backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by bigdawg1988.. on Jul 22 at 1:38 PM


Mark Zuckerberg's Google+ profile  (Source: huffpost.com)
Zuckerberg explains why Facebook is the number one social network, and why it will likely remain that way despite new competitor Google+

With over 750 million active monthly users, Facebook has a solid position in the social networking industry. But with Google+ on its way, many are wondering if it could be a true rival to Facebook. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg answered this question yesterday at the introduction of Facebook video chat, saying that many websites are becoming more social these days, but added that Facebook is unique in that it specializes in socializing. 

Zuckerberg said that the last five years have been about connecting people while the next five years will be about connecting apps, and that many companies will look into making their apps more social. He also added that Google isn't the only company releasing a social app, but companies like Netflix have expressed interest in doing so as well. It's all about who will build the best app, because if one doesn't, the other will, he said. 

After mentioning that he has spent little time on Google+, Zuckerberg went on to explain why Facebook is the number one social network, and why it will likely remain that way. He has four reasons for thinking this way: Facebook is strictly a social network, people don't want to manage groups, everyone is already on Facebook, and Facebook's video chat is more appealing. However, Zuckerberg never directly spoke of Google by name when discussing these points.

"Companies doing one thing will always do better than companies doing a million things," said Zuckerberg. 

Google, for example, has invested in search, music, mobile phones, advertising, etc. 

As far as managing groups go, Zuckerberg believes that it's time consuming and very focused. With Facebook's group feature, people within a group know whom they are grouped with. But Google's Circles doesn't allow people to know how they are categorized and with whom. Everything revolves around what you're sharing with whom, which, Zuckerberg believes is time consuming.

An obvious advantage that Facebook has is its 750 million users. Many people already have most of their friends and family on Facebook, and will be reluctant to switch to another network if all of these people do not go with them. 

Facebook just announced its video calling feature yesterday, which is a joint venture with Skype that allows users to have one-on-one video chats. Zuckerberg believes this is a better system than a multi-person video chat (much like Google+'s Hangouts, which allows users to video chat with up to 10 people at one time) because "the vast majority of chat is 1 to 1 today."

Whether Zuckerberg is right or wrong about any of the above will play out in time, but for now, he doesn't have to worry much since Google has admitted that Google+ needs some work in certain areas, such as making the service business-friendly.

Google Group Product Manager Christian Oestlien noted on his Google+ page that the way businesses communicate is different from how individuals communicate, and that this is something Google is working on. 

"We want to create an optimal experience for both," said Oestlien. "We have a great team of engineers actively building an amazing Google+ experience for businesses, and we will have something to show the world later this year." 

In fact, Oestlien discourages businesses from making Google+ pages in its current format, and will shut down any businesses trying to connect with users at this time. 

While Google+ won't launch anything business-friendly for a bit, there is a small pilot program that businesses can sign up for to test the waters.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Facebooking it wrong
By Mitch101 on 7/7/2011 10:16:51 AM , Rating: 4
Maybe Im Facebooking it wrong or really I just dont care about facebooking in general but I dont get all the hype.

Facebook to me is picture posting with shared chat sessions. The rest is just tricking your friends into providing personal information about you that is passed along to spammers.

Wish I would have thought of it but I dont get the hype. Maybe you need a sense of what you do needs to be shared with the world feeling.




RE: Facebooking it wrong
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:23:15 AM , Rating: 2
I don't get facebook much either. I have it cause my wife wanted me to have to it but only have like 35 friends and barely use it at all. My wife on the other hand has like 1300 friends and can identify every person, how they met, how long she has known them, and a crap load of other info just by looking at names. I don't know how she does it but she does manage to stay in contact with a huge majority of them and will just "stalk" facebook, as i call it, seeing what everyone is up to.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By icanhascpu on 7/7/2011 10:31:46 AM , Rating: 4
Its an easy way to keep track of family and friends you do not have easy access to physically. If someone is having issues, say a kind hello. If someone found a new great job, getting married, congrats to them. You have acquaintance and maybe a few dozen closer friends and fam you pay more attention to. You post things that are interesting to you, people that want to see it, see it. You want to plan an event to goto, it makes it easier. Holy shit. Socializing. ect ect

I dont 'get' how people dont 'get' that. Kind of obvious.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 10:34:23 AM , Rating: 1
Or you could keep an actual address book of friends and family, and I don't know, give them an actual phone call instead of just taking the lazy way out and messaging them.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 10:57:45 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Or you could keep an actual address book of friends and family, and I don't know, give them an actual phone call instead of just taking the lazy way out and messaging them.


