Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Begins To Merge Google+, Gmail Contacts

Posted by samzenpus on from the make-it-one dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Google today announced new integration between Gmail and Google+ that sees your social connections show up in auto-complete when you're composing an email. Google says the feature is rolling out "over the next couple of days" to everyone that uses Gmail and Google+."

50 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Great.... by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spam City, here we come. Why is this opt-out instead of opt-in? Because nobody would want it.

    1. Re:Great.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Google+: Google's third failure of a social network that nobody wants but Google is going to push by forcing integration with their popular services such as YouTube and Gmail.

      Sorry Google, but I've had I'm jumping ship. Microsoft looks like a saint in comparison.

    2. Re:Great.... by number17 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I looked at the pictures in the article and you can disable emails coming from Google+. Its under General settings tab in Gmail.

      It doesn't look like I can send emails to Google+ people quite yet.

    3. Re:Great.... by JDG1980 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google+: Google's third failure of a social network that nobody wants but Google is going to push by forcing integration with their popular services such as YouTube and Gmail.

      This is the kind of thing that antitrust laws are supposed to stop. Unfortunately, we don't do antitrust enforcement in the U.S. any more, at least not in any meaningful sense.

    4. Re:Great.... by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google+: Google's third failure of a social network that nobody wants but Google is going to push by forcing integration with their popular services such as YouTube and Gmail.

      This is the kind of thing that antitrust laws are supposed to stop. Unfortunately, we don't do antitrust enforcement in the U.S. any more, at least not in any meaningful sense.

      I don't like Google integrating its other -- more useful or popular -- services like YouTube GMail with Google+, but where's the antitrust angle to that?

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    5. Re:Great.... by queazocotal · · Score: 2

      If G+ was market dominant, the argument could be made that by showing completions only from google services was anticompetitive.

    6. Re:Great.... by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is this opt-out instead of opt-in? Because nobody would want it.

      Oh, wait, you're talking about Google. For a second there, I thought you were talking about Slashdot Beta.

    7. Re:Great.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Obviously, since Google is the only company providing Google+ and Gmail.

      Your pedantry aside, they are dominant in the areas of email and video sharing which are the places they are forcing Google+ integration.

    8. Re:Great.... by swillden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Spam City, here we come.

      Do you circle a lot of people who will spam you?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re:Great.... by Charcharodon · · Score: 2
      It's only anti-trust if you have no other choice. Last time I checked there were nearly endless social media and email choices out there.

      Anti-trust is not synonymous with anti-business that are jerks and stupid heads.

    10. Re:Great.... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do you circle a lot of people who will spam you?

      That's not that game where everyone... never mind.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  2. bad bad idea by jaymz666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When will they force everyone using any google service to use G+?

    What about all these people that have problems having G+? This could well be the real beginning of the end

    1. Re:bad bad idea by MacTO · · Score: 5, Informative

      You aren't actually forced to use G+, even if it is enabled on your account. Realistically, Google won't be able to force you to use G+ either since that would break interoperability with other email providers.

      As for the privacy concerns associated with G+, they should exist whether or not these are independent services. It is the same company collecting your data after all.

    2. Re:bad bad idea by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You aren't actually forced to use G+

      Most Slashdotters aren't actually forced to do much of anything, but that doesn't stop them from bitching about just about everything.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:bad bad idea by peragrin · · Score: 2

      Just don't use google + and everyone in a while check the security settings o that it stays locked down.

      google is just merging all of it's products to one username/password combo. instead of having an account with youLube, Docs, mail, etcs, it is google +.

      It will make adding features easier on the backend. the down side is I don't use social networking, of course since I have an iPhone I can't use google contacts anyways.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    4. Re:bad bad idea by cmorriss · · Score: 2

      Good lord. I understand Slashdot folks generally don't like to read the actual article, but I don't think a single comment on this has come from someone who actually read it.

      It is simply and integration between G+ and gmail. They are NOT merging. IF you use G+, then you'll be able to send emails to people in G+ without having to know their email address. It's a nice convenience. That is all.

      So if you're not using G+ for anything now, nothing at all will change for you in gmail. If you are using it, you will get some nice new feature.

      --
      10 minutes working on a sig. What a waste.
  3. Easy enough to disable by barlevg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Though the obvious response is, "for now."

  4. Whatever by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's great Google. Keep trying to make google+ a thing. That's great.
    Can't say I'm happy about how that worked out for youtube but keep trying. You never know.
    I don't care that much anyway. I switched my gmail account to be my spam account a while ago and only check it via outlook any so whatever. Good luck though.

  5. Re: Great by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm just waiting for a conclusive youtube history gets linked in to your G+ display. I'm sure that won't be any cause for embarrassment amongst professional circles.

