New goooogle

[BlodwynPig]

Just noticed the new "layout" for google. There is an interesting addition in a +1 recommendation button next to each search hit (Similar to Like in facebook, but for webpage returns). I wonder how that will work - so far I seem to be the only one who has +1'd this site...

Worthless or another step into the bright future of infotainment (web searching)

[The Boston Crab]

Thought you were talking about Google+, the Facebook killer. Would 'kill' for an invite (not literally, guys!).

[biggytitbo]

They've introudced there ultra lame 'alternative' to Facebook today too. Which looks virtually exactly the same but 5 years too late. Add it to the long list of things they've introduced that will be quietly dropped a year later because nobody uses them - google wave, buzz, talk. Like a lot of companies they can't be satisfied with their core business, the thing they have expertise in and are brilliant at. Instead they have this obsessive compulsive desire to try and stick their fingers  in every single fucking pie going because of this paradigm of perpetual growth. And they will fail miserably.

[The Boston Crab]

Dunno, bro. I'd use G+ instead of FB due to integration and shit.

[Still Not George]

Also if they leave it the fuck alone rather than changing it every other day that'd be nice too.

[biggytitbo]

Dunno, bro. I'd use G+ instead of FB due to integration and shit.

Maybe if they let you log in with Facebook they might get somewhere.

[The Boston Crab]

Good idea, definitely. Never gonna happen, though.

[Still Not George]

We might end up with a situation where all the techy/smart people are on G+ while all the thickos are on Facebook. There's certainly enough drooling idiocy on FB to make me want to run to the (Google-scented) hills.

As for whether FB will inevitably win - "Myspace is unbeatable at the moment" is a phrase I remember being used a goodly few years back...

[Icehaven]

Some (frankly crap) BBC technology reporter was saying how ''canny'' Google are being in making it exclusive and invite only at first, and intending to open it up to everyone once it's established, as if that isn't exactly what Facebook did.

[Still Not George]

Some (frankly crap) internet analyst on the BBC site was saying how ''canny'' Google are being in making it invite only at first, and intending to open it up to everyone once it's established, as if that isn't exactly what Facebook did.

And indeed what Google did with gmail.

That said I didn't hear much about Facebook until long after it was public access, while gmail was on everyone's lips during its invite-only period.

[Icehaven]

And indeed what Google did with gmail.

That said I didn't hear much about Facebook until long after it was public access, while gmail was on everyone's lips during its invite-only period.

I remember reading an article on the BBC news site about Facebook when it was still exclusive, presumably not by the same reporter.

[biggytitbo]

Google trying to beat Facebook is a bit like bing trying to beat google search. Not going to happen. Facebook has become social networking, like google has become search And Facebook isn't just a website, it's a whole set of apis used on virtually every website in the world. It's user base is also too large to ever take on successfully on a timeframe that would make a viable business. it might erode over a great deal of time, but not because of 1 new competitor trying to go after them, more likely due to a fragmentation as the social networking space becomes more decentralised.

[small_world]

If Google want this to work, they need to just fuck everything and ride the controversy out. They need to launch on Day 1 with your Google home page, covered in photos of you and your friends, and your 'wall' and newsfeed down one half of the page (stolen from Facebook and linked to you, as they so obviously could).
And a Street map view of where you live as background wall paper.
And their search bar at the top.
Just push through the barrier of privacy infringement and ride out the storm.
That way, people who use Google as their home page will just go, 'Oh, so this is the new Facebook, that's clever. And hopefully won't notice. Only that way will they get the product going.

I wonder what the Home Page stats are.
A lot of my friends[nb]are cunts[/nb] have Facebook as their homepage. I, as I always assumed people do, have Google (that 'i' thing) as my home page.

[The Roofdog]

Google is a classic case of the "ain't broke, don't fix it" serial offender. You'd think that once you had a killer search algorithm in place you couldn't fuck up a plain white page with a text box and a 'Go' button but they're doing their damndest. Instant search makes the whole thing sluggish as fuck and now you can't even turn their shitty autocomplete off. And now there's a nice black bar shat out across the top of the page to make way for G+ updates.

[Old Thrashbarg]

Instead they have this obsessive compulsive desire to try and stick their fingers  in every single fucking pie going because of this paradigm of perpetual growth. And they will fail miserably.

Yeah, what were they thinking trying to branch out into email, browsing, mobile operating systems, advertising, web mapping, etc.?

[George Oscar Bluth II]

Surely Facebook/Google etc get that everyone is on Facebook not because of the features or whatever, but because everyone is on Facebook.

[Icehaven]

Surely Facebook/Google etc get that everyone is on Facebook not because of the features or whatever, but because everyone is on Facebook.

Exactly. It must have the highest proportion of people who use it every day and yet also claim to hate it on the internet.

[Squink]

It must have the highest proportion of people who use it every day and yet also claim to hate it on the internet.

I think almost every website that reaches a certain degree of popularity gets to this point. Look at Pitchfork, for example. It would die on its arse if it wasn't hated so vehemently by its readers (who return every day to hate it some more).

[Icehaven]

I think almost every website that reaches a certain degree of popularity gets to this point. Look at Pitchfork, for example. It would die on its arse if it wasn't hated so vehemently by its readers (who return every day to hate it some more).

I suppose, although with Facebook it's more that you can feel at a distinct social disadvantage if you don't use it, as so many people use it as their main way of communicating/telling people anything/organising social events (my friend actually rang me to ask why I hadn't confirmed my attendance at his party on the event page he'd set up, depsite me having told him in person I was definitely going plenty of times), and you'd miss out on things, so you feel obliged to use it regardless of how you feel about it. Same reason people get so pissed off about the privacy breaches, because there's no way they're going to just not use it. There's almost a sense of entitlement to it now.