Or you could write letters instead of being on the Internet. Also you could use a telegraph instead of the telephone.

Seriously, what cave did you guys roll out of?


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:59:26 AM , Rating: 3
If people used facebook for only an address book I could understand. What I don't understand is the constant need to keep every friend on earth updated that you walking your dog


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 11:01:59 AM , Rating: 2
Uh the cave where people actually talk to each other in person rather than talking through a screen. It's a 1000 times better to talk to people in person than through a social failure like Facebook.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:09:11 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's a 1000 times better to talk to people in person


And if you can't talk to them "in person"??


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/11, Rating: 0
RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:26:41 AM , Rating: 3
You're a broken record. You obviously just do NOT get it.

It doesn't matter how you communicate with people, it just matters that you cared enough to do it. The Internet has brought people closer together than ever. I have friends and talk to people that I would never have known they even existed otherwise. Calling my friend in Japan, for example, would be very expensive for me. Thanks to online communications and Facebook, it's not only possible, but completely convenient and painless.

You need to try and see past your own little bubble.

quote:
Rather go out and do something instead of sitting in one place.


Keep assuming that nobody but you does this. Go ahead, cause it was so effective the last 4 times you said this.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Samus on 7/7/2011 2:52:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'm more interested in Google+ than I am Facebook (I have neither) but honestly, Google+ is simply going to be on the spectrum of LinkedIn or Plaxo: a purpose built social network ecosystem.

Facebook is a multipurpose ecosystem, which is essentially what Zuckerberg is saying, and he is right. Nobody will take all of Facebooks users, but a select group may be at risk of switching to another service that offers that group a better environment.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 5:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
Google+ right now looks like a horrible Facebook ripoff. The page layout and color scheme is like exactly the same.

Facebook won't "lose" users to Google+. People might use Google+ AND Facebook at the same time. But the idea that people are going to delete their Facebook profiles and go through all the friend-adding processes etc etc on Google+ seems very unrealistic.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By JoYu on 7/7/2011 6:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah very unrealistic, except that it has happened many times already. Friendster then MySpace then Facebook. History repeats itself. You are correct that very few people would delete their facebook atm, it is a slow progression not many people deleted their myspace and switched to facebook in one day...

To me it is impossible to predict what is going to happen (I certainly won't try and tell you whether goog+ will succeed), I think it has a long way to go, it's still in beta... But the internet is ever changing.

I like some of the features like group chat on the phone apps is awesome. But some things I really miss from facebook, like being able to tell who is online.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By snakeInTheGrass on 7/8/2011 10:11:54 AM , Rating: 2
So to take your argument to the logical conclusion, you shouldn't be on an impersonal phone call either - get in the car or on a plane and meet your so-called friends. That should help you stay in touch, right?

As for me, +/- 6 hour time differences and having a family with activities can somewhat limit these perfectly scheduled phone calls you're into, and I'm happy to have an easy way to stay in touch.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Miggleness on 7/7/2011 12:36:52 PM , Rating: 3
Point is, I do not want to talk with everyone for more than 2 minutes in person. Facebook makes that possible for me.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By croc on 7/8/2011 3:29:10 AM , Rating: 2
"Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

Zuck: Just ask.

Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

Zuck: People just submitted it.

Zuck: I don't know why.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks."

Park this quote under the 'why Croc doesn't use facebook' heading...

And I'll make up an original Croc quote while I am at it - Anyone that trusts even a little of their private life to facebook, google, et al, deserves neither privacy nor a life.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By ShaolinSoccer on 7/8/2011 9:37:04 PM , Rating: 2
Women love facebook just because it's called facebook and guys will flock to anything women love. You'd be kind of stupid not to lol...