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  6. Re:Google, when will it end? by luca.masters · · Score: 2

    I don't know. I use it for commenting on YouTube and will soon be using it for my Google Contacts (Gmail and Voice) as well.

    Yeah, Google+ isn't replacing Facebook. But it's working as a way of consolidating overlapping aspects of their various services. If you don't want to go post to your feed, that's fine.

  7. Google+ is supremely annoying by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 5, Interesting
    We run a small condo, 12 units. A few years ago we created a gmail account for the condo administration to communicate with the residents. We used the condo association's legal name as registered with the government. Recently I had to go through the whole "upgrade the account to google+ and you can't opt out" rigamarole. I sent the registration form to google's anonymous and unreachable (except through the one-way web form) to be told the name doesn't meet Google guidelines because they want people to be able to find us.

    Guess what? It's a condo. It only concerns the 12 people who live here. No one else cares about who cleans our carpets and who's complaining about the squeaking hinges on the door over at #201.

    It's so stupid. I downloaded all the documents in the drive but Google doesn't handle french accents too well in file names, AND it creates a flat zip... We lost the whole tree. Oh well, I'll manually re-create it when I migrate over to Yahoo groups.

    You can say what you want about Yahoo, they don't annoy you at the same level as Google.

    --
    Mostly random stuff.
    1. Re:Google+ is supremely annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      A few years ago we created a gmail account for the condo administration to communicate with the residents....Recently I had to go through the whole "upgrade the account to google+ and you can't opt out" rigamarole.

      I have a gmail account and I don't recall anytime that I was required to upgrade to google+. Sure, I have had the occasional "friendly reminders" that I need to update my contact information or I could permanently lose access to my account if I forget my password, but other than that no troubles. What the hell did you do to piss them off so much?

    2. Re:Google+ is supremely annoying by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 3, Informative
      Who knows? Like I said, Google was forcing me to upgrade to Google+ and it was complaining that the name didn't live up to their exalted standards. They said they wanted other people to be able to contact us. If we were a business, we should create a google+ page. Guess what? As a condo admin, I'm not paid, and I'm not interested in creating a google+ page. Furthermore, a condo board in Quebec is not a business so why should I care?

      The main problem Google seems to have is with the name. It's a long sequence of letters and numbers at gmail.com.

      We don't want other people to find us. We don't want to find other people.

      We are not going to help Google+'s bogus social networking numbers simply because like I said we're boring. Just let us keep our name...

      The pop-up I get is in French but it boils down to that the name "doesn't sound" like a name and we must change it. Even though I sent the document showing that it's the name registered with the government, it's not good enough for Google??

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    3. Re:Google+ is supremely annoying by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are full of shit. I just created a Gmail account without a real name to prove it.

      Email: a38749238467332443@gmail.com
      Pass: supersecure

      Feel free to log in and check it out. The name on it is "Not Real". It is required for email headers. Fake birthday too, which is of course required because minors can't agree to TOS.

      They don't force you to create a G+ account just to continue using Gmail. Obviously they are aware that many Gmail accounts are not personal (they have a whole Gmail for business thing going on) and provide email services for other companies (like UK ISP Virgin) who would not take to kindly to having their customers forced to join G+.

      Unless you have provide some evidence that you were forced to sign up to G+ against your will I'm afraid you have been exposed as a fraud or a chump who didn't see the "no thanks" button.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  8. Re:All your base belong to us. by TWX · · Score: 2

    Old? That meme only happened in the early 2000s and the version of the game that it came from was released in 1991. If you think that makes you old, then you're probably still just a kid.

    Oh yeah? Well, a grue eats your face!

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  9. Wrong by tlambert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is no different when people made a stink over Microsoft bundling IE with Windows.

    Wrong

    They do not wield monopolistic power in the marketplace, and they are not leveraging monopolistic power (which they don't have) to obtain a monopoly in another market.

    This is very different from Microsoft, which leveraged it's desktop monopoly in order to try to obtain a browser monopoly, and was convicted of same in a Federal Court.

    1. Re:Wrong by tlambert · · Score: 2

      Operating system: ... etc.

      At the time, Windows had more that 75% of the desktop makretshare, so it counted as "monopolistic power".

      As I said, the same thing and you are a Google marketing shill.

      And you have obviously never read my posts about Google...

      And what are you talking about with sock puppets? I am an AC, how can AC be a sock puppet?

      It's really easy. Except, you know, on YouTube, where AC's are no longer allowed to make comments. And the newspaper sites where they are now requiring accounts. Bet that really pisses you off.

    2. Re:Wrong by tlambert · · Score: 5, Informative

      Desktop operating systems: BeOS, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD MacOS.

