Google+ now open to all

cribologycribology Posts: 1,992
Forum Member
✭✭✭
No invitation required, all you need is a Google account and your free to go.

Anyone joining?

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/google-92-93-94-95-96-97-98-99-100.html
«134

Comments

  • Freeview_ViewerFreeview_Viewer Posts: 1,262
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cribology wrote: »
    No invitation required, all you need is a Google account and your free to go.

    Anyone joining?

    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/google-92-93-94-95-96-97-98-99-100.html

    I've setup my account
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 5,304
    Forum Member
    Unless I can bring a doggie bag, um, no.
  • LightningIguanaLightningIguana Posts: 21,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    They frown on fake names, so no.
  • radioanorakradioanorak Posts: 4,247
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No way am I joining.I dont use anything associated with Google
  • Esot-ericEsot-eric Posts: 1,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't see the point of social networks, but if i did use one it'd probably be Google+.

    Supposedly Google Voice will be coming to Europe sometime soon too.
  • floopy123floopy123 Posts: 6,003
    Forum Member
    "I don't see the point of social networks,"

    Er... to make Mark Zuckerberg obscenely rich? He invented Facebook and he's worth around 13 billion dollars! :eek:

    Just think, he could give one billion of his wealth to, say, a charity or a hospital for terminally ill kids and he'd still have 12 billion in the bank! Mind blowing amount of money to have.

    Google Plus features circles - a new feature.

    Well I dunno about you lot but I did circles and triangles and squares at school so I don't see what's so new about that. :p
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well I have just activated my account but I don't see anything in there worth bothering about.

    Do Google really think that people have enough time in their lives to have duplicate presences on Facebook and Google+?
  • gomezzgomezz Posts: 44,505
    Forum Member
    Of course neither of them is used by the cool kids. ;)
  • cribologycribology Posts: 1,992
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No way am I joining.I dont use anything associated with Google

    What great evil has Google done? Their maps are excellent, so are their email services.
  • gomezzgomezz Posts: 44,505
    Forum Member
    They have sticky fingers.
  • darkknight77darkknight77 Posts: 3,430
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No way am I joining.I dont use anything associated with Google

    You do. You might not realise it, but you do. It's nigh-on impossible to use the web in 2011 without ever running into a Google service, product, adserver etc.
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No way am I joining.I dont use anything associated with Google


    i tend to stay away from Google as well to be honest.
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cribology wrote: »
    What great evil has Google done? Their maps are excellent, so are their email services.


    Apart from the fact they love to know where you go on the net and they love using they cameras to film everywhere in the world including peoples houses and stick it up on the net and the fact that they love to grab hold of peoples Wif-fi.

    they are not evil, much
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cribology wrote: »
    No invitation required, all you need is a Google account and your free to go.

    Anyone joining?

    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/google-92-93-94-95-96-97-98-99-100.html

    I used a false name to have a peak a couple of months ago when a mate of mine gave me a invite, but that is as far as it got
  • danletodanleto Posts: 2,777
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No thanks. Facebook has copied most of what G+ has so nobody is going to move like they did from MySpace.
  • paulbrockpaulbrock Posts: 16,632
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    danleto wrote: »
    No thanks. Facebook has copied most of what G+ has so nobody is going to move like they did from MySpace.

    Facebook's currently implementation is disastrous though. Google+ does the same but much cleaner and easier on the eye. More intelligent conversation as well, this is a great comparison of discussion available on each of them:

    https://plus.google.com/107330528562005281406/posts/E1LHNRK8Ksv
  • paulbrockpaulbrock Posts: 16,632
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    LostFool wrote: »
    Well I have just activated my account but I don't see anything in there worth bothering about.

    Do Google really think that people have enough time in their lives to have duplicate presences on Facebook and Google+?

    well people manage to have Facebook and Twitter accounts and post on DS ;)

    As for "not seeing anything there". I can't find the post where someone put it far better than me, but in the same way as a lot of people were disillusioned by Twitter, having signed up and found a largely empty feed with no interaction, you have to...."join in". Post stuff publicly, comment on others posts, follow people, debate with them. After a small lull last week, Google+ is again the most energetic and interesting social network.
  • JohnbeeJohnbee Posts: 4,019
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I saw the arrow on the Google page and clicked on you' and it said I had to 'join Google'.

    One or two messages in this thread seem to know what it is about, I'f be grateful if someone could explain it. I realise that I could just agree and see for myself, but I read somewhere that there is not an option to leave these 'social network' sites, so I am a bit wary of trying them out.

    I once had a thing called messenger on my PC but It just caused me to get interrupted all the time with meaningless babble - it was blooming annoyng and it seemed to tell everybody I had the PC switched on. So is joining Google like that?
  • danletodanleto Posts: 2,777
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    paulbrock wrote: »
    Facebook's currently implementation is disastrous though. Google+ does the same but much cleaner and easier on the eye. More intelligent conversation as well, this is a great comparison of discussion available on each of them:

    https://plus.google.com/107330528562005281406/posts/E1LHNRK8Ksv

    Currently I'm ditching Facebook and sliding over to Twitter if people I know migrate to Google+ then I'll consider it but I'm not going to join just for the sake of it.
  • paulbrockpaulbrock Posts: 16,632
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Johnbee wrote: »
    One or two messages in this thread seem to know what it is about, I'f be grateful if someone could explain it. I realise that I could just agree and see for myself, but I read somewhere that there is not an option to leave these 'social network' sites, so I am a bit wary of trying them out.