[Johnny Yesno]

Add it to the long list of things they've introduced that will be quietly dropped a year later because nobody uses them - google wave, buzz, talk.

Wave is an odd one. It seemed to have potential but no one I knew could work out exactly what to use it for. I like Googletalk, though. I've got it set up with Adium so I can use it to communicate with users of other IM clients. I like the Google video chat too.

As for whether FB will inevitably win - "Myspace is unbeatable at the moment" is a phrase I remember being used a goodly few years back...

Yes, MySpace has just got worse and worse with every update. It's such a pain to use that people have left it in droves. Maybe if Google can make privacy much simpler than it is on FB, or perhaps if people suddenly realise they don't need 100 friends after all then there might be some takers.

[biggytitbo]

Yeah, what were they thinking trying to branch out into email, browsing, mobile operating systems, advertising, web mapping, etc.?

All those things,with the exception of android are pretty logical extensions of their core search business though. Android itself seemsq to work because google actually found a new market - 'open' source mobile operating system. Where's the new market with a clone of facebook, and apart from tinkering what have they introduced that's in anyway new? The ultimate problem for them is that the main feature of a social networking site is that everyone is on it. So when you compare google plus to Facebook, even if it's technically superior it's it's always going to lack that one selling point.

[Jamie Oliver is fat]

I'm not sure the success of Android is due to it being open source, but rather because it's just very good. I don't think most of it's users like it because it's open source, or even know or care for that matter.

Unless it's functionally good because it's open source, but I'm not certain that's the case.

[Milo]

Given that Facebook managed to slaughter Myspace by having a much cleaner and more usable design, it's not out of the question that G+ could do the same to Facebook given how many people are nowadays pissed off with the shite, overcomplicated design on Facebook.

[mook]

i've never used facebook or any of the other doohickeys, but i'm going to stick my neck out and say that within a couple of years G+ will be the most popular and used among them. and i'm basing this certainty on the fact that biggy says it won't work. that dude is so wrong so often, it just makes fiscal sense to do the opposite of what he says.

[Still Not George]

Wave is an odd one. It seemed to have potential but no one I knew could work out exactly what to use it for. I like Googletalk, though. I've got it set up with Adium so I can use it to communicate with users of other IM clients. I like the Google video chat too.

Gtalk is pretty much the best chat service around - I've only seen it down once, while almost every other "IM service" with the exception of P2P weirdness seems to be down all the time. And lets not talk about MSNM...

Yes, MySpace has just got worse and worse with every update. It's such a pain to use that people have left it in droves. Maybe if Google can make privacy much simpler than it is on FB, or perhaps if people suddenly realise they don't need 100 friends after all then there might be some takers.

The whole driving force of G+ appears to be this "circles" concept. Essentially a circle is a visual friendlist/whitelist - you make one, label it, drag friends onto it, and then it hovers around in an easily accessible selection. Whichever one is highlighted is the one your messages are going to. So you can set up a "friends" circle, a "work" circle, a "family" circle and quicky and easily flip between them. It's a good idea, but I suspect it'll be difficult to gauge how good until there's more people on the service.

[biggytitbo]

I'm not sure the success of Android is due to it being open source, but rather because it's just very good. I don't think most of it's users like it because it's open source, or even know or care for that matter.

Unless it's functionally good because it's open source, but I'm not certain that's the case.

That fact it's open source is why it's on tons of devices from different manufacturers though, which si the key to it's success.

[biggytitbo]

i've never used facebook or any of the other doohickeys, but i'm going to stick my neck out and say that within a couple of years G+ will be the most popular and used among them. and i'm basing this certainty on the fact that biggy says it won't work. that dude is so wrong so often, it just makes fiscal sense to do the opposite of what he says.

You wouldn't be saying that if you could see how much my gold is worth these days :)

[Zetetic]

Gtalk is pretty much the best chat service around - I've only seen it down once, while almost every other "IM service" with the exception of P2P weirdness seems to be down all the time.

That Gtalk is part of that P2P weirdness (ok, very loosely) because it's just XMPP is even better.

[jutl]

They've introudced there ultra lame 'alternative' to Facebook today too. Which looks virtually exactly the same but 5 years too late. Add it to the long list of things they've introduced that will be quietly dropped a year later because nobody uses them - google wave, buzz, talk.-

Buzz and Talk are still open.

Like a lot of companies they can't be satisfied with their core business, the thing they have expertise in and are brilliant at. Instead they have this obsessive compulsive desire to try and stick their fingers  in every single fucking pie going because of this paradigm of perpetual growth. And they will fail miserably.

Google's core business is the integration and analysis of data, and all these initiatives provide them with more data to analyse.

I'm not sure the success of Android is due to it being open source, but rather because it's just very good. I don't think most of it's users like it because it's open source, or even know or care for that matter.

Unless it's functionally good because it's open source, but I'm not certain that's the case.

Android has succeeded in part because of its wide support by hardware manufacturers and network operators. The fact that it's open source made hardware manufacturers and operators less nervous about investing in it, as they could be sure that (the majority of) the OS would continue to be available under very liberal licences in the future, with no possibility of licensing costs getting jacked up. So while the open source nature of (most of) Android probably doesn't sway many consumers, it's played a big part in its success.

[katzenjammer]

The killer for Facebook will be if someone comes up with a standard for social networking that anyone can write their own frontend for.