Google plus


Google plus - Yahoo News Search Results

Google to release Nexus Player in Japan next month

Google’s Nexus Player won’t be exclusive to North America for much longer: The device will start selling in Japan next month, and other international rollouts may not be far behind. Google announced in ...

What Google's Unpatched Android Flaws Mean for You

Google caused a stir in the information-security industry this month by publicly disclosing flaws in the software of its rivals Apple and Microsoft. The first flaw, in the WebView component of Android 4.3 Jelly Bean and older, will stay unpatched for "practical" reasons. WebView lets third-party Android apps leverage the stock Android browser to display ads and other Web-based content. In ...

Former Google+ employee: We f***ed up

A former Google+ employee who spent three years helping create Google+ has written a brutal blog post declaring the tech giant's social network a failure.


recent bookmarks tagged Google%20plus

Men Are from Google , Women Are from Pinterest | Techland |

Posted on 28 January 2014

Posted on 18 January 2014

Social Media Marketing with Google Plus | Social Media Today

Posted on 12 November 2013

Google+ alcanza 400 millones de usuarios

Posted on 10 November 2013

5+ Ways Google Plus Impacts your SEO Strategy - Positionly Blog

Posted on 23 October 2013

gplusID - Create Vanity URL for your Google+ profile |

Posted on 20 September 2013

Posted on 16 July 2013

Helping Or Hurting: The Debate Over Google+ Local

Posted on 12 July 2013

Now Multiple Google+ Accounts Can Manage One YouTube Channel

Posted on 2 July 2013

Google Plus for Business: 3 Google Plus Tools to Help Your Business

Posted on 23 June 2013

Top Answers About Google+ on Quora

Top Answers About Google+

Should I use a YouTube channel linked to my profile or one linked with a website if I want to brand myself as a self-help author?

I don't think there's a bad answer out of the two options - they're both acceptable approaches.

The way I see it, the benefit of the branded one is that it may help you grow into that market easier, and may be able to feature other people in your channel later on. The benefit of the personal one is that if you find that there's a better market to go that's a few steps away from this one, it's easier to transition.

See question on Quora

Posted on 13 March 2014

Why hasn't Google purchased Quora yet?

Quora's founder was an early employee (CTO) at Facebook, and I'd guess he likely has a nice chunk of equity from there socked away. Add that in to the fact that his former position lends him the ultimate credibility, network connections for coding talent and venture capital, and the fact that Quora is head and shoulders above most of the other Q & A sites out there, and that's what you call major leverage.

In layman's terms, he does not need to sell Quora to Google and allow someone else to alter his vision and throw a monkey wrench in his plans. Most startup founders eating ramen would take a cool billion or two from Google easily and not look back, but perhaps he's in a position where a billion dollars wouldn't really do much to change his quality of life as compared to the freedom to run his own show and attempt to go even bigger independently.

It's a great problem to have.

For the other 99 problems we don't want to have, this book sheds light upon what we can do to fix them:

It's All My Fault: How I Messed Up the World, and Why I Need Your Help to Fix It

See question on Quora

Posted on 25 January 2014

Why are some people fighting against Google+ integration on YouTube?

Because it's evil. Evil. EVIL!

Reminds of the times when Microsoft forcefully integrated IE into Windows. Not fair play. End users are hurt. The corporation is strengthening its position not by winning the competition but by abusing its privileges.

Summary: Bad practice by all means except for some short-term gain at the expense of dissatisfied users. And I am speaking as one of them, who does not open YouTube in a way other than Incognito Window for the past half a year.

Added: Btw, what Google has done to Picasa is even worse.

See question on Quora

Posted on 15 January 2014

Will Google figure out social?


Google thinks everyone should be smart, and should want to interact the way Googlers do. G+ is designed by engineers for engineers. It's infinitely more elegant than FB but it's also complex, hugely versatile, constantly evolving and has a steep learning curve (since updating the documentation is not a priority). 

Facebook thinks that most people are stupid, and want to interact in the easiest possible way with other stupid people, about stupid unimportant things.

Unfortunately, Facebook is right.

See question on Quora

Posted on 24 October 2013

What is the best social networking site to promote your website or blog?

This really depends on your target audience. If you are targeting a professional audience, LinkedIn would probably be most effective. In general, a combination of platforms usually works best. Facebook and Twitter are great because it is easy for your followers to share your website or blog with a simple click which can increase traffic to your site. The key is to see where you have the most followers and start there. Every business is different so you have to experiment and see what works best for you!

See question on Quora

Posted on 30 September 2013

What is the purpose of Google Settings App?

Do you mean the "Settings" app that allows you to change and view the different settings on your phone?  The one that allows you to configure things like notifications and ringtones, or uninstall applications that you're no longer using?  The one that's pre-installed on all Android devices so that you can change your phone's settings?

That's pretty much why it's there...

See question on Quora

Posted on 27 February 2013

Why do people mention others on Google+ or Facebook?

To expand a bit on Roberto Acevedo's answer: I see three main reasons for mentioning on Google+. I can't speak to Facebook as I'm not a user, but the use cases likely share some parallels.

1. Attention. It's fairly common to see a popular post with a few comments from others that look like this: "+David Metcalfe Check this out!" which is a quick way to alert someone to a post of potential interest. They will get a notification as their name has been mentioned. This might be preferable to the "Share this post" button (beside the +1 button), when mentioning a person's name publicly isn't uncomfortable for them. If I'm a private person, I might prefer that a person Share the post with me privately instead.

To a point, it's purely up to preference. But there's a 500 comment limit to each post, so if it becomes popular enough, the +mention approach won't be possible, and one will have to share it the traditional way. Neither is wrong.

2. Readability. The second pertains to conversations in the comment section. In private posts, this usually isn't an issue, but when a number of people start commenting and talking, it can become very messy to read. +mentioning people helps maintain readability in a busy post, where people would have to read all the comments otherwise to discern who's talking to whom. See below for an example:

3. Addressing multiple people. Lastly, you can quickly see the utility of +mentions when you consider talking to multiple people inside of one post, be it the comments section, or inside the post itself.

There are several popular users on G+ who are using the platform for blogging, as the posts have no character limit. Imagine referring to several people inside the post who are in G+ with +mentions? This helps to enrich the original post, and add more context to the writing itself.

So the use of mentions is up to the user, but in the end, proper use of them helps make the platform more enjoyable.

Thanks to Brian Metcalfe for the use of the photo.

See question on Quora

Posted on 11 December 2012

How will marketers use Google+?

Google+ is great for marketers for several reasons - The most important reason is that Google+ has great SEO benefits.

Google+ actually plays an integral part of any business’ online marketing strategy. When you realize all the SEO advantages of using Google+, you will immediately see it needs to be incorporated into your marketing strategy.

One thing that sets Google+ apart from Facebook and Twitter is that it helps businesses appear at the top of Google search result. Twitter and Facebook posts do not appear on Google search result; status updates from Google+ does.

Read more about: Leveraging Google+ for Your Marketing Purposes 


See question on Quora

Posted on 30 November 2012

What is morale like at Google, in the first quarter of 2012?


Been at Google for 5+ years now..

Morale at Google is quite strong IMO..probably the strongest it has been in years....Chrome's strong growth, the continued explosive growth of the Android eco system,  success with youtube monetization, and surprisingly robust performance of G+, are some of the reasons..

Larry's strong performance as CEO has also probably been a factor...

(note: all these developments can be gleaned from news sources and earnings reports)

Also, Facebook going public and subsequent teething pains has, in some ways, helped Google appear much more attractive to superstar talent...This is in stark contrast to 2009-2010 when Facebook attracted some of the best talent at Google with the promise of a blockbuster IPO 

Even the fickle stock market has started to recognize that Google's fundamentals remain strong and the stock price is the highest it has been for ~5 years.

See question on Quora

Posted on 21 September 2012

What value is there in creating a Google+ page for a brand?

There has been considerable negative press about Google+. It has been called a grave yard, a failure, and various other unflattering things.

The facts on the ground tell a different story.

First I would like to point out that after only the 1st year Google+ has more than 250 million users, 150 million sign in every 30 days and 75 million every day. Facebook and Twitter certainly did not have those numbers after just one year.

While Google+ is constantly being compared to Facebook, it really is a very different animal. Facebook is truly a social network. Friends and family are typically talking about things outside of work and sharing content that is also not work focused.

Google+ on the other hand is much more focused on business, science, tech, etc. sharing. I don't ever expect to see my mother on Google+. Want to find experts on computational neuroscience, the latest developments in semantic search or chat with an astro physicist about relativistic mass and space-time curvature? Google+ wins hands down, especially since you can use Hangouts to actually interact with these experts. Good luck with that on Facebook.

The tools to manage contacts and relationships on Google+ are far superior to Facebook. Google+ circles are a fantastic means of sorting and following relevant contributors and thought leaders and since circles are fundamental to the design of Google+, unlike the grafted on categories on Facebook, they work extremely well.

But by far the most compelling reason to create a Google+ page for a brand is the fact that Google has changed the way they index social content, especially content on Google+. In many local search queries, local google+ pages will come up ahead of even SEO powered organic search results.

