I think the only test for Google+ left is that of reaching critical mass. Facebook and Google+ are of the same ilk, but emphasize different things. I think that's the fundamental difference. I should also mention that Google+ has no "wall" equivalent, which I think is an interesting design choice.
You know, I just thought about how ambitious a project Google+ is. Here's a small list of products it's a direct or indirect attack on: Twitter Facebook FourSquare (Hangouts) Beluga, IvyTalk and other "Group Messaging Solutions" (Huddle) Flickr (well, along with Picassa) Reddit Digg (Sparks)
Hangouts are impromptu voice and video chatting with circles. So I'm not sure that that falls into FourSquare territory, but there is google maps integration that does.
Please give me your Google+ invite. I'd like to try it if you're not.
Really Air Co.? First of all, my conversation about its faults ended with
Alright then, when an invite gets sent my way, or it eventually becomes available to the public, we'll reconvene here and discuss in a more informed way.
I was acknowledging that I didn't know very much about it and that I was speculating based on the faults of other social networks. I acknowledged this on several occasions during the conversation as well. Secondly, you took that quote from the middle of a back-and-forth, and took much of its context away.
This is the same for any social network, Facebook is not exempt.
I should mention here that I don't like facebook. I use it by social necessity to interact with people and occasionally I use it for the lulz. Back to the original point - yes, google+ suffers from the same problems as facebook, that is why not very many people will switch.
I was making a general point about the idea of grouping your friends into categories. That is the extent of the phrase "the same problems". I don't need to use it to make a broad statement about social networks in general. I can understand your need to defend it from my unsubstantiated speculation, but did you really need to be so aggressive about it? It isn't like you have used it either.
On a different note, Magic, I agree with you that if it attains critical mass then it will be successful (this is kind of a tautology about social networks). The point I've been trying to make this whole time is that Google+ doesn't do enough to make it better than existing social networks to overcome the inertia it would take to make such a critical mass switch.
Hey, glad someone remembered us! Luckily for us, our business model has changed to be mostly business focused, and I can't imagine Google+ trying to tap into that market soon. It seems much more just a straight consumer product.
Yes please. I would really like the invite you have used to experience Google+ and gain all your knowledge about how it works and what its faults are. Surely you would not make baseless assumptions so loudly and for such a prolonged time, right? That would be silly and stupid, no?
Don't you think you are taking all of this a bit to seriously? My overarching argument was: Google+ won't gain sufficient popularity because it doesn't appeal to enough people. Within that I argued point such as the annoyance of making friend lists and the lack of an appropriate target demographic. I also argued that it has no significant features which will draw people in from other social networks. I don't consider any of these points to be unfair extrapolation from the videos about it that are already out detailing its features.
The only place where speculation occurred was regarding the mechanics of adding people to groups, and I admitted several times that I was speculating based on my experiences with Facebook.
No sense in trying to deny you have a Google+ invite jmerm (if that is even your real name). Just give it to me. You've clearly played with it long enough to spend hours making posts telling how it's going to fail and stuff. So be kind and just pass it on. As I said, I'd like to try Google+ myself, so just pass the invite to me. No hard feelings, mkay?
If you are desperate to know, both ProfPangloss and AdmiralHotcakes know me personally in real life and know that my username here is the first letter of my first name and the first four of my surname.
And I forgot to ask you earlier, but if I did have an invite and was using it to try out the service based on which I'm making my claims (not the case), how would I be able to give it to you?
Engadget is raving about it, and Lifehacker called Hangout the best video conference suite they've ever seen
I saw the lifehacker article/video but somehow missed the engadget one. You make a good point, and have weakened mine greatly. If the video conferencing is as good as the lifehacker video made it out to be, I could see people joining just for that, but staying for the other features.
Main selling point for me? It's Google. I have Android phone, use gmail, greader would use google calendar, if our university's calendar would sync up with it nicely. I have sold my soul to Google so deeply that I would try and use the +, even when I don't even yet know on what, how and why I would use it.
I'm with Apsup. If Google+ works, it will reduce the number of accounts my online presence needs by 5+, and it'll all be in the Googleverse. I'm pretty much sold on Google products from the moment I know they're Google products, and this won't be any different.
I think Google+ has the potential to bring people in because it's new and there's a big name behind it, but they'll stay because it does facebook better than facebook does while adding compelling features like hangouts, huddles and circles. It solves the "parents on facebook" issue that's caused troubles for many a' facebook user, so we'll have to see.
it will reduce the number of accounts my online presence needs by 5+
Even if it is a complete success, don't you think you would need to keep a skype account and the like around for interfacing without people outside the google bubble?
Yes of course you would be able to, jmerm (if that really is your name). Now get on with it. Just send me the invite and we'll be done with this nonsense. Sooner the better. Will ease your mind as well. Don't dilly-dally now.
Something I forgot to mention is that (usually black) bar that is atop all google products right now allows you to interface with g+ pretty functionally. For example, if someone comments on a post I made, I can comment from a drop down notification from gmail, or docs or anything. Its well integrated and quick, I can't express how fast it is.
Comments
Twitter
Facebook
FourSquare (Hangouts)
Beluga, IvyTalk and other "Group Messaging Solutions" (Huddle)
Flickr (well, along with Picassa)
Reddit
Digg (Sparks)
On a different note, Magic, I agree with you that if it attains critical mass then it will be successful (this is kind of a tautology about social networks). The point I've been trying to make this whole time is that Google+ doesn't do enough to make it better than existing social networks to overcome the inertia it would take to make such a critical mass switch.
My overarching argument was: Google+ won't gain sufficient popularity because it doesn't appeal to enough people.
Within that I argued point such as the annoyance of making friend lists and the lack of an appropriate target demographic. I also argued that it has no significant features which will draw people in from other social networks.
I don't consider any of these points to be unfair extrapolation from the videos about it that are already out detailing its features.
The only place where speculation occurred was regarding the mechanics of adding people to groups, and I admitted several times that I was speculating based on my experiences with Facebook.
My question to you is why you are so bothered?
Or get a Circle.
And I forgot to ask you earlier, but if I did have an invite and was using it to try out the service based on which I'm making my claims (not the case), how would I be able to give it to you?