      By your reasoning Microsoft never had a monopoly to leverage either. Take your double standard and cram it. "Monopoly" in the context of anti-trust and anti-competition laws means "dominant market position",

      Microsoft had a >85% share of the desktop market, and this is a point Federal Investigators made at the time they were considering bringing charges against Microsoft. None of those competing operating systems, taken together, had anywhere near enough market share to disrupt Microsoft effectively targeting Netscape and nearly putting them out of business. The E.U. agreed with this assessment, and brought similar charges to those brought by the DOJ in the U.S..

      This is a matter of historical fact and court record.

      Google has a dominant market position in search, webmail and web video, Microsoft has/had a dominant position in desktop operating systems.

      Apparently you don't understand what wielding monopolistic power means either, but lever let details stop you from getting your frothing at the mouth on.

      Say we grant your premise for the sake of argument. What services is Google forcing you to use, in place of what other services, by leveraging their dominant position? The only thing they are doing is using G+ as the primary placeholder for their combined credentials store, and even then, unless you are creating a new YouTube account, you can choose not to attach your existing YouTube account to the G+ credential.

      The only thing that they are doing, which I think is kind of piss-poor on their part, but has nothing to do with the use of monopolistic power in any way, is preventing you creating *new* separate accounts for their various services, the same way you are unable to create separate accounts for Word or Excel on the Office365 site.

      From a services management perspective, maintaining multiple back end account databases is a PITA, so I can understand why they are doing this, although I really hate that they are doing the whole Facebook-like thing and insisting on "Real Identities or well known pseudonyms", and denying account creation outside those categories. I think anonymity is important, but you aren't going to resolve that particular issue by having separate accounts, since giving that up is pretty much part of their TOS agreement, just as it's becoming part of everyone else's.

    3. Re:Wrong by swillden · · Score: 2

      I really hate that they are doing the whole Facebook-like thing and insisting on "Real Identities or well known pseudonyms", and denying account creation outside those categories.

      You can work around that by creating a "page", which is essentially a pseudonymous sub-account, and using that instead. Pages can have any sort of name you like, and can be used as an identity for posting, commenting, etc.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  10. I only want to use GMail. Don't want Google+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just give me GMail.

    Why is it so hard for Google to give me something I want and not something that I don't want?

    Or is this part of Google's plans to increase their Google+ numbers by forcing everyone with GMail to become part of Google+?

    Give it a break Google.

    You were cool.

    But now you're becoming annoying.

  11. G+ is not market dominant... by tlambert · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If G+ was market dominant, the argument could be made that by showing completions only from google services was anticompetitive.

    G+ is not market dominant... even among Google employees.

    1. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by aliquis · · Score: 5, Funny

      What Google needs to bring to the market is Google porn.

      That would be an instant success!

    2. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 4, Informative

      They already have - but they just called it Google.

    3. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by tlambert · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's the point. G+ isn't market dominant, but GMail, Google Search and Youtube are.
      IE was not market dominant, but Windows was.

      I'll give you Google Search, but you don't have to sign into G+ to use it.

      YouTube doesn't seem market dominant, but as long as you aren't commenting, you can use your previously created YouTube account to post videos and they've *claimed* there's no intention to change that, so it's irrelevant (this is a "wait and see" for me).

      GMail doesn't seem market dominant, but I'd be willing to look at numbers if you have them relative to Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail/Outlook.com, and if you can show 75% market share or above, I'll grant you that, though I think that the market for free stuff is more or less infinite.

      I kind of don't see how this is any different from the Yahoo single sign-on or the Microsoft single sign-on that goes across all their properties, other than people don't like having their anonymity stripped away. Neither do I, but then I avoid it by not using merged single sign-on services from any of the three companies in question.

    4. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They used to. Image search was quite nice for a quick and high quality porn fix. Then Google decided to replace "Save Search" with some fucked up "we'll detect if you want to see porn" setting which tends to find lower quality porn then before.

      Google is getting worse every year.

    5. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by macson_g · · Score: 2

      I'll give you Google Search, but you don't have to sign into G+ to use it

      ...yet

    6. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Informative

      YouTube doesn't seem market dominant

      What planet do you live on? What other large sites out there allow users to post videos? YouTube is easily, by far, the largest site of its type.

      GMail doesn't seem market dominant, but I'd be willing to look at numbers if you have them relative to Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail/Outlook.com

      Here again you seem to be out of touch with reality, but maybe not so much as with the YouTube comment above. Hotmail has been going down for ages, ever since the MS takeover and conversion to "Live", though maybe they're doing a little better now with outlook.com but I kinda doubt it, and Yahoo's been going down the toilet for years now too. I don't have any hard data, but I definitely see far more people with Gmail addresses than the other two.