    I once had a thing called messenger on my PC but It just caused me to get interrupted all the time with meaningless babble - it was blooming annoyng and it seemed to tell everybody I had the PC switched on. So is joining Google like that?

    I'm guessing you're not a user of Facebook and/or Twitter?

    I'll assume not and attempt to describe social networks.

    Social networks (Google+,Facebook,Twitter and a few others) allow you to keep track of updates posted by people you're interested in (normally your friends,co-workers,family but particularly on Twitter, this can include celebrities, politicians). These updates can be text e.g. "I've just got a new job" or photos e.g. from a party last night or the wedding last weekend. Of course, you are also encouraged to post updates, which is a way either to share news, or to seek opinions on stuff for example. The networking bit comes in, as you can often see what your friends' friends say in response to your friends updates, and you can then potentially extend your network.

    Sounds rather dry doesn't it? Perhaps I'm not explaining it well. Simply, it's a way to keep in touch with people you don't get to see as often as you like.

    Very quick and simplified overview of the different networks:

    Twitter: this is all about short, to the point updates. Maximum length is approximately 160 characters so no essays, but equally lends itself to a lot of short updates rather than a few long ones. Until recently had no photos. Key differentiator: By default most updates are public, meaning it can be very easy to see what a city/nation/world is talking about, and what they think of it.

    Facebook: The big popular one. much more visual, has more photos than any other service on the internet (including Flickr). Much more geared towards sharing stuff only with people you already know - you can only see someone's updates if they give permission, and a consequence of this is they can see your updates.* Tends to be more about staying in touch with people you already know. Has diversified into games and 'apps', which can get very annoying as your old school friends pester you to help them with their virtual farm.

    *slightly out of date with new changes to make it more like the other networks.

    Google+:New kid on the block. More control over who you share things with - a mix of Twitter and Facebook. nice clean interface and so far attracting a intelligent, professional crowd. Lacks the sheer volume of Facebook though and the simplicity of Twitter. 'Killer' features include hangouts (group video calling) and circles (organising people into groups so you choose which groups see your updates/photos/news)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Forum Member
    Thats a pretty good description.

    Never used twitter myself, although had a good look.
    Facebook Ive deactivated, just found a few people wanted to hassle you with their trivial life. Also had a lot otheres trying to be friends who I really didnt want to know or care.

    Like you say Google+ seems a lot more structured, and Im a big fan of Google, they just do it easily and are innovative, only thing is i have an iphone (work phone) and so dont use android but google docs and google mail on it really work for me.
  • paulbrockpaulbrock Posts: 16,632
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lettice wrote: »
    Like you say Google+ seems a lot more structured, and Im a big fan of Google, they just do it easily and are innovative, only thing is i have an iphone (work phone) and so dont use android but google docs and google mail on it really work for me.

    There's a decent iphone app available for G+.
  • JAS84JAS84 Posts: 7,430
    Forum Member
    LostFool wrote: »
    Well I have just activated my account but I don't see anything in there worth bothering about.

    Do Google really think that people have enough time in their lives to have duplicate presences on Facebook and Google+?
    I'm afraid I have to agree. They have apps and games for the Chrome browser, these should be part of Google+ too. After all, Facebook has a similar feature - the games are the main reason I use FB.
    You do. You might not realise it, but you do. It's nigh-on impossible to use the web in 2011 without ever running into a Google service, product, adserver etc.
    Yeah, they even own Youtube.
    paulbrock wrote: »
    Twitter: this is all about short, to the point updates. Maximum length is approximately 160 characters so no essays, but equally lends itself to a lot of short updates rather than a few long ones. Until recently had no photos. Key differentiator: By default most updates are public, meaning it can be very easy to see what a city/nation/world is talking about, and what they think of it.
    The limit is 140 characters.
  • paulbrockpaulbrock Posts: 16,632
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    JAS84 wrote: »
    I'm afraid I have to agree. They have apps and games for the Chrome browser, these should be part of Google+ too. After all, Facebook has a similar feature - the games are the main reason I use FB.

    Google+ has games. they're just tucked away so anyone that doesn't want the equivalent of Farmville invites won't get them.

    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/games-in-google-fun-that-fits-your.html
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    paulbrock wrote: »
    well people manage to have Facebook and Twitter accounts and post on DS ;)

    I'm not a twitterer myself (though I do browse at times) but Twitter and Facebook are very different things and there is room for both. Similarly, LinkedIn survives as it is a very different sort of social network than Facebook as it is purely professional. I don't mind being "linkedin" to my Managing Director but he'll never be a Facebook friend.

    Facebook and Google+ howver are just too similar for people to want to be actively engaged in both.

    Only time will tell. Friends Reunited and Myspace both faded away as Facebook was significantly better and had more participation. Google+ needs to have a mass market killer feature and, at present, Circles and Hangouts aren't it.

    Google+ will have much better Youtube integration which will help them with the media market. Facebook are looking to hit back with a tie-up with Spotifty.

    Interesting times ahead...
Sign In or Register to comment.