactly call that any kind of major milestone in the history of computing and if you are gonna count that you would need to also count the KIM 1 released in the same year but I can't find the exact day so who knows if it was earlier or later.

Regardless MOS Tech were already working on the KIM before they could have possibly heard of Jobs so one could argue that even if Jobs had never built squat you'd have still had the birth of the home computer, as its only logical to slap something like the KIM in a box with a keyboard and a monitor hookup which is exactly what Commodore did when they bought out MOS and had the same guys build the PET. Of course once the PET hit the scene with the TRS-80 right behind it that was it, the race was on.

Parallel world.

[Ostracus]

Privacy advocates beware, as the problem is almost certainly worse than ever anticipated.

Good thing we have alternatives, right?

Re:Parallel world.

[PNutts]

Yes, as in none. I don't use any of them.

Re:Parallel world.

[interkin3tic]

There's a guy around town who must not be right in the head, he's always shielding his face with one hand, has long fingernails, all black clothing, a hat, long hair, and a beard. Whenever I see him I'm tempted to tell him that whoever he thinks is watching him, he's making it really easy to track him by standing out like a sore thumb. Holding your hand over your face is not really a good way to stay incognito.

I wonder if the same isn't true for online privacy, if by caring about it and making some attempt to remain private, I've put myself on the radar for anyone who happens to be monitoring online activity.

Re:Parallel world.

[wvmarle]

Privacy advocates beware, as the problem is almost certainly worse than ever anticipated.

Good thing we have alternatives, right?

Well, yes and no.

There are alternatives, but no useful alternatives. The problem of the Internet is that it is very conductive to the creation of monopolies, especially when it comes to sites that rely on user input. Facebook is big because in the early days it managed to gain critical mass. This made it grow to the juggernaut it is now. Slashdot is also a site that gained critical mass, and as a result is one of the biggest IT/tech related discussion sites.

As a result, if you want to connect with friends and use an online social network, you go to Facebook, because everyone else is there already. You don't go to Google+ or any other such network, as your friends aren't there. The sheer size of Facebook is its main attraction, and this makes it also very difficult for other networks to start to compete. After all you first have to get critical mass, and that's really difficult.

Even a company like Google, with its very positive image, its huge resources, gaining enormous publicity with their start-up network (they made it to the TV news, front page of news papers worldwide, all over the tech sites) didn't manage to do this. They didn't even gain enough traction to survive as social network in a niche, like e.g. LinkedIn still survives. This just goes to show how hard it is to come with a viable alternative. The only way to come with an alternative is to link your network to Facebook, which Facebook won't allow, and still doesn't give users much of an incentive to use your network and not Facebook's.

FFS. Steve Jobs is not god, you dimwits.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the same man who came up with "MobileMe" and Ping. Remember those massive failures? No? That's because the media ignores them in portraying Apple as a company that never makes a mistake.

Re:This is what Slashdot has become?

[NoSleepDemon]

I like how the article quite randomly mentions that Jobs used to do LSD, for no apparent reason:

"But where does Steve Jobs fit into all this? Before he passed, the famed Apple CEO (and former LSD user) met with Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, with Page as Google CEO by that time."

I'm not sure exactly what reaction that little interjection was supposed to elicit from the reader...

This article says nothing

[guises]

There's nothing in the article (yes, I read it). It's just what everyone already knew - Google+ is one more Google service and will continue to exist and act as a data source to better target their advertisements. Big deal. The actual content of the unified privacy policy remains less threatening than most, even if people continue to cower at its mere existence. The contribution that it mentions from Steve Jobs is essentially non-existent, and I've already written more than this thing deserves.

Re:This article says nothing

[slasho81]

I suggest we start tagging articles with no content as 'fluff'.

Re:a certain lack of users

[MachDelta]

TFA explains it - if you're using YouTube, Google search, gmail, or any other google service, you're using Google+. It's just a big wrapper for the whole experience. No one cares if you aren't posting about drunken weekend escapades because your digital footprints are just as valuable without the meaningless banter that serves as an excuse to use the FaceTubes.

Re:a certain lack of users

[evorster]

I have to agree. There are less users, but they are overall more useful. I subscribe to the photography and technology groups, so I have a neverending stream of nice photos and interesting gadgets to look at on a slow news day. In fact, I sometimes learn about new gadgets even before they pop up on slashdot. So, G+ is aimed at a different group of people, and that being so does not make it a failure. Facebook pretty much has the market cornered with the Farmville and other online game types, G+ news seems to have more news from creative types. Also, G+ is easy to train, and after weeding out the worst spammers, the rest is all good. -Evert Vorster-

Re:FFS. Steve Jobs is not god, you dimwits.

[bluemonq]

Apple themselves readily admit their own mistakes.

"You're holding it wrong." "Just avoid holding it that way." "Upon investigation, we were stunned to find that the formula we use to calculate how many bars of signal strength to display is totally wrong."

Re:a certain lack of users

[EvilAlphonso]

So you mean the big fuss is over them being able to do "grep $googleid unified_services_access.log" instead of "grep $googleid *service_access.log"?

Almost Certainly

[ryanisflyboy]

I almost certainly read the article, and I almost certainly agree with the summary. You almost certainly read the article too, in which case you almost certainly agree that this almost certainly occurred. This is almost certainly the most accurate story ever posted on /. And almost certainly, this comment will be rated +5 informative.

It is either certain, or it isn't. If it is certain, then there is no doubt evidence to back up that claim. In which case you would simply say "it is certain that... because of..." Unless you are writing an article on probability theory, then we should expect facts. Not rumor dressed up as fact.

You know what we call things reported on web blogs that are almost certain?
Bullshit.

Here are some red-flag phrases the writer of the summary almost certainly read, and almost certainly ignored:
"Nobody would expect..."
"I'm going to reveal..."
"It all started when..."
"...something to the effect of..."
"...easily verified via his Wikipedia page..."
"I'm told by people familiar with the situation..."
"I project that..."

Well, before I totally dismiss the article let us learn about the author. Perhaps he is a well connected business savvy insider who has connections right at the top. Let's see what the bio says:

Chris "...is a business grad student at USC who is very fluent with technology..."

Okay, I can't go on any more. I'm going to be sick. Whatever journalistic integrity I had is being sucked dry by this one. Since when did USC grad students start getting taken so seriously?

Give C= a bit more credit sir

[cheekyboy]

C= made a PC too in the 70s

C= made a cheaper home fun computer than Apple

C= made a better color computer than Mac System 6

The C= Amgia could emulate the Macs+OS via ROM module or (copy rom as most did via BBSs). The Rom in ram ran faster. The Emulator patched some OS calls to be asyncronous and ran faster and better that a real mac did. And also ran Amiga apps at the same time as Mac Apps.