    7. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2

      Image search, with safesearch turned off. Is pretty much "Google porn."

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    8. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2

      I almost forgot about google trying to detect when you wanted porn (Hint: always)
      Just add "xxx" to every search, and the free porn avalanche begins again.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    9. Re:G+ is not market dominant... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      YouTube doesn't seem market dominant

      Are you serious? I can't even remember the name of any other similar service (though I do know that a few others exist).

      as long as you aren't commenting, you can use your previously created YouTube account to post videos and they've *claimed* there's no intention to change that, so it's irrelevant (this is a "wait and see" for me).

      Well, first of all, commenting is kinda a major part of what YouTube is.

      Also, didn't they basically just made all YouTube accounts G+ accounts? I know that it's what happened to mine. You can still keep it separate, yes (though they will keep spamming you again and again asking whether you want to merge them), but it's all G+-based now.

  12. Re:I'm about to give up on Gmail... by xeno · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This.

    I have my own domain and a small rack in the basement, with mail I haven't used much in a while.. but this G+ stupidity might just roust me out of my slumber. I've stayed with Gmail out of inertia mostly; the handy features just barely outweigh the irritation. But it's really, really close. The Gmail interface changes from a year ago still suck. Badly. Google+ is an irritating solution to a problem I don't have, and becoming terribly intrusive. Youtube integration is actively conterproductive, a constant intrusion of personal browsing into potential business activity. When I log into gmail and open up a youtube tab, it constatntly pops up a link to some warplane videos I watched a year ago. So... I can't browse youtube because if I use gmail to communicate with clients for moonlighting gigs, because those who use g+ might see that and think I'm a nut? No thanks.)

    Gmail is a handy web interface to email functions I had thru IMAP a decade ago, nothing more. I could easily switch back. Better yet, I could update the whole mess and run it in a couple of VMs at AWS for pennies a day.

    I hesitate because Google docs is handy for helping my kids on their school reports, annotating, correcting, making suggestions as they work on it.. but really it's a nice-to-have. I would miss it, but if the price for docs is forced use of Google+, it's not worth the hassle.

    --
    I think not...(*poof*)
  13. Re: Great by Antonovich · · Score: 3, Informative

    Use different accounts. I have several Google accounts for different purposes. All are connected to chrome where I want them to be. Nothing professional ever gets on my personal accounts, where I look at political stuff and the like that my colleagues have no business knowing. I only use my personal accounts outside work hours, or on my phone. In any case, colleagues only see what I want them to see. It takes a while to get used to (forgetting to do work-related searches in the work browser) but when you do it's really, really handy. Problem solved? Sure, they could get at my accounts if the boss really wanted to but the boss could also install a key-logger and I'm not that paranoid...

  14. why don't google by obreiro · · Score: 2

    why the hell google don't understand that nobody wants G+ ??????????

  15. Re: Great by StripedCow · · Score: 4, Funny

    on my personal accounts, where I look at political stuff and the like

    I see what you did there.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  16. Re: Great by Monoman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mistakenly use the wrong account ONE time and you probably won't be able to undo the mess it will cause. I didn't like it when my "smart" phone linked my contacts and social apps and I don't like the idea of G+,FB, etc doing things auto-magically for me either.

    This crap is just chasing me away from Gmail and G+.

    --
    Keep the Classic Slashdot.
  17. Re: Great by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's plenty of things on YouTube that I would be embarassed for the world to know I saw I'm sure. Tame or not.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  18. Re:*ALL* of my gmail accounts? by Rockoon · · Score: 2

    Tthey already created a g+ account for your gmail account. It just hasnt been linked yet.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  19. Whatever Happend to "Do No Evil" Google? by JBrow · · Score: 2

    Ref: #6: You can make money without doing evil.
    http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/

    YRS

    --
    --- You are in a little twisty maze of comments, all different.
  20. Re: Great by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    There aren't really any great options when it comes to phones. You can get an Android phone, which is inexpensive but has Google's tentacles in it, or you can get an iPhone which is expensive as hell and forces you to stay confined to Apple's walled garden and their One True Way of doing everything and fuels a company which now seems have taken the crown of most evil corporation (in the tech sector) away from MS, or you can get a Windows Phone which is ugly, forces you to do everything in MS's One True Way of doing everything, and fuels what is now the second most evil corporation in the tech sector.

    AFAICT, the best option is probably going to be getting an Android phone, and then reflashing it with one of those alternative firmwares like CyanogenMod which doesn't have everything linked to Google.

  21. Re:Google, when will it end? by geminidomino · · Score: 2

    Uh... no? At least, I don't see any real overlap in mine. Email address book is for people I want to email, and phone contacts are for people I want to call. The union of those two sets is in the single-digits.