I find it amazing that Mark is making billions off of this. I've actually seen facebook ruin friendships. Someone would post a picture that was offending to a family member or a friend. That person would comment about it. Instant friend killer. I've seen family members become so addicted to facebook that they literally stay on it all day. It's disturbing! And their app on iphone or android? Absolutely TERRIBLE apps. The guy has billions of dollars and can't hire a compentent programmer? Someone should punch him in the face for that. I wish I could!


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By FTM0305 on 7/14/2011 3:56:01 PM , Rating: 1
A little harsh there, Adolf.

As for me, I do not mind willing giving my information to a corporation like Google. If they want to take the time and customize content for me, then that's great.

If I went to a doctor and wouldn't allow him to enter my personal space then he really can't like a doctor, now can he?

How many doctors out there have murdered, molested, or otherwise abused their station?

Do you distrust all doctors as you do these companies?

Plus your little phrase at the end is not only disturbing but a blatant corruption of the Ben Franklin quote: "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security."

I for one would enjoy the liberty of receiving content then worrying about the security of my personal data.

You make baby Ben Franklin cry.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By pandemonium on 7/15/2011 1:28:17 AM , Rating: 1
You do realize that almost everything you do on the internet is being categorized and given statistical analysis, right?

How do you think Google got big in the first place?

Some people have rationality when it comes to disclosing personal information, and others don't...anywhere in life. It doesn't matter if it's internet or not. Yours shown here is cripplingly paranoid.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By jtesoro on 7/7/2011 11:16:45 AM , Rating: 2
Or you could use the actual address book of friends and family, and I don't know, pay them an actual visit instead of taking the lazy way out and calling them. ;-)

There are lots of ways of keeping in touch: physical visits, phone calls, SMS, messaging and the like. Facebook is another option that people are capitalizing on. With it I was able to get in touch with people I haven't contacted in years. And those I am in touch with, I communicate with more than ever, digitally *in addition* to other means. Not for you? Fine, no worries.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:35:09 AM , Rating: 3
Yeah but what happened to just calling family everyone once and a while to see how they are doing or going to dinner with your friends every one in awhile. I don't need a web application to know what is happening with my close friends and family. I have a phone and a car to do all that. I don't need a web application to socialize with the people I care about.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 10:54:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah but what happened to just calling family everyone once and a while


Hey, grandpa, why are the two mutually exclusive? Do you have any data to prove that Facebook users don't also call people on the phone?

quote:
or going to dinner with your friends every one in awhile


Yes because nobody has friends on Facebook that live in other countries or in far off states! Dinner would go over REAL well. Another brilliant observation.

quote:
I don't need a web application to know what is happening with my close friends and family.


And yet, lol, you're a self confessed Facebook user yourself. Are you going for the hypocrite angle or the "I'm better than you" one?

It's 2011, the way we communicate and interact with people has been forever changed. It's time to deal with that and adapt. What's the big difference between a phone call or a Skype VoIP call or video chat anyway?

Your old man "in my day" grouchy complaints about Facebook and Internet technologies is just SO tired.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 11:04:43 AM , Rating: 2
The quality of a land line phone call is a lot better than a VoIP call or video conferance. I've used both technologies from within and out of the country. Land line always tops the internet alternative.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:11:35 AM , Rating: 2
Bypassing the fact that unless your Internet connection sucks, Skype's quality is completely indistinguishable from a land line. So what? By your logic cell phones shouldn't be used because call quality varies wildly on those.

Did you even have a point?


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Mitch101 on 7/7/2011 12:30:57 PM , Rating: 2
VOIP and Landline have been nearly the same technology for years now. Landline compresses the audio at the switching center and VOIP compresses the audio at the little box your phone is plugged into.

That voice compressions technology is what all the VOIP carriers were getting sued for as AT&T and Verizon seem to own all those patents.

But your right because the back end infrastructure of land line is much more robust than passing data from VOIP over to a carrier and back out to land line or other VOIP service almost all through the internet. The problem with VOIP is that its the internet and not a dedicated network like land lines back end.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Solandri on 7/7/2011 4:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
A good VoIP service is better than landline quality. Landlines (POTS) transmit frequencies from 180 Hz to 3.2 kHz. The high end is cut off as it's deemed unnecessary, and the low end is cut off to avoid noise at 60 Hz. This is what gives the characteristic "phone call sound" which you can immediately recognize in movies and TV shows.