Getting on the 1st page of Google in the organic search results is relatively expensive, especially in popular categories. Creating and managing a Google+ brand page is currently the most cost effective means of getting on the 1st page of Google organic search. Add to that the value of Google+ as an engagement platform and it seems clear that creating a Google+ brand page is a very good idea indeed.

See question on Quora

Posted on 31 July 2012

Is Google+ dead?

Would it fwoom if you put four million volts through it?

Let's see. I'm going to poke at some circles/follow/friends figures for some people to see what's what.

101,307 - George Takei (actor) on G+ 2,230,835 likes on FB
1,373,832 - Wil Wheaton (actor) on G+ 81,761 subscribers on FB

Does that mean anything?

Probably not.

What I see on G+ is Android activism, other geekery, and Google rank and file employees who happen to be my friends. I don't know of any feeds that are driving people to G+.

A year ago, my friends were flooding G+ in an exodus away from Livejournal and Facebook. #nymwars drove them away. I've poked my toe back in that pool recently and it's acting very much like a dead space. I know that there was some activity around a puzzle convention that irked a friend of mine who got nuked during last year's pseud-purge and hasn't succeeded in being reinstated despite the alleged reform of the pseud policy.

G+ could use some positive publicity, IMO. I think answering some of those 503 open questions on Google+ would help, but I'm biased toward Quora as an information source.

See question on Quora

Posted on 15 July 2012

Is Google+ dead?

Google+ has never been alive. It's lifelike in the same way this thing below is, which is to say, in an unpleasantly creepy way.

Say what you want about Facebook, but, to continue with the "being alive" metaphor, it was born, it had childhood and adolescence, and now it's in its late twenties. Google+ was Frankensteined by fiat and is now kept alive in ICU.

See question on Quora

Posted on 14 July 2012

Is Google+ dead?

I have a sneaky feeling that while the growth of google plus has been slower than google and everyone expected and that the fact google advertises it, is embarrassing, that it may come back to surprise people.
1) There is a huge relatively silent dismay, anger and hatred of Facebook. A latent forde that means that once google plus or any other credible alternative reaches a key level of utility and popularity, I think people would flock to join. People like the brand that is google, they feel warmth to it, they trust it, they want it to succeed- none of which could be said for facebook by ANY means.

2) It's quietly and slowly evolving to be a key glue to our online experience. Each and every day I gradually note that google plus is being weaved slowly, carefully and purposefully with the other fabrics of my online life. Its not ready yet, but there will be a point soon where people take note that their images, files, places they go, wallet, contacts, statuses, things to do, calendar, searches, likes, tickets, friends info, intentions and personal info  are suddenly aggregated and connected all in one place and  intelligently connected and shared. Suddenly it will be noteworthy that google plus is a good way to navigate and control this.
So long as its done carefully , slowly, and most importantly considerately and with no obvious evil motive behind it.

I'm not a google plus fan yet, I've mocked it somewhat but slowly it dawns on me that it's rather more of a Trojan horse than it may appear and a lot of people are laughing about what place a massive carved wooden horse has in today's society. Don't go to sleep without a careful eye on it.
( P.s- I don't think Googles original intend was for it to build this slowly, but I think they are ramping up and pulling levers to ensure it takes off)

See question on Quora

Posted on 14 July 2012

Did Robert Scoble ragequit Google+ or does he still see a future in it?

I have not left Google+. The service has good value for me because of its integration into its search services. The events feature is potentially very cool, but the implementation of how it inserts itself into our lives really sucks (and still does -- my events page is full of things I already deleted or turned down).

Do I still see a future in it? Absolutely. I just plunked down $1,500 to get one of those Google Glasses and I see a huge future there.

Will it ever compete with Facebook? Seems like execs are trying to run away from that kind of comparison. If I were Google I'd run toward Blogger integration and make a better interest graph thing. Unfortunately for Google Facebook's new Interest Lists are way better than Google+ Circles, so that's making that tough.

I actually wouldn't mind Events integrating into my calendar IF it let me approve things before they got onto my calendar first. Whoever didn't plan that out is totally incompetent and needs to really rethink his/her role in this industry. I'm getting tired of the "let's roll over the user" kind of attitude that seems to be happening here lately (and Facebook isn't blameless, either, its forced move to email addresses really sucked too, although the damage wasn't nearly as bad as what Google+ events did to my calendar).

See question on Quora

Posted on 3 July 2012

Did Robert Scoble ragequit Google+ or does he still see a future in it?

I hope so.

I respect Robert Scoble and I respect what he had to say here. He's an early adopter AND he's looking for a social platform and network that allows him flexibility without having to sell his privacy out from under him. He wants a community he can be active in that doesn't then go and piss on his legs. I get it. I'm not at Scoble level, but I completely sympathize.

Google has horribly failed to comprehend *anything* about social and is pissed, so they are selling us out as fast as they can. I loathe and despise them for it.... I have to use Google for Blogger and I still use Gmail, but every day I wean myself from their utterly evil approach to everything. I do not want my everything to be integrated. I don't want *anything* to be integrated. Get the hell out of my stuff you /bleep/ing /bleep/s.

See question on Quora

Posted on 2 July 2012

Is social networking a good thing?

I don't think you are paranoid. Social Networks should be taken seriously.

The Perfect Social Network
Like I once said, the perfect social-network is peer-to-peer, your messages are encrypted and private through a public/private key exchange on the unique password you use to logon (Not the same as your other passwords).

Filtering is Essential
.. And you should never be forced to 'Friend' someone just because they saw you on someones friendlist and think they know you (Google's Google+ circle model is much better, because you can just put them in the 'Jackass'-circle).

You should choose wisely who you follow, and not just follow everything to spam up your wallfeed. This is the largest time-consumer besides chat-popup enabled social networks (eg. FB). Most of the time you have both your childhood friends and adult friends- you don't share the same interests anymore (So why bother reading updates from them?).

Humans never seem to learn
About being caught on Social Networks. Well. You don't brag in real life about a criminal act, and the same should apply online.

Are Social Networks Good for Anything ?
That depends. Socializing is considered essential in life to develop yourself in modest amount. Who says you can have better friends through social networks ? Afterall is it computerized suggestions based on facts such as topic-interest, education, age .. So who says social networks helps making new friends, they may suggest the largest jackass you have ever met if you're not careful ..

I don't even think some forums or new websites would like to be categorized as a social network. Mainly because it is such a buzzword that is partly linked to Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and if that is not the goal of the website then why call it a social network ? Is Quora a social network suddenly also ? How broad can we apply this term that raged and encouraged everyone to opt in on 'Socializing'.

Social Networks. Just listen to yourself saying it. The first part 'Social' is like a glowing halo over your head. You're socializing. Helping friends, talking to long-distance family. There are probably alot of great values, but also many pitfalls.

Be aware, and don't feel tempted to think you miss out on anything. Afterall, the friends who don't keep contact with you (Mobile, Email, essential contact forms) are not your friends .. The best comment I saw on Lifehacker 'If people only talk with you on Facebook, they are not your friends' ..

Well, a pseudonym, fake email, and a proxy will get you a long way. The rest is up to the authorities. Should you take social networks seriously, when any mobile lost in a public place will enable people to bring you in a situation where you maybe could be punished and jailed ? That is the question !

See question on Quora

Posted on 1 June 2012

How can social networks best help you plan a trip?

Twitter is a great tool for planning a trip. I plan trips for visitors to London and I find it very useful to go on Twitter and find out the latest news about travel, events, sightseeing and dining.

My first tip would be to go to your destination's tourist office website and see if they have a Twitter site, then follow them and check out who they follow too to see who is posting the most information about your centres of interest.

You can then search Twitter for whatever you like (e.g. Theatre in London) and you will see who is writing about this subject. The great thing about Twitter is that, even if your interests are really specific, you are still likely to find someone who is tweeting about your subject.

Don't forget you can also ask questions to people on Twitter. My experience has been that people on Twitter are really friendly and helpful when it comes to recommendations and holiday advice.

The only problem with Twitter is that there is always so much information, which can be overwhelming. My advice would be to take your time and give it a chance!

See question on Quora

Posted on 18 May 2012

How can social networks best help you plan a trip?

In case you want to book a trip for attending a music festival, I am at the moment working on a great solution for you: Festicket will be an innovative website that allows fans of live music to book online in a hassle free and one click solution a full package for their next festival trip. Made as a turnkey solution, Festicket will intend to build a trusted festival community that will share their experiences and provide recommendations. The website will have large digital touch points across all primary platforms such as Twitter and Facebook to ensure social networks are the main and essential components of your trip plan. Festicket will soon be in the air.

See question on Quora

Posted on 18 May 2012

Why aren't Facebook or Google+ using conversation threading on their comment platforms?

Long ago I worked on the Long Now Foundation's project Long Bets. One of the people involved was Stewart Brand, who among other things is an online community pioneer. As we were building the Long Bets discussion system, I was naturally going to include threading. Because features are good.

