Google+ Is it the answer to Facebook? - Page 12

Ghoulish Delight · 07-17-2011, 10:57 PM

Google is trying to meld the Facebook and Twitter models. So they are expecting people to have circles of people they follow, but are not friends.

Morrigoon · 07-18-2011, 01:16 AM

Yeah, someone I don't recognize tried to share with me, and there's no way to get rid of that announcement, when I don't want to put that person in a circle.

BarTopDancer · 07-18-2011, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

Yeah, someone I don't recognize tried to share with me, and there's no way to get rid of that announcement, when I don't want to put that person in a circle.

If you hover over their name you can X them out.

Alex · 07-18-2011, 06:08 AM

I keep hearing the "combination of Facebook and Twitter" comment. But I must be missing something because I see nothing Twitter-like about it. Anyone willing to explain that part to me?

It just seems exactly like Facebook but without the app clutter.

Betty · 07-18-2011, 06:13 AM

I think it's because you can follow someone by adding htem to a circle without them adding you to their cirlce. They don't need to accept a friend request for you to see the streams they have marked public.

Alex · 07-18-2011, 06:21 AM

Ah, that's considered "Twitter-like"? So what Google has reinvented 15 years later is Livejournal (which is fine by me, I much prefer Livejournal over Facebook but everybody else moved eventually forcing me to as well).

Ghoulish Delight · 07-18-2011, 06:53 AM

Like anything, it's sometimes more about timing, packaging, and brand recognition than innovation.

Alex · 07-18-2011, 06:59 AM

Oh, that's fine. I just didn't consider that a "Twitter" thing so when people were saying it combined Facebook and Twitter I wasn't getting it.

But then I'm not getting what is considered remarkably different from Facebook either. I can't do anything with circles (except put people in them without approval) that I wasn't already doing on Facebook (anybody I even faintly knew who asked to be my friend got put into a list that never sees anything) and I never view my default News Feed, but a more limited list. Admittedly the interface for Circles is much simpler than the interface for Lists.

I do much prefer G+ over Facebook, but I'm not seeing anything about it that particularly moves the needle on anything. Almost everything that I like has to do with the fact that not everybody in the world is on it and there isn't the app clutter. Both of which will end if the platform is at all successful.

Ghoulish Delight · 07-18-2011, 07:02 AM

To me, circles are better than Facebook's lists because a) they're far easier to manage and b) Facebook's model is "everyone you know can see this except..." while Google's is "only these people you've specified can see this." It's slightly splitting hairs, but it's made a big difference in how I feel about who can see what and what I'm willing to share.

And hangout is awesome.

Alex · 07-18-2011, 07:12 AM

I'm not seeing the distinction. Especially since every time I post on G+ I have to change the default away from "Everybody in the world can see this" (It only seems to remember the filter I used for the last post about 30% of the time).

Haven't tried Hangout and I'm sure I will eventually and I'll probably be proven wrong like I am about so many things I initially resist. But video chat triggers that same visceral reaction as the thought of voluntarily spending my evenings in hell. But maybe that is piggybacking on the fact that videoconferences at work are all universally horrible experiences.

07-17-2011, 10:57 PM	#1
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Google is trying to meld the Facebook and Twitter models. So they are expecting people to have circles of people they follow, but are not friends. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 01:16 AM	#2
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	Yeah, someone I don't recognize tried to share with me, and there's no way to get rid of that announcement, when I don't want to put that person in a circle. __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 06:08 AM	#4
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I keep hearing the "combination of Facebook and Twitter" comment. But I must be missing something because I see nothing Twitter-like about it. Anyone willing to explain that part to me? It just seems exactly like Facebook but without the app clutter.
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 06:13 AM	#5
Betty Kicking up my heels! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The Silver State Posts: 3,783	I think it's because you can follow someone by adding htem to a circle without them adding you to their cirlce. They don't need to accept a friend request for you to see the streams they have marked public. __________________ Nee Stell Thue
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 06:21 AM	#6
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Ah, that's considered "Twitter-like"? So what Google has reinvented 15 years later is Livejournal (which is fine by me, I much prefer Livejournal over Facebook but everybody else moved eventually forcing me to as well).
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 06:53 AM	#7
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Like anything, it's sometimes more about timing, packaging, and brand recognition than innovation. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 06:59 AM	#8
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Oh, that's fine. I just didn't consider that a "Twitter" thing so when people were saying it combined Facebook and Twitter I wasn't getting it. But then I'm not getting what is considered remarkably different from Facebook either. I can't do anything with circles (except put people in them without approval) that I wasn't already doing on Facebook (anybody I even faintly knew who asked to be my friend got put into a list that never sees anything) and I never view my default News Feed, but a more limited list. Admittedly the interface for Circles is much simpler than the interface for Lists. I do much prefer G+ over Facebook, but I'm not seeing anything about it that particularly moves the needle on anything. Almost everything that I like has to do with the fact that not everybody in the world is on it and there isn't the app clutter. Both of which will end if the platform is at all successful.
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 07:02 AM	#9
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	To me, circles are better than Facebook's lists because a) they're far easier to manage and b) Facebook's model is "everyone you know can see this except..." while Google's is "only these people you've specified can see this." It's slightly splitting hairs, but it's made a big difference in how I feel about who can see what and what I'm willing to share. And hangout is awesome. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-18-2011, 07:12 AM	#10
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I'm not seeing the distinction. Especially since every time I post on G+ I have to change the default away from "Everybody in the world can see this" (It only seems to remember the filter I used for the last post about 30% of the time). Haven't tried Hangout and I'm sure I will eventually and I'll probably be proven wrong like I am about so many things I initially resist. But video chat triggers that same visceral reaction as the thought of voluntarily spending my evenings in hell. But maybe that is piggybacking on the fact that videoconferences at work are all universally horrible experiences.
	Submit to Quotes