Most regular VoIP services sample at 8 kHz (thus capturing audio frequencies up to 4 kHz; all low end frequencies can be captured). But many of them have options for higher quality. Skype can go up to 16 kHz samples (8 kHz audio frequencies), and other services can do 20 kHz, with some even offering 44/48 kHz sampling (CD quality).


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By JoYu on 7/7/2011 6:54:55 PM , Rating: 2
Good job keeping up on Tech, but in the end what really matters is how it sounds (and feels). Maybe it just because you are using a computer and it varies depending on the persons microphone/speaker/webcam, but I think phones sound much better regardless.

I am an Engineer, and one of the the first things I realized becoming one is that people get all excited over the technical details, but all that really matters is the end result.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 7:12:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am an Engineer


Just not a very good one, apparently. Sound quality is not subjective, it's a verifiable and quantifiable through scientific means.

quote:
Maybe it just because you are using a computer and it varies depending on the persons microphone/speaker/webcam


The technology isn't responsible for the means used in conveying it. Using your logic, one could make the argument that phones sound terrible because they have a cheap low quality phone. Does this make the underlying technology any less sound?


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By bigdawg1988 on 7/22/2011 1:38:46 PM , Rating: 2
The only problem is only 1% of the people actually have something to say, and they say it all the damn time. Wish they would just get twitter accounts instead. Put the important stuff on facebook and the rest on twitter. I'm actually looking forward to google+ and the circle thing. There are certain circles of friends you just don't want to hear from everyday.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 10:48:51 AM , Rating: 2
I love when people say they don't "get" Facebook. It's 2011 and you don't "get" people communicating online yet? What's there to get! Unless you are a senior citizen or have been living in a cave since 1996, then I don't get what the problem is.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:55:52 AM , Rating: 2
Well call my old fashioned then but I'm 22 and would much rather call my friends then send them a facebook message or wall post.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:02:49 AM , Rating: 2
I call my friends too! Every Facebook user does. Again, did you have a point? Do you have data showing that Facebook users have less phone activity or something?

Nope. You sound like a grandparent who hates change and insists that their way is better. It's 2011, you are wrong, it's just that simple.

Let me ask you something. Do you email people or write letters? Because if you email and don't write, you're just taking the "lazy" way out, aren't you? You should put pen to paper like the old days and show your friends and family and boss etc etc that they mean a lot to you and that you care. Right?


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 10:59:20 AM , Rating: 2
Did you stop to think that a lot of people don't want to communicate online, but to communicate in person where the social and interactive dynamics are a lot richer than anything you could get online? Or how about your condescending remark about people's ability to use computers. Maybe it's because they don't want to be tied down to a machine and instead spend their days doing more constructive and healthy activities like working out, reading a book, doing crossword puzzles, and other such things instead of being glued to a screen all day long. And people say video gamers have addiction problems. I take one look at all the people on Facebook and just shake my head.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:07:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did you stop to think that a lot of people don't want to communicate online


Oh my goodness, again, why are the two viewed as being mutually exclusive? Why can't there be a moderate view of Facebook? There is a time to communicate online and there is a time to do it "in person". If you have friends far away, "in person" doesn't always work now does it?

I cannot believe here in 2011 there are people with your attitude and the other guy who's 22 going on 80. It's really sad.

quote:
I take one look at all the people on Facebook and just shake my head.


You "shake your head" at almost 1 billion people. And you call ME condescending?


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Ninhalem on 7/7/11, Rating: 0
RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 7/7/2011 11:15:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I was talking about the hypocrism between addicted video gamers and people staying glued to Facebook 10 hours a day


That exists in your own mind? Nobody even brought that up here except you.