He argued vigorously against that. It was his view that threading mainly improved the ability to bicker endlessly. Linear discussion made that failure mode more difficult, and pushed people in the direction of saying whole things.

In the years since, I've come to agree with him. Threading generally makes for hard-to-follow discussions and point-by-point arguments. The reader experience is much better in non-threaded discussions, and you get wider participation without it.

See question on Quora

Posted on 26 April 2012

Which Google products am I probably not using that I should be?

Google Reader:
It's great for keeping up to date with information from sources you like. Since its linked to Google, when I use the Google Reader App on my phone, I later don't see the read articles when I check it on my computer at home or computer at work. You can share your feeds with other people too!

Chrome Sync:
It enables me to keep my settings, and best of all, bookmarks the same whether I'm at home, work, girlfriend's house, and now my Android phone as well!

Docs Forms:
Google Docs enables the creation of forms which are a simple and elegant way to do small surveys. For example, arranging an event for example and having everyone select one of several activities and dates. Docs is also very useful as a notepad for writing thoughts, ideas, budgets etc. that you can access anywhere you go.

Instant Upload:
This is done using Google+ for the Android, and basically instantly uploads any photo you've taken to your Picasa/Google+ account (and it does it at full resolution). This feature will probably become even more handy when it's inetgrated with Google Drive which you should definitely sign up for (by requesting a notification of when it's ready).

Chrome to Phone:
My work blocks certain websites and sometimes I want to read something when I'm about to go home or leave home. With Chrome to Phone, the link pops up on my phone and I can read the article on the go, or in the toilet. You can also send Google Map links, numbers, email addresses or any words from a website and they appear on your phone ready to be opened by the appropriate app.

For people you trust, you can add them to latitude on Google Maps on your phone. Now you can see where your friends are, and if they are nearby you can catch up with them. Usually it uses cell tower or WiFi locations. However, once my friend needed to find me on the beach and by launching Google Maps, it got my location via GPS and he was able to find me very easily.

Google Drive:
This is the best cloud application that is presently available in the market. Sync all your applications whether you are in windows or mac or android or Iphone[sooon.... :) ]. please do give it a try.
Please follow this link

See question on Quora

Posted on 25 April 2012

What would happen if Apple built its own social network?

Apple already owns a giant social network service in the form of Address Book, iCal, phone calls, facetime, and the other native apps in OS X, iOS, and iCloud.  The real social network is the relationship between people as expressed by their various communication interactions.   Every time you call or email someone from your contact list you're using a social network, and that network sells iPhones and iMacs. 

The social graph is an abstract representation of that, explicit in the case of friends lists, likes, followers, address books, and such, and implicit (but still eminently mineable and monetizable) in the case of email and phone trails, appointments, or shared events.  Social networking services like Facebook and LInkedIn build a platform that embodies the social graph and takes some of the communication and commerce services available on the hardware and OS, then hangs web and mobile apps on top of that.

Apple makes its money selling devices, and to a lesser extent for the moment selling music and movies.  It lets the carriers make all the money for wireless service.  Like Facebook they invite the app developers to fight and compete over the relatively slimmer market for content and commerce, and in the process make their platform that much more valuable.  The only thing missing is a thin middle laywer that makes the social graph explicit - you can install Facebook or LinkedIn for that.  One thing I don't completely understand is why Apple doesn't make this more explicit by encouraging their app developers to use the native address book rather than Facebook as their social graph.  Perhaps it's history and momentum, or else they have higher concerns than Facebook over privacy and loss of their business advantage by opening that up too much.

See question on Quora

Posted on 25 April 2012

What's going wrong with Google+?

Here is a good analysis from Devin Coldewey of Techcrunch:

There have been times recently when I’ve felt the need to deflect a few of the slings and arrows trained on Google. This time, however, they are well-deserved. Google’s big bet was based on bad instincts, jealousy, and hubris — not the curiosity, experimentation, and agility that have characterized them theretofore.

Could Google+ ever have been anything but a failure?

Just as a caveat: the problem with criticizing Google+ is that it’s a good product. It’s not for everybody, and there are problems with how it models social networks, but the only real problem it has is that there’s no one engaging with it. There are, of course, some people on it, but it’s hardly at a level that would make it what Google obviously intended it to be.

That said, Google should never have thought of it that way in the first place. The concept, as well-represented as it is in the product, was wrong to begin with. The whole project is a failure to understand their strengths and their competitors’ weaknesses.

Looking for clues in how Google’s products have improved or differentiated themselves previously (whether they flew or crashed) isn’t much help. You can’t dissect Google+ by proxy in Wave or Gmail. It’s better to look at their intentions.

“Sharing is broken.” There’s a hell of a place to start. To make such a statement about a sector with so much diversity and velocity is a red flag to begin with. First, because it isn’t broken, it’s a work in progress. And second, even if it were broken, Google has never fixed anything before.

Google never said “What you’re doing is broken. Use our thing instead.” They always said “Did you know you we can do that too, for free?” Did they say Excel was broken when they let you make spreadsheets in Docs? Did they break down email to its bare bones and remake it for Gmail? Of course not. Google was about ubiquity, diversity, and a few memorable little quirks or improvements that set them out from the crowd.

To attempt to build something new, a la Apple, with the assurance that company likes to make (“This is the best way, which is why we made it the only way”) is not a Google strength. They just aren’t good at making new things. Never have been. Making existing things easier, faster, more accessible — sure. But inventing them? Not so much. So the idea that they were going to invent a new way to share should have rung alarm bells to begin with.

Sharing was never broken; Google merely found that they were losing a battle they had not even prepared for. Their declaration of war was a declaration of defeat.

And there is more....

Here is a comment on that analysis from Robert Scoble:

The problem is that Google doesn't look at Google+ as a failure. A friend who works there told me it's Google's fastest-growing product ever. Which is true in sheer number terms but it hasn't done well in three areas:

1. Addiction of its users.
2. Affection by the press.
3. Love by its users or most of the "influentials."

Even if you don't care about the PR connotations of the bottom two (just read the above article for a proof point) you should pay attention to #1.

Facebook has its users addicted. Deeply addicted. Google+? Not so much. I'm followed by something like 4.5x as many on Google+ but get fewer people engaging with my items on Google+ than Facebook. That's evidence enough of addiction and lack thereof on Google+.

More troubling is that Google+ doesn't have good mobile clients, doesn't have an answer for Facebook's OpenGraph, doesn't even have neat things like videos and thumbnails in comments.

So, why isn't Google+ addictive?

1. Clicking +1 on an item INSIDE Google+ doesn't do anything. You can't see every item that I've clicked +1 on and they are way behind Facebook in adding web-based +1s to profile pages. Using Highlight I can see what "likes" I have in common with other people. That's totally missing from Google+.

2. Comments don't have videos and photos. These little things make Facebook's comments more addictive.

3. There isn't granular noise controls. On Facebook I can quiet down a single person, or single data type. On Google+ I don't have control of the noisiness of my feed.

4. Mobile clients aren't as well designed as Facebook's and that's a low bar, actually.

5. There's nothing to see implicit signals being through around the network like what Facebook has with its "ticker." I have found that the ticker is very addictive on my screen. I love seeing all the little signals coming down through that.

Google+ was largely started to protect the search engine and its revenue stream. Google and Facebook are both intent satisfaction machines. Old style is Google. We'd search for "sushi Palo Alto" and get a list of results. The new style is social "what sushi place should my wife and I go to in Palo Alto?" Increasingly the Facebook answers were better than the Google ones. Advertisers notice this and started moving dollars over to Facebook. Google went into freakout mode and Google+ is the result.

That said, I expect that Google+ will morph much closer to mobile, because Google owns Android. That's a real advantage for Google and one that I expect will be where Google+ goes in the future in a much better defined way than it has so far.

One problem is that you see just how hard it is to catch up when you give another company a six-year-head-start. Google is in a deep hole, and continues to be in a whole raft of areas when compared to Facebook. So, these "negative" articles will continue until those holes start getting filled in.

That said, I'm quite happy with the community on Google+. Generally I get really awesome conversations started there that go way beyond anything I've seen elsewhere. Part of that is that there's not much distraction, which Google's Vic Gundotra keeps playing up (but those lack of distractions are due to being in a few deep holes platform and system design wise).

Google needed to use its "big stick" to get to where it is, which is why more than 100 million have signed up for Google+. Now it needs to build a system that gets users to love it and talk about it in glowing terms rather than terms like "I just go there because Google forced me to." If it can get a lot closer to that this year then Google+ will do just fine and these kinds of articles will look just as quaint as the ones Techcrunch commenters used to write about Twitter and how lame it is that people are talking about what we had for lunch on that service.

See question on Quora

Posted on 29 March 2012

What's going wrong with Google+?

James Whittaker, a high-profile developer at Google who recently quit and joined Microsoft, put it the following way:

Officially, Google declared that “sharing is broken on the web” and nothing but the full force of our collective minds around Google+ could fix it. You have to admire a company willing to sacrifice sacred cows and rally its talent behind a threat to its business. Had Google been right, the effort would have been heroic and clearly many of us wanted to be part of that outcome. I bought into it. I worked on Google+ as a development director and shipped a bunch of code. But the world never changed; sharing never changed. It’s arguable that we made Facebook better, but all I had to show for it was higher review scores.

