Estoy de acuerdo >_> Facebook already has everyone on it, which is actually so much more important than a lot of new and helpful features and interfaces.I don't understand this at all.
It's taken years to slowly accumulate all the people I know on facebook. I've uploaded 100s of pictures, been tagged in almost 1000. At this point, facebook is almost like an archive of my life - I can easily find pictures of my high school prom or look at conversations between myself and my friends that took place years ago if I'm feeling nostalgic. All of my friends are on facebook and we use it all the time for planning events, coordinating daily life, keeping in touch when we go away etc
What possible reason would I have for wanting to start completely from scratch to emerge at almost the exact same final product? Less ads/apps? If you've used facebook at all since the last update you would have seen that stupid quiz updates and farmville type stuff in your newsfeed or your inbox have been drastically cut down to the point where they're almost non-existent, and ads only occupy a column about 2 inches wide on one side of the screen. Increased privacy? I guess if you are extremely, extremely paranoid about privacy this could be important but I've never found a case where facebook's privacy settings were inadequate. The circle idea is pretty interesting but I can't imagine wanting to maintain that when you have a ton of friends.
Either way, my point is - even if google+ is better than facebook, I still don't see that as a reason to switch to it, because A) I don't think there is anything deepy, structurally wrong with facebook and B) whatever few perks there are of google+ are overwhelmingly outnumbered by the fact that facebook is already the standard and changing is a bitch.
Except that Facebook actually brought something new to the users in comparison to Myspace whereas Google+ is already identified as an 'identical product' to Facebook. Internet innovations are not about replacing, which Google+, Diaspora, MyCube and all these other start-ups are trying to accomplish. Internet innovations are about generating something new to the consumers.You really can't expect for facebook to be around forever. Myspace used to be what Facebook is to us today. Suddenly a new guy appears with all the things that Myspace used to have, and even more perks. Myspace is now a ghost town. I think that g+ is to Facebook as Facebook was to Myspace.
Yes, they are not identical - thus, the quotation marks around the word identical in my previous post.Google+ isn't a simple replacement, or even identical as you put it. Yes, it serves the same purpose of social networking. At the same time it brings along with it a wonderful and clean interface, quite a few neat features, and access to all my other Google products such as mail, calender, docs, youtube, blogger, ect from one place. What advantages did facebook have over myspace when it first came out? To be honest, not much. It had a nicer interface and the community was better. But both did the same thing. You could post on someone's wall, send messages, post pictures, and other such things. The same can be said for Google+. It is similar in it's purpose, but not identical in execution. Those differences in execution are what allowed facebook to topple myspace, and maybe what will allow G+ to pull ahead someday.
a service like this should strive for a simple, consistent, minimalist interface. that was a huge advantage facebook had over myspace in 2006, but google's really good at doing that sort of thing well.A new interface is not a new need for consumers. In Internet products, the surface is just rather a supporting element in the product. Facebook's interface is nothing spectacular but it serves its purpose - people don't need a fancy interface.
it annoys me to no end that facebook follows me all around the internet. it's the only site i log out of when i'm done using it deliberately to stop this kind of behaviour.Every new site has these 'neat' new features but I don't see how Google+ would have anything neat enough to absorb the consumers of a worldwide social media website with brand-loyal users. You can also implement quite a few products to Facebook and log in to various websites via Facebook.
trillian is basically just pidgin but proprietary. i don't know of any trillian users but i know lots of pidgin users (including myself, for a while)Trillian combined all popular messengers a few years backwards into the same program/website, so it would be easy to access all of them at once. And how did that work out? I never saw people too hyped about the concept, even though it looked good on paper.
facebook's news feed blows. it doesn't tell you what all your contacts are doing (it picks them seemingly at random) but it pretends that it does. my google+ newsfeed hasn't seen enough use for me to make a comparison but it'll probably be much more useful than facebook's.As for advantages that Facebook has over Myspace, I'd start with the amount of different applications Facebook has to offer over Myspace's fairly limited selection, the news feed is something Myspace lacks. In Facebook you have instant information on what your contacts are doing, this Myspace didn't have.
yes?The actions you mentioned in your post that would indicate the similarity between the two sites would make Smogon and Myspace 'do both the same thing', as you put it. You can post on someone's wall, send messages, post pictures, etc. Yet, would you define this forum as social media?
alsoHere's what I love about Google+ in general and the Google+ Diet in particular:
Instead of saying, "I'm going to write a blog post now," or "I'm going to send an e-mail" or "I think I'll tweet something" you simply say what you have to say, then decide who you're going to say it to.
If you address it to "Public," it's a blog post.
If you address it to "Your Circles" it's a tweet.
If you address it to your "My Customers" Circle it's a business newsletter.
If you address it to a single person, it can be a letter to your mother.
I'd say this is pretty revolutionary.
Very cool, especially if the main reason you didn't want to move over to G+ was because you didn't want to lose all your photos. Very very neat, and probably not good news for facebook...Move Your Photos to Picasa
One of the side-benefits of signing up for Google+ is that users get essentially unlimited storage for the photos they want to share with their circles. As soon as Google+ launched, many scrambled to move their photos from Facebook to Picasa (soon to be renamed Google Photos) so they could share them. The service Move2Picasa appeared, was promptly overwhelmed after TechCrunch and we mentioned it, and then moved to a Chrome add-on that streamlines the process of migrating your photos from Facebook to Picasa. Still, if you're looking to make better use of Google+, posting your photos to Picasa is the easiest way to make them available for sharing.