Your argument is what's called a straw man.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By ShaolinSoccer on 7/8/2011 9:50:37 PM , Rating: 2
He's right, though. I have seen people post a comment or a picture and within a few minutes, get a reply from most of their friends. No matter when they do it. People are getting HIGHLY addicted to facebook. I call it "nosy syndrome" lol.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By superunknown98 on 7/7/2011 1:54:43 PM , Rating: 2
"why are the two viewed as being mutually exclusive?"
They are not exclusive. However I will tell you that people I used to be good friends with, on the phone and in person, now spend less time doing so. Where is all their time spent? posting messages, videos, pictures on Facebook. It does detract, to a varying degree from face to face relationships.

I don't hate facebook, I see some potential, but I really think it's the way people use it that makes it worthless. Most people post trivial crap to begin with. "lol at mall", "I'm mad at my girl/boyfriend", "alf is back!". Or they link it to foursquare and let everyone know they're at Mcdonalds for the fifth time today. Maybe you would like to plant some seeds at your friends farm in farmville?

It's just not a very serious form of communication. You wouldn't fire someone, break up with someone, propose to someone, announce a death to family members on facebook. It is mostly used for nonsense.

Aside from the "750 million accounts" what does facebook do that some other service doesn't? What is wrong with phone, AIM, email, Flickr, and skype? Facebook didn't revolutionize anything, it just bundled all of this together. So can anyone else who happens to be popular at the moment.

The reason I stopped using it is because, I don't want 500 friends that I barely keep up with. I have a small group of close friends, that I know very well. We talk face to face and that's the ways i likes it.



RE: Facebooking it wrong
By amanojaku on 7/7/2011 10:33:12 AM , Rating: 2
I don't have an account, but I think I get the attraction. The ability to share things with people anywhere, no matter what that thing is (picture, web link, movie, song, event, etc...) is pretty compelling, especially when people have different operating systems and a general lack of computing knowledge. The two problems are the frequency and importance of this information. It gets to the point that people live on the site, excluding anyone who is not on it, and they share everything, no matter how trivial or important.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By Flunk on 7/7/2011 12:12:20 PM , Rating: 3
Facebook is not a verb.


RE: Facebooking it wrong
By hanmen on 7/10/2011 9:10:40 AM , Rating: 1
welcome to our online store site: http://www.buy3buy.com
looking forward to your visiting,hope to meet your need all cheap but good quality,best sevice ,free shipping.
http://www.buy3buy.com


Who gives
By icanhascpu on 7/7/2011 10:21:07 AM , Rating: 1
a fuck what doucheburg has to say? Fuck that guy. Facebook is an awesome idea with a dipshit driving it.

All hail G+. I'm using it already, and while its clearly still being developed, it is a far better system than Facebook. Google has applications all over the place and is building a social network around that instead of the other way around.




RE: Who gives
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 10:32:56 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah I couldn't give a rat's ass about Zuckerburg. Facebook was ruined after it was opened up to non-college applicants. All it is a giant address book for me now, and I'm looking to switch to Google+ as soon as I can snag an invite.

Hint Hint: sunpaladin@gmail.com

Heh. :)


RE: Who gives
By cjohnson2136 on 7/7/2011 10:36:04 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah I have been looking for an invite too

:) cjohnson2136@gmail.com


RE: Who gives
By petrosy on 7/7/2011 8:05:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Facebook was ruined after it was opened up to non-college applicants.


What an elitists douchebag statement... maybe its people like you that has ruined FB. Please don't use G+ as you may ruin that too.

By the way G+ is awesome I recommend it.


RE: Who gives
By troysavary on 7/7/2011 10:47:08 AM , Rating: 1
Ah, what the hell, even though I despise Google, I hate Facebook even more so I might as well check out Google's next failure.

troysavary@gmail.com

btw, I had that gmail address long before I realised what douches Google are and it is only used as a spam-trap now.


RE: Who gives
By Flunk on 7/7/2011 12:17:18 PM , Rating: 2
All companies want one thing, profits. They are all equally douchy, once you accept that you can figure out how to exploit it to your advantage.


Not everyone knows...
By DrApop on 7/7/2011 10:55:39 AM , Rating: 2
I really like many of the Google online applications. But Google does have a number of issues that I think they are blind to.

I work in an office with people that use facebook multiple times a day(and even gmail!) but as far as google.....of about 80% of those people all they know is that google is a search engine and provides email. They have no idea that google actually offers numerous online applications. I think the majority of facebook users will never hear about google + unless they read the tech journals and/or websites.