As it turned out, sharing was not broken. Sharing was working fine and dandy, Google just wasn’t part of it. People were sharing all around us and seemed quite happy. A user exodus from Facebook never materialized. I couldn’t even get my own teenage daughter to look at Google+ twice, “social isn’t a product,” she told me after I gave her a demo, “social is people and the people are on Facebook.” Google was the rich kid who, after having discovered he wasn’t invited to the party, built his own party in retaliation. The fact that no one came to Google’s party became the elephant in the room.

See question on Quora

Posted on 29 March 2012

Should Google market Google+ as more of an "interest network"?

I think the question asker is on the right track. Google has made a mistake by positioning it as another social network, because no one needs another Facebook. Those of who are using it actively and getting great benefit out of it are finding that it is a great way to discover new people you'd never know in areas of your interest and engage them in conversations and exchanges way better than you can do in Twitter. One of Google+'s most powerful tools is Shared Circles. Users can curate a circle of people who are interesting on a certain topic and then share it for other users to add. It's like Twitter list but way better implemented and easier to promote and share.

See question on Quora

Posted on 6 March 2012

Should Google market Google+ as more of an "interest network"?

Yes, because the whole social network thing is not working out too well for them. They won't beat Facebook at that game. Google+ seems like Twitter but with longer posts. 

Twitter was the original social network for connecting with people who shared your interests, but Google+ seems better suited to the longer posts that come with talking about your interests.  For example, trying to talk about the interest graph on Twitter is tough when each post has to be 140 characters or fewer.

Interested to hear your thoughts in more detail Mark Robinson.

See question on Quora

Posted on 5 March 2012

Is it possible to automatically send tweets to Google+?

It is possible, of just takes some work.  I can help.
So here goes.  This might not be easy for you but there is a work-around.  I have my setup going from facebook to google+, so you can substitute twitter or anything else that will let you output into an email format.

I don't know exactly how I found this (took around 6 hours to find the solution), but here's what I did:

- I use
- Setup a trigger that IF you publish a tweet THEN send to an email address
- Setup Google Voice
- Allow texts to be able to be received on Google voice
- Find the email address for Google+ that allows you to be able to email TO Google+ and have it update your status with the contents of the email
- The email address should look like this (the Xs are what your info will be)
- Forward text messages from Google Voice to your gmail
- Setup a filter in Gmail that looks for incoming messages from your Google Voice (usually a 5 digit number for messages SENT from Google Voice)
- Have this filter forward these messages to your Google+ email address (from above)

And, that will do it.  I am almost sure I covered everything, but let me know if I missed a step.

I would recommend on the gmail filter, have the filter mark that message as read and auto-move it to a folder that isn't your inbox.

So, I hope this works for you.  This is the result of a totally different problem and the solution that I didn't even know that I wanted.


See question on Quora

Posted on 28 January 2012

How does Google+ differ from Facebook?

Top features which differentiates Google Plus from Facebook are Circles, Hangout and Sparks.
In Google Plus you can follow anyone and get their public posts in your stream, you can interact more actively with celebs and public figures. You can add as many users to your circles as you want. Creating circles is very easy and there are separate stream for each circle.
Facebook allows one to be friend with someone to view their posts. Otherwise you wouldn't be get it touch with them. Facebook Fan pages was the only option to connect with a celeb or public figure. Yesterday Facebook launched "Subscribe" feature which allows users to subscribe to public feed of any users.For more info on Facebook's new feature read. http://www.survivalguide4idiots....
Google Plus hangout features allows one to interact more actively with friends. Consider it as a video conferencing service which has proved to be a great tool and users are using it to arrange sessions, tutorial, watching youtube videos together and with great clarity.
Facebook only allows video chatting via Skype but still it can't be compared with Hangout option in Google Plus.
Sparks allows you to get latest info on your interest topic while accessing Google Plus. You can also share these sparks results with your circles. With a little hack you can also bookmark your Spark results for later reading.http://www.survivalguide4idiots....
Facebook has no such option and I am keeping Facebook page updates aside for this topic.

Other differences
+1 button vs Facebook Like
Anything you like on Web will be shown on your stream whereas your +1 will go to your +1 tab which are private by default but can be made public.
Separate Games tab
Google Plus has separate Games tab and all the notifications related to games will appear in that tab. Whereas in Facebook, if you play game its notifications will appear on your wall. Add extra clutter to Facebook News Feed.
G+ integrated with other Google services
Google is in the process of integrating its major services with Google Plus and giving a similar look to all its products e.g. Google, Gmail, Blogger, Google maps.
Facebook is only dedicated to Social networking. No other services to integrate with Facebook.
Google Plus Bar
Google Plus bar is one the best features which allows you to easily connect with Google Plus. You can get Google Plus notifications, share updates using this bar.
Facebook also has a top blue bar but not as robust as Google Plus bar.

You can follow me on Google+ for more tips related to Google Plus

OR visit my blog which has around 100 how to and tips article related to GooglePlus.

See question on Quora

Posted on 15 September 2011

How can I convince friends and family to make the switch from Facebook to Google+?

Follow these tips :D

  • I use only Google+ now. I even do not reply to comments/messages on Facebook.
  • I only share photos at Google+ then I send their link to my friends who do not like Google+. This way they come to Google+ to comment on photos.
  • I have connected my all other sites like Twitter, Facebook, Plurk with my Google+ posting. My G+ posts are going automatically to my other 25+ sites as short statuses with links to my original Google+ posts. People from there click on the link which brings them to my Google+ profile.

 I have connected Google+ to other sites by this method (this posting method is not longer working)

See question on Quora

Posted on 9 August 2011

How can I convince friends and family to make the switch from Facebook to Google+?

The hard way? Stop posting updates and replying to messages in Facebook, move your social network activities to Google+ and occasionally share updates to their email. This will prompt them to switch if they still want to keep in touch via social network. Or ignore you.

The soft way: use Google+ as your primary social network. If there are any interesting post in Google+ that will usually elicit a lot of response or interest in Facebook, post a "hook", something short like "I've a major decision regarding my career. Read more at <link to Google+ post>". Occasionally share innovative features in Google+ that is not available in Facebook.

See question on Quora

Posted on 4 August 2011

I already use Facebook and Twitter. Why do I need Google+?

Google+ appears to have drawn lessons from the experience in both Facebook and Twitter. So, excluding the fact your existing contacts are already in Facebook and Twitter, there is a nice blending of the features from both social networks in Google+.

The table below highlights where Google+ is like either Facebook or Twitter. Take a look:

While the similarity count is higher for Facebook, I think the one-way following is the most defining part of Google+. The default position for a lot of initial users is probably public, I'd wager. But watch those Circles - they could offer the privacy and limited distribution people like with Facebook.

To sum it up, Google+ gives you an experience that draws from the best features of both Facebook and Twitter. Now it's a question of whether the people you connect with or follow show up there and engage.

See question on Quora

Posted on 19 July 2011

Has Facebook gone into lockdown mode in response to Google+?

My impression was that there were already several new features in the works prior to Google+'s launch that required summer lockdown. Also that late-spring and summer are the traditional time of year for new feature roll out. If Google+ has lit a fire for Facebook, I'd expect it's primarily to make sure that new features offer Facebook users more compelling reasons to stick around. I'd not imagine the company is all that concerned that Google+ will present direct competition.

Current interest in Google+ is a reflection of its novelty and of curiosity among social media users in how the site is different. A lot of the interaction on Google+ is talk about Google+ -- I'd expect management at Facebook recognizes this and has confidence that ongoing feature rollout at Facebook will keep it in the lead.

See question on Quora

Posted on 17 July 2011

Has Facebook gone into lockdown mode in response to Google+?


Yes, as an engineer at Facebook I can absolutely confirm this. I can tell that over the last couple of weeks, upper management has been more stressed than usual. There are more hurried meetings.

I think that much of Facebook's confidence and maybe even valuation was based on the assumption that it's the only game in town. Now that's no longer true.

See question on Quora

Posted on 15 July 2011

Why did Google choose red for the color of the "main action button" in the latest redesign across all Google products?

Well, did they? How do you define “main action button”? I see four different button classes in Google's recently redesigned services:

1. The gray default button:

It is also used for navigation here and there:

2. The blue button, which is used where a gray button wouldn’t be prominent enough, e.g. for submitting forms, and especially for search purposes, when the user retrieves information:

(By the way, this is similar to Facebook’s approach:

While I totally like Facebook’s buttons, I think they have one little flaw: The gray button, with its gradient, looks more like “Click me!” than the blue button. I click “Cancel” quite often when I actually mean “OK.”)

3. The red button is primarily for creating something new, e.g. composing a mail or creating an event in Calendar:

In Google Books, it is used for purchasing eBooks and also – for the sake of consistency with the “Get it now” button, I guess – for normal book previews:

4. Last but not least, the green button indicates some sort of social communication:

On Google+ profiles, it shows that the person is in your circles (otherwise, a red “Add to circles” button is present):

This appears to be an attempt to make the interfaces more intuitively usable by letting users know (well, feel) what a button does before they even read the label. The new Google design carefully leverages color as a powerful tool for guiding the user’s eyes. Another example: Consider the optimized link colors on the search result pages:

It is easy now to tell apart the search tools (gray: link; red: selected item) and links to the search results (blue or purple), while the last design used blue links also for the search tools:

The search tools were more distracting when you were just scanning the results, and a vertical seperator was neccessary – that was one more graphical element for our visual system to parse.

User interface design is much about making people think less about the tool so they can focus on the stuff they are actually interested in.

See question on Quora

Posted on 4 July 2011

Will Google+ overtake Facebook as the dominant social network?

I think some of the posts in this thread focus too much on technical differences between the two platforms and thus miss what will ultimately be Google+'s biggest draw: the opportunity to start over online.

Social networking has grown up alongside Facebook. In its early years, it was a quirky online activity mainly enjoyed by horny college students, and so profiles mainly featured pictures of people holding red party cups. Then, somewhat unexpectedly, Facebook opened itself to the world, and, somewhat more unexpectedly, the world joined. Friend requests started coming in from parents, bosses and colleagues. This caused problems for people who’d created their profiles in the party-cup days. Then the requests started coming in from people you hardly knew. How many of your pictures do you really want them to see?

At this point, most of us have Facebook friends dating back to three or four distinct eras in the evolution of social networking. That’s made it very hard to know how to use your Facebook account. I, for one, have mostly stopped using mine. I don’t want to annoy my acquaintances with the content I want to send my closer friends, nor do I want to annoy my closer friends with the content suitable for my acquaintances.

Facebook has tools for managing all this, but they’re hard and awkward to use. Will people notice that they suddenly can’t see your photographs anymore? If you defriend them, will they take it personally? Do I have time to defriend 400 people? What I need, and what I think a lot of other people need, is an opportunity to start over. But you can’t start over on Facebook. That’s awkward. And no other social network has sufficient density to make joining worthwhile.

That’s where I could imagine Google+ coming in. It’s not that any of its features are so revolutionary. It’s not that it’s better at doing social networking than Facebook. It’s that it’s an opportunity to start over, to build your social network with years of Facebook experience in mind, rather than having to face the accretion of mistakes and miscalculations you made over almost a decade of trial-and-error with a new technology.

It’s not Facebook’s fault that “what it means” to have a Facebook account has changed four or five times over the last few years, even as most of us have only had one profile over that period. But it is an opportunity for Google.

See question on Quora

Posted on 1 July 2011

How can I convince friends and family to make the switch from Facebook to Google+?

Tell them that facebook will shut down in couple of months! :)
But seriously, one should try something and like it to continue using it. Facebook has established a good benchmark and in order for us to see a massive transition it should be something revolutionary and different, both from UI and function point of view. I think that google has put a lot of thought in this project so...hopefully there will be people that will hop on board

See question on Quora

Posted on 30 June 2011

Will Google+ overtake Facebook as the dominant social network?

Dudes, you are all missing the crucial point here: Google+ lets you watch YouTube videos while videochatting with your friends.


Or if you don't, stop to consider: Would preteens and housewives not think this is the most awesome thing of all time?  And are not preteens and housewives the core user demographic of sites/platforms like Facebook?  Think of all those poor, lonely preteens and housewives who can't leave their homes to actually watch TV with their friends IRL, "Hang[ing] Out" on Google+ instead...

Seriously, the Internet currently lacks a really easy and reliable free videoconferencing service.  Google+ kills at that, plus it's aware of your social network because of the Gmail address book, plus any Circles users might fill out (which they probably will, because people love making lists, being catty about their social circles, and dragging and dropping shit on computers).


Excuse me, I'm going to go watch my friend rap along to "George Washington" one more time.  "Six foot twenty, fucking killing for fun..."

See question on Quora

Posted on 29 June 2011

Will Google+ overtake Facebook as the dominant social network?

Google+ should overtake Facebook because Chrome + Android provide user experience opportunities unavailable to Facebook.

Myspace was once the top dog. Terry Peng nicely summarizes the scope of this discussion. Circles, clearer privacy statements, brand equity all matter but are not enough to draft enough people to move away from Facebook. Sure Google can try to conscript people away, but that will probably fail. Google+ should learn from the Myspace case study. Myspace lost to Facebook for a variety of reasons, but the core element to Facebook's victory was that Facebook was so much more pleasant to use. The design and UX of Facebook was more persuasive to the American public. Same with OSX compared to Windows Vista/7.

Look and feel win over mass audiences. Design and user experience will determine if Google+ overtakes Facebook. As Peter O'Kelly points out, hiring Apple's Andy Hertzfeld to design Google+ is a big deal. Wave was not designed for a college student to take out of the box and run with it. As Steven Levy discusses, the features of Google+ are being slowly rolled out to not intimidate new users.

Chrome + Android matter. No offense to Rockmelt -- a product I use and enjoy -- but I would place my bets on Chrome to be the dominant browser. With Chrome for laptops/desktops/netbooks and Android for mobile, Google can integrate Google+ into the design of the browser instead of providing social plugins for websites.

Question: Name me a website that persuasively integrates Facebook?

Here are the two most popular examples of Facebook's social plugins:


Neither one of these is particularly elegant or useful. The social plugin for Wired is little more than an actual Facebook and Endgadget's is Facebook's version of a tailored most e-mailed box.

Look at how Google+ is already built into Google's search results. This type of design will change my behavior. For example, Chrome ruined Firefox for me because I don't want separate boxes for  URLs and search. Simplifying the browser will organically promote Google+. Having a mobile foothold only strengthens Google's position.

Unlike building a social network from scratch, Google has Gmail and Gchat. Most of my friends and contacts are already on the Google network. Transition is easier than many people think.

That said, does Facebook now try to utilize Microsoft and Bing as counter-weights?

See question on Quora

Posted on 29 June 2011

Will Google+ overtake Facebook as the dominant social network?

Google+ will never overtake Facebook as long as their social strategy is simply to build a better Facebook.  Let's say Google does find a feature that appeals to users, like Circles.   It is far more likely that Facebook would then just add this feature than to expect 700 million users to switch to Google.

The social product that overtakes Facebook - and there will be one eventually, there always is - will need to be something that adds a new dimension to social that Facebook can't address.  Not just a feature that Facebook hasn't implemented yet.  From what I've seen so far Google+ ain't it.

See question on Quora

Posted on 29 June 2011

Will Google figure out social?

I'm very dubious. For one, it just doesn't seem to be in their DNA. For two, they aren't making the kinds of acquisitions they would need to do to get back in the game (buying Twitter, for one).

But, let's look at it a little bit more scientifically.

Who is running the social efforts there? Vic Gundotra. He's smart, hired me at Microsoft, and has young kids who probably tell him Google is lame, the same way my 16-year-old tells me it's lame. Add in Rohit Kare, along with Chris Messina, and a raft of other people pulled in from across the company, and they have some smart people working on the problem.

The major leak about Google +1  ( )does not inspire confidence that they are on the right track. A toolbar? Please.

But, let's look at what assets they have:

Google Profiles: Mine is at (I've told it many of the services I use, I need to add Quora, by the way). But this is still an interesting place to innovate on in a social way.
Google Contacts: right now just for standard email and phone contacts, but what if it had a TON more? What if they bought Gist and incorporated all that data into contacts?
Google Buzz: this needs a major rework, to give us noise control (for instance, you can remove a single person's tweets from this stream, but you can't remove ALL tweets. And you can't remove tweets with keywords, etc).
Google Latitude. Really lame attempt at location-based services. Has huge churn. Most people are freaked out by even their close friends being able to stalk them all the time. Split it into two services, one, check in, like Foursquare or Facebook Places, and one, where you turn it on for a while, like Glympse.

What do they NOT have?

1. Anything with a good UI like Quora or Plancast has.
2. Anything that really has a viral loop. HInt: when was the last time you saw any of the above services being discussed in a good light on Twitter?
3. They have rules against integrating with Facebook, which is really lame (and Facebook doesn't want to make it easy for Google to slurp everything off to make a competitive service nice).

They also have some institutional things dragging them down. I covered a lot of these in why Google can't build

They do have SOME big advantages, though.

1. They have the best maps in the business.
2. They have the base OS that a majority of mobile phone users will be using (which is where most of us will be "social" in the future).
3. They have the most popular browser (among early adopter types, which is who will matter to the early days of a new effort anyway, and is fastest growing, while other browsers, like IE and Firefox, are declining in market share) on Windows and MacOS.
4. Based on the tablets I'm seeing that are being announced this week at CES they will pick up a good amount of marketshare in tablets, which is another place I'm seeing a lot of Facebook time spent.
5. They have relationships with the world's best advertisers, which can help pay for many of these services.

So, to wrap it up. Will Google figure out social? My confidence is not high. They aren't able to think small enough. Imagine you went in and asked to do something like Quora at Google. Or Instagram. Would you get approval? Would they understand that's how you come at the problem? With a bunch of small projects? Not one big one? With dozens of decentralized teams, all of which get to ship code the way Facebook's engineers get to ship code? Google can't do that, at least they have demonstrated they can't where it counts.

In other words, look for small startups to continue to embarrass Google and look for Facebook to continue its run to dominance over Google.

Of course, I'm poking my ex-boss a bit here. Funny, another ex-boss, Lenn Pryor, just went to work for Facebook in its mobile team. So, it's the battle of Scoble's ex-bosses!

See question on Quora

Posted on 2 January 2011

Should Google really focus on social and why? Should they use a different brand to do that?

Google needs to stop focusing on social, and in particular stop trying to destroy Facebook.

I've recently been talking to some Google and ex-Google engineers, and have crystallized my thoughts on this topic.  Here is a long and rambling answer on why.

Although Google could benefit from being more social-literate in its products, that is a long way from their current goals of contorting themselves with the goal of gaining advantage over Facebook.  I've come to believe that this striving is due more to memetic desire (wanting what others want just because others want it) rather than true competitive threat.  Google disdained Facebook and social networking when it was small, but now that it's big, it's suddenly important.  All that is is the nightclub effect

Indeed, Google itself was once the victor in its own history against Microsoft, whom they witnessed spending billions crashing itself upon the rocks of the various 1.0 internet startups, exemplified by Google's search empire, only to suffer defeat after humiliating defeat, only now barely staying in the game by buying up Yahoo's defunct search business but still a relative bit player when it comes to consumer internet products.

Microsoft's mistake, which Google itself surely recognized, is that they continued to try and stubbornly shoehorn everything into a Windows- and Microsoft-centric model while attempting to tackle a market far outside their core competence just because someone else there was doing well.  Yet, Google is now trying to do exactly the same thing.  Small startups naturally know that you don't go up against an industry leader; instead, you try and do something new.  The same strategy is just as valid for large companies, except for some reason they don't think that way - another rival large company in a different line of work (here, it's social vs search) is viewed as a competitor that must be displaced or supplanted, rather than accommodated with a complementary market model, i.e. by building products that benefit from the success of the "rival," rather than attempting to attack it.  Startups do this all time, large companies almost never.

I attribute this to the fact that young companies are driven by entrepreneurial types, who are prone to carving their own path rather than attempting to follow in the market footsteps of others.  Even companies which are helmed by their founders become subject to this, due to the growing weight of executives and middle managers who join from other large companies.  The chorus of voices within the company begins to shift from one of entrepreneur self-guidedness to one of conservative big-business industry-following.  And what does an industry follow?  Why, the industry leader, of course.  They are blind to other possibilities.

In fact, it seems that it requires no less than an incredibly dictatorial founder-leader to keep a large company on the path of "doing new things your own way" - i.e. Steve Jobs.  Even Bill Gates, considered a very strong CEO, was not enough to keep Microsoft from eventually attempting to beat Google by following it.  It's not about beating the other guy, it's about being successful on your own terms.

Google should be playing to its strengths, not attempting to compete in the area where it is arguably the weakest.  Some examples, one good and one bad:

  • Until recently, its disruptive move into the smartphone OS market was and continues be shaping up to be a massive success.  Sure, there is the collision with iPhone, but every single Android phone is still far superior to anything we could buy 5 years ago.  Vic Gundotra did a great job here.  Android was a great example of Google using its strengths of technology, business development, and scale to move an entire industry.
  • Amazon's EC2, S3, and related services are an amazing success, powering almost the entirety of a new generation of web-based startups.  There is no reason why Google should not have owned this market.  Even today, if they poured the resources and attention that they're putting into social into this market, they could probably take it back from Amazon.  Instead, Google App Engine continues to languish.  If they won this market (or were even a major player in it), they would be powering the entire next generation of internet startups.  Talk about winning at a meta-game that Facebook can't possibly touch.

The very problem with Microsoft competing against Google is that they didn't recognize their true strength, which is that they had a stable of world-class engineers who could go build anything.  So why force them to build search or internet portals?  Microsoft was smart enough to let at least one promising executive create the XBox project, which today is one of the few landscape-defining new Microsoft product lines to have taken shape since Microsoft achieved its OS/Office market position, having astoundingly gained advantage over even the PS3 and Wii.

Google is in the same position.  In 2008 they killed off a great flowering of Google products to hunker down for the recession.  Fine, that was necessary, but why aren't they now unleashing their world-class engineers to develop and discover new products and business lines, rather than forcing them to march to the beat of trying to take down Facebook?  Google has massive data centers all over the world, unmatched internal infrastructure, and advanced toolsets that are generations ahead of what is available commercially.  Is using that to create a Facebook-killer really the best use of all those people and all that technology?

Lastly, a question for Google itself: exactly what ultimate success state are you after?  What if you win - what if you gain complete and total victory, the way Microsoft did versus Netscape?  Do you really want to stand over Facebook's corpse, having destroyed a product and community of over 500 million users worldwide?  Are you going to tell yourself that you've done the world a favor because now they're all using some sort of ur-Orkut?  Or will that have been a whole lot of wasted time and energy that you could have spent building something truly new and useful for the rest of the world?

Google's current mission to overthrow or block Facebook is borne out of ego and fear, and transparently does nothing to advance its mission of organizing the world's information, nor its meta-Silicon-Valley mission of changing the world by advancing the state of technology.

See question on Quora

Posted on 21 August 2010

Why is it taking Google so long to develop/launch Google Me?

They only started a few months ago. 6 months is probably the minimum amount of time it would take any team to develop something with features competitive with Facebook. Also, there are a lot of people working on it, who need to be organized, managed, and coordinated.

Why did it take them so long to get started, though? My guess is that this is how long it took for them to realize that Buzz wasn't going to work, plus some time given to how long it took them to decide that this (making something like Facebook) was the right next step.

See question on Quora

Posted on 3 July 2010 search results

Google plus gets a lot of ridicule from everyone, but can someone suggest a better photo sharing platform?

Google plus photos is by far the best photo sharing platform that i have come across. the google photos app itself isnt my favourite but the platform as a whole is pretty complete and unique imo. the gripe i have with the app is that the first screen tries to load apps from the internet instead of showing whats on the device

some points that make me believe that it is the best:

  • automatic backups in full quality
  • share backed up photos without re-uploads to specific people and/or groups of friends
  • ability to share publicly if needed via a link
  • fuckin photospheres!
  • ability to look at all your shared stuff in one place ("photos from posts")
  • view photos that have been shared with you from particular friends
  • auto-awesome. especially the videos when created via manual intervention turn out to be pretty great

if you dont use google photos to share photos, then how are you doing it? especially when you want to share photos to just a few people.

EDIT: i just remembered this cool feature. go to the photos app, and hit the search button. now, enter terms like "beach", "mountain", "christmas" etc

submitted by picspotter to Android
[link] [141 comments]

Posted on 25 December 2014

TIL Google Plus is amazing at creating Porn montages. [NSFW]

So I was without a computer for a while, which naturally led to the kind of content I usually use my laptop to consume ending up on the phone's storage... Among comic books, TV shows, and movies I ended up having two porn torrents on my N5.

Later on I'm browsing through my auto backup on Google Plus and I notice an unfamiliar face in the "Auto Awesome" section. You know, the one where Google does stuff like collages, animated gifs from progress pictures, etc.

Well, it turned out Google cut the two scenes into a very nice preview, just over a minute long! Not only that, it added some very fitting music and showed what I think were all positions in both scenes. It really looked better than many porn trailers.

Without further ado, the masterpiece!

submitted by teeso to Android
[link] [84 comments]

Posted on 1 June 2014

On Google Plus

In the light of recent events involving Vic Gundotra and his leaving of Google, I've read so many hateful things here on Reddit and on the internet in general, so I just wanted to share my own experiences with the social network that are very contrary to popular beliefs.

-Google Plus the ghost-town

That's really the primary argument I always hear from most people. "But none of my friends or family are on Google Plus" "No one I know uses Google Plus" "Why should I use Google Plus when everyone I know is only on Facebook?"

To those people I want to say: Did it ever occur to your that you can maybe use a platform with interesting posts and people, even if none of your friends are on it and everyone is a stranger? Well look around, you're doing it right now! I didn't exist in your world before this post! Tell me, exactly how many of your friends and family use Reddit? Probably not that much right? Yet you spend hours here and discover new and funny things every day, right? And there are also many Subreddits targeted directly at your particular interests, full of relevant content and people that you interact with daily, even in this very moment. Now think about this for a second: Google Plus has more than twice as many active users as Reddit.

-The Userbase

From my PoV "But all my friends are on Facebook" is an argument for Google Plus, rather than against it.

Tell me, when exactly was the last time you saw a rational, respectful discussion without insults on Facebook? It's probably been a while, right? Maybe never? I've had some of the most engaging, rational, respectful and grammatically correct conversions and discussions with some of the brightest and nicest people I've ever met in this "ghost town". Certainly not something I can claim to have experienced on Facebook.

If you log in to Google Plus, like 3 pages and then leave after 10 minutes, you're really not in a position to claim that this Platform is a ghost Town.

Your argument should end right where you say "I don't know much about the topic" and this doesn't only apply in this discussion.

My 2 cents, I'd like to hear your thoughts Reddit!

submitted by HeavyHDx to google
[link] [136 comments]

Posted on 25 April 2014

Ask Gov. Gary Johnson

I am Gov. Gary Johnson. I am the founder and Honorary Chairman of Our America Initiative. I was the Libertarian candidate for President of the United States in 2012, and the two-term Governor of New Mexico from 1995 - 2003.

Here is proof that this is me: I've been referred to as the 'most fiscally conservative Governor' in the country, and vetoed so many bills that I earned the nickname "Governor Veto." I believe that individual freedom and liberty should be preserved, not diminished, by government.

I'm also an avid skier, adventurer, and bicyclist. I have currently reached the highest peaks on six of the seven continents, including Mt. Everest.

FOR MORE INFORMATION Please visit my organization's website: You can also follow me on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and Tumblr. You can also follow Our America Initiative on Facebook Google + and Twitter

submitted by GovGaryJohnson to IAmA
[link] [4502 comments]

Posted on 22 April 2014

Let's Play - Google Plus - #1 : Dump your links here.

Since we've all been strong armed into making G+ accounts, why don't we make it a little easier to hit the ground running and start dumping our G+ channel links in this thread? I figure this way we can see who has their profile page set-up instead of all guessing and trying to find each other.

Commence networking!


For everyone having trouble getting their "correct" profile to be set to default, imunfair figured out a work around. Once you do this, g+ becomes a lot easier to work with.

submitted by BirdCatcherGames to letsplay
[link] [180 comments]

Posted on 7 November 2013

Something's up: 11 Google apps are awaiting updates on the Play Store

Current count: now 17 app updates (Oct 30, 4:25PM EDT)

It happened in the last hour. All of the apps below are currently showing Oct 29, 2013 as the most recent update; but there's no changelog and no roll out yet. If you include Google+ (which had its own press event), that's 12 apps 16 apps that will be updated at some point this week.

Could tomorrow be N5/Kit Kat day? Or is it just bug fixes as part of 'update Wednesday'?


Which camp are you in?

Believers | Non-Believers | Close to mad

EDIT: Blogger too. So 13.

EDIT2: Pure speculation here; multiple updates usually happen close to the end of a quarter, not in the middle of it (Q3 ended Sept and we're only a month into Q4 - why would 13 product teams release updates on the same night? and Wallet of all products? and finally, considering Sundar Pichai didn't appear at the Google+ event yesterday, why did Vic Gundotra tag him earlier this week after all? I think Vic's big day was yesterday. Sundar's will be tomorrow.)

EDIT3: Kinda huge one... Google Play Services now showing Oct 28 (but hasn't rolled out to anyone either). So 14 apps total.

EDIT4: Less huge, Analytics and Fiber app also surfacing with Oct 28.

EDIT5: Someone reminded me that Snapseed was also updated Oct 29.

submitted by JLishere to Android
[link] [542 comments]

Posted on 29 October 2013

Dear Reddit, I just made my first Reddit Android app, inspired by the Google Plus cards UI and Holo design, it is called Reddit Illustrated.

Hi friends, I am an indie developer working alone on Android apps. I wanted a Reddit app that puts the full preview of photos in the main timeline itself so that I don't have to open each picture and then come back to the main screen. Since most Reddit apps I tried followed the "inbox style" list model, I set out to create that app on my own. I wanted the app to be based on the latest version of Android design guidelines, with cards UI, navigation drawer and all. And 4 weeks later here I am with Reddit Illustrated.

Google Play Store link

The app puts the big colorful images right in the middle of your timeline and you can keep on scrolling without reaching the end. It works best on photo-centric subreddits like pics, funny, wallpaper etc (screenshot) but even on subredits like worldnews or Android where the posts are more likely to be stories from sites like or, the app attempts to extract the most relevant image from the page and displays it (screenshot). There is also an internal web browser based on Readability (which you can turn off) that displays links in a mobile formatted UI.

You can use the app without a account but if you login, you can vote, comment and access your personalised front page and subscribed subreddits as well. You can also add subreddits locally into the Favorites section if you just need it in your phone/tablet alone instead of subscribing.

  • Clean user interface based on the cards UI of Google Plus app
  • Scales beautifully on phones as well as 7" tablets like Nexus 7
  • Vote or comment on stories as well as individual comments
  • Access to your personalised front page and subscribed subreddits
  • Sorting option for stories and comments
  • Threaded comments with color coding to indicate their hierarchy
  • Maintain a list of your favorite subreddits
  • Simply long press on any image to download
  • Set the downloaded image as wallpaper from notification bar (screenshot)
  • Share your favorite stories to Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and more
  • Downloads thumbnails (instead of full size images) for preview from,, and
  • Generates thumbnails for Youtube videos and links
  • Hide NSFW photos completely or turn off their previews alone
  • Integrated internal web browser that displays links in a mobile-friendly format
  • Automatic image cache deletion in every 2 days (can be changed in settings)

The app is free and will work on all devices with Android 2.2 and above (although on an Android 4.0+ device it will feel much better due to hardware acceleration and large memory heap available). A $1.99 in-app purchase will remove the ads and your support will help me continue the development.

I tested the app on my Galaxy Note and a friend's S2 and it worked great. I hope it works well on your devices as well. Please give it a try and do let me know your thoughts. Thank you.

Google Play Store link

submitted by naveenjn to Android
[link] [185 comments]

Posted on 22 May 2013

Google is lying. Reader still has MILLIONS of active users. Stats inside.

If you click the detail view of a Reader feed, it will show you the current number of subscribers. You can also see subscriber counts in the Recommended list, or on a feed search.

The number of subscribers is staggering even for sites I'd never heard of, larger than some countries:

Engadget: 6,604,967

CNET News: 1,663,104

The Big Picture: 761,743

Ars Technica: 28,350

The Onion: 499,915

Order of the Stick: 34,497 686,512

xkcd: 324,329

Cyanide & Happiness: 108,458

Lifehacker: 55,627

Cool Tools: 201,264

Penny Arcade: 183,586

I thought maybe it was a legacy thing, like these sites racked up tens or hundreds of thousands of subscribers years ago when Reader was popular but the service now has far fewer active users. And yet:

The Verge (launched November 2011): 102,756

xkcd's What If? (launched July 2012): 71,811

Also, Buzzfeed recently published statistics showing that Google Reader delivers orders of magnitude more traffic than Google Plus -- between 10 and 25 million hits per month. That's a significant fraction of Facebook's total traffic the same time period (10-35%).

Judging from these stats, Google Reader is not stagnant or neglected. Reader has millions of active users. And Google is fucking all of them over, hard.

EDIT: According to blog Google Operating System:

  • most popular feed (CNN) has more than 24 million subscribers

  • Google's official feed has more than tripled its subscription base since 2007

  • 87% of GOS readers come from Google Reader

  • According to Google Trends, search interest in Google Reader climbed steadily throughout 2008, 2009, 2010 and plateaued in 2011, seeing only a slight decline (plateauing at 2009 levels) only after they fucked up its social sharing systems.

submitted by Jordan117 to google
[link] [166 comments]

Posted on 14 March 2013

We are the Google Site Reliability team. We make Google’s websites work. Ask us Anything!

Hello, reddit!

We are the Google Site Reliability (SRE) team. We’re responsible for the 24x7 operation of, as well as the technical infrastructure behind many other Google products such as GMail, Maps, G+ and other stuff you know and love. We’ve been traditionally invisible and behind-the-scenes but we thought we’d drop on here and answer any questions about what we do, what stuff we come up against, and what it’s like to be an SRE.

Other interesting things to give you an idea of what we do:

Blog post about the Leap Second written by Chris Pascoe from SRE give an ides of the kind of hairy problems we come up against.

Steven Levy wrote a Wired Article about inside our datacenters, and managed to make us sound like some sort of amazing justice team.

Kripa (who’s one of our participants today!) also writes about DiRT for ACM Queue.

We’ll be here from 12pm to 2pm PST to answer your questions, when we'll have info on our participants.

Proof (official Google accounts) :

EDIT 11:50PST: We're just getting set up here to answer your questions. We are:

Kripa Krishnan (/u/kripakrishnan), SRE Technical Program Manager and DiRT mastermind from our Mountain View HQ. Kripa works on infrastructure efforts in Google Apps.

Cody Smith (/u/clusteroops), long-time senior SRE from Mountain View. Cody works on Search and Infrastructure.

Dave O’Connor (/u/sre_pointyhair), Site Reliability Manager from our Dublin, Ireland office. Dave manages the Storage SRE team in Dublin that runs Bigtable, Colossus, Spanner, and other storage tech our products are built on.

John Collins (/u/jrc-sre), SRE Ombudsman, advocate and general force for good, from Mountain View.

EDIT 13:56PST: OK folks, we're all done. Thanks for the questions, hope our answers were satisfactory. May the queries flow and the pagers be silent.

*EDIT Jan 30: Corrected the spelling of @stevenlevy's name. Whoops-a-daisy. *

submitted by sre_pointyhair to IAmA
[link] [1438 comments]

Posted on 24 January 2013

How I imagine Google Now in the future (10 mockups)

According to The Verge, Google has a pipeline of cards ("possibly hundreds") planned for Google Now.

I made 10 mockups of cards I wouldn't mind using.

View on imgur:

Any ideas of cards you would especially like to see in the future?

submitted by JLishere to Android
[link] [319 comments]

Posted on 10 December 2012

Bradley Horowitz says that a merge between Voice, Google Talk, Hangouts and Messenger is on the roadmap

Spotted this bit of news from a user who attended a breakfast event at Google Nederland with Bradley Horowitz, VP of Social Products.

"Currently there are two versions of Google Talk (outside and inside Google+), there is Gmail, Google Voice, Google+ Hangouts and Messenger. This does not make it easy for the user to share something with someone else. Although Horowitz again not much was said, would be the one and the other in the coming months are going to change." (sorry for the bad translation from Dutch)

Google+ post:

Article (Dutch):

Also interesting: only 20% of the planned features for Google+ have rolled out so far. Bradley says "2013 will be the year of Google+".

submitted by JLishere to Android
[link] [175 comments]

Posted on 9 November 2012

I Am Jamie Hyneman from MythBusters, AMA. Proof:

I'm Jamie, host of Mythbusters- the guy in the beret. I've not done AMA before, am looking forward to some thoughtful questions. I'm on the northern California coast, in a comfortable chair and looking out to sea. We are on a couple of week break from shooting, and so I'm relaxed and in a good mood.


Tour Website:



Thanks for all the discussion- wish I had time to answer everything. Signing off now. -Jamie

submitted by IAmJamieHyneman to IAmA
[link] [6090 comments]

Posted on 6 October 2012

Reddit Sync has been removed from Google Play

Just woke up to an email from Google Play informing me that the free version of Reddit Sync has been banned without warning for the following reasons:

REASON FOR REMOVAL: Violation of the intellectual property and impersonation or deceptive behavior provisions of the Content Policy.

I've checked the content policy and am at a complete loss as to why it has been pulled. If it's just for having the word Reddit in the title I'd be surprised. All images and assets in the app follow their respective licenses so I doubt it's that either.

The app was even previously reviewed by some guys at Google who didn't seem to think it was deceptive...

I have no idea what to do, I have been working on this app for just under a year and it has been a complete labour of love. Would appreciate any suggestions, thanks.


EDIT: I've cross posted this to Google Plus, hopefully this should gain a little awareness:

EDIT 2: I've also emailed Reddit directly however no DMCA notice was included in Googles email

EDIT 3: Reto Meier has got in touch through Google Plus and is looking into it

EDIT 4: Ionatana Davis from Google has also got in touch via Google Plus and is looking into it

EDIT 5: The guys from Google seem to have backed off, now waiting for the appeal team to get in touch. 26 hours and counting...

submitted by ljdawson to Android
[link] [480 comments]

Posted on 27 August 2012

reddit is fun banned for "sexually explicit material"

Wow. I wasn't expecting this. I got 2 emails from the Google Play Store telling me my apps, reddit is fun lite and pro, have been banned for sexually explicit material.

I'm not sure how to go about appealing this. After all it's true that reddit content includes NSFW content. Not sure exactly why my app was singled out and the other reddit apps weren't, though.

Any thoughts? Should I even bother appealing? As always I appreciate your input, /r/android. Thanks.

EDIT: I posted on Google Plus: maybe it would help to gain awareness through that avenue? Thanks for all your support, guys.

EDIT2: Dave Nicponski, a Google employee, commented on that Google Plus thread, saying the right people at Google are going to contact me about what actually triggered the issue:

+Andrew Shu So i've spoken with the appropriate people here @ google. There seems to be some (very large) confusion about what actually happened. Expect to hear back shortly.

To the masses decrying "censorship! Oh noes!" That's not what happened here at all. Hopefully Andrew will be able to confirm this shortly. It really is a very tiny thing that seems to have caused this. Just be patient.

Still awaiting their response...

EDIT3: I thought it was funny that the situation is somehow getting coverage in China:

EDIT4: The Google Play appeals team have responded to my appeal. They asked me for more clarification on a few points all surrounding the inclusion of NSFW reddits in the default list. So that, as many of you already guessed, is what concerns them about the app. I replied already and will update when I hear back a second time.

EDIT5: Thank you everyone for your support! Google is giving me a chance to reinstate the app, provided I fix the Content Policy issues. The primary issue is the linking to sexually explicit reddits and potentially other policy-violating reddits like any condoning hate speech, gratuitous violence, etc.

submitted by talklittle to Android
[link] [877 comments]

Posted on 19 March 2012

How I got on Google Plus (No witchcraft, just a little help from some code)

A redditor shared a link (not an invite as those are closed) and using that link to I refreshed every 5 seconds for 20 hours. To make that easy, I used a handy Chrome Extension to stay up all night and do all the refreshing for me. Download Extension - Went to bed & woke up w/ access to Google Plus. EDIT: I was logged in to my gmail account at the time. EDIT 2: Wow, front page! Glad to have been helpful. Thanks folks!

submitted by Depression-Unlocked to googleplus
[link] [50 comments]

Posted on 7 July 2011

[IAmA] We are a few engineers and Product Managers on the Google Images team. Shoot us a question!

UPDATE (1:17pm): This IAMA has officially ended, so you'll notice our responses start to trickle off. Please visit our forum to continue this discussion!

Hello redditors,

We're really pumped to be here to talk to you all about Google Images. As you may know, we've recently announced some pretty cool features to Google Images like Search By Image, Sort by subject, Images with Instant, and we’re working on a new interface optimized for tablets like the Xoom and iPad. Got questions or suggestions about these things and more? Great! Ask us anything.

Joining you live from the Googleplex in Mountain View are...

Nathan Beach (highcadence), Product Manager

Peter Linsley (BeardP), Product Manager

Myron Flickner, Product Manager

Chuck Rosenberg (pillansii), Software Engineer

Andrew Munn (import_this), Associate Product Manager

Ken Dauber (lazystroll), Software Engineer

Jeff Laflam (imagesguy), Consumer Experience Specialist

Check out our picture!

We’ll be here until 1:15PM PST to answer your questions.

Please join our Community Manager Kelly Fee (kellyfee) in our forum to talk to other Google Images users!

submitted by kellyfee to IAmA
[link] [1148 comments]

Posted on 7 July 2011

Google Plus invite thread

Figured I'd start this one up again since I got my invite through this thread a week ago (and wasn't able to activate it until an hour ago).

Post your email, get an invite, remove your email from the post (so other know not to invite you) and invite others. Repeat.

Faster we invite people, better shot it has of competing with Facebook.

EDIT: Seems like they closed out the invites again. I had the same thing when I got invited last week and had to check back every so often and wait for them to open up. Once they do open up, all you gotta do is go to and it should allow you to sign in. Nothing more I can do from this point on. If you got an invite, try to invite more people when it does open up. If you're still waiting, keep checking back. I'll try to open another thread like this when I notice that it's open again.

EDIT 2: Seems it might be back up now?!?! Either way, if you ever get an invite but get stopped for a "keep me posted" button, simply keep checking back later, it might take a week or more though (mine took a week).

EDIT 3: I'm off to bed for tonight. Seems there are a few people that are inviting others, consistently faster than I do it too. If they miss you by any chance, message me and I'll mass invite people tomorrow when I get a chance.

EDIT 4: Back from work. Invited everyone who didn't have an invite since I went to sleep yesterday. I'm done for now guys, my fingers hurt from inviting right now. Might be back at this a bit tonight again.

submitted by ItzRabbs to google
[link] [695 comments]

Posted on 6 July 2011

Hey ladies- do any of you want a google plus invite?

Pm me your email address.

EDIT: Apparently it can take upto 3 hours for you to get the invite. I didn't get mine in my inbox but after I was invited, I just went to and got to login with my gmail account. You can try that. If you get the we're temporarily at our limit message, you can try refreshing the page until it works. I'm adding you all to a circle (and its the only way I know) so if you know a more efficient method of inviting people, please let me know!

EDIT2: It might be easier if you logged into your gmail (for those of you who sent me your gmail addresses) and then went to

EDIT3: Its 5.25PM CST and I sent out ~60 invites. Let me know if you don't get them. I'm going out now ...I'll get back to these again later tonight:)

EDIT4: I'm so sorry for the lack of updates. So I sent out a bunch but I'm not sure if they're going through - a bunch of people messaged me saying they didn't get it..but I saw a bunch who got on. I'm not doing any more invites but thanks so much to the redditor(s?) who sent me reddit gold - it was so ridiculously sweet and thank you soo really didn't have to! i got my invite from a redditor so just wanted to give some back to my favorite subreddit! <3

submitted by bluegreensunrise to TwoXChromosomes
[link] [103 comments]

Posted on 3 July 2011