And now that you can (for most browsers) just type your search into the address bar to get results, they just never see of hear about the available google applications.

IMO, google needs to invest in better placement of their apps or somehow show users what is available. Even when you go to a listing of their available applications it is just that....a listing. Spruce it up...make it look professions...hire a designer.

They need to hire a web designer to spruce up the "look and feel" of their apps...right now they look pretty generic (regardless of how well they work/function).

They also need to spend more time updating their office suit of applications....it's like wordpad or MS Works from the 1990's.




RE: Not everyone knows...
By icanhascpu on 7/7/2011 11:06:28 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
IMO, google needs to invest in better placement of their apps or somehow show users what is available.


Being done....dude...
*cough*google+*cough*


RE: Not everyone knows...
By Ninhalem on 7/7/2011 11:08:04 AM , Rating: 2
Google is currently changing the feel of how the search page is layed out. I think the black bar at the top with your settings and different application links really emphasizes what's being done to help move your eyes and attention to the new stuff.


RE: Not everyone knows...
By smithb115 on 7/7/2011 11:17:18 AM , Rating: 2
If Google+ is truly a superior and diversified product to Facebook, people will hear about this technology without having to do much research. Word of mouth is strong with popular trends. Google just has to prove it can provide a service people will want to convert to be excited about using.


*Snicker*
By bplewis24 on 7/7/2011 10:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Companies doing one thing will always do better than companies doing a million things," said Zuckerberg.


It must sting him to realize that the company doing "a million things" is doing the social network thing better than his company, which ONLY does social networking.

Google+ is far superior to Facebook, and I've been on FB for years now.




RE: *Snicker*
By Lazarus Dark on 7/9/2011 12:35:01 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, that quote made me laugh for several reasons.
Reasons like Gmail, GCalendar, Picassa, Google search, Android and Android Market, GMaps, Lattitude, Google Earth, Chrome, GVoice, Youtube.
Google is doing a LOT of things really, really well. Some of them are the best, like Gmail and Gmaps; some are revolutionary, like Android; and most others are very competitive with other services, but have the added benifit of being all under the Google roof and therefore intercompatible and using one login.

And in fact, moving to G+ this week has plugged me more in than ever. I never used Picassa before, but thanks to the G+ integration, I tried the online and offline version and I am blown away. I can't believe such an incredible photo service is free. I am now a Picassa convert thanks to G+. I think others may find themselves in a similar situation, people who try G+ may find themselves discovering other G services they never used before.

Been on G+ for a week now and I can say they have a winner. It's designed far better than FB and takes social networking to the next level. Will Facebook fall tomorrow? No, I wish. But G+ will put a big dent in it. If Google can even lure one tenth away, they will win, because that one tenth will be the power users, the ones who actually matter. I've accepted that I probably wont be able to drag my grandmother away from FB to G+, and I'm fine with that, G+ wasn't designed for her, FB fits her better. But unfortunately for her, if she does not move to G+ she wont see any of my posts or pics, making her feed a bit of a desert town.


i can remember when...
By inperfectdarkness on 7/7/2011 11:15:40 AM , Rating: 2
everyone thought myspace was on top of the heap too. nothing is constant. i won't be surprised if facebook starts to slide into obscurity within 10 years.




Funny how
By lgoldberg on 7/7/2011 4:31:54 PM , Rating: 2
the "I don't get it" guy spent a large amount of time just now communicating online.




fdsdsa
By fdsafsda on 7/7/2011 8:11:45 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.benzlogo.com/

I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport




Jack of all Trades
By FTM0305 on 7/14/2011 3:45:30 PM , Rating: 2
"Companies doing one thing will always do better than companies doing a million things," said Zuckerberg.

Jack of all trades, master of none, often better than a master of one.




svdvs
By nvnvlai3535 on 7/9/2011 8:37:54 AM , Rating: 1
http://www.ifancyshop.com

I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport




hjkh
By yuyuyuan on 7/7/11, Rating: 0
dfgd
By dsfnsdfn on 7/7/11, Rating: 0
"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki