Google+ is an Epic Fail
According to their initial marketing push, with Google+, Google set out to create the next generation of social network, one that would provide the nuance of real-life interaction that other social networks (i.e., Facebook) lack, in part by giving users better control over their privacy. However, the result, while intriguing in many ways, misses the mark so badly that one wonders if that was really even the target they were aiming for. To illustrate, let’s contrast some key differences between Google+ and the biggest name in social networking, Facebook: On Google+, “public” literally means public, and is visible to anyone on the Web whether they have a Google+ account or not, and can be found with search engines.
On Facebook, even “public” usually means limited to Facebook users who are logged in. On Google+, much of your profile (which is required to include your full legal name) is forced to be completely public. This means even if you block someone, you can’t make your on-line presence cease to exist to that particular person; simply by having a Google+ account, you’re making your on-line presence *public*.
On Facebook, you can make your profile private, so no one can even tell your profile exists unless you choose to friend them. Most importantly, on Google+, adding someone to your circles just means you want to read what they share with you. It is the same as bookmarking a website.
On Facebook, adding someone to your friends list is explicitly creating a mutually agreed upon relationship between two people. That’s *the* key difference between Facebook and Google+: Facebook maps social relationships. Google+ maps reading habits. In other words, when Google set out to develop a new social network… they didn’t develop a social network at all. They developed a publishing platform. Talk about an epic fail.
On Facebook, even “public” usually means limited to Facebook users who are logged in. On Google+, much of your profile (which is required to include your full legal name) is forced to be completely public. This means even if you block someone, you can’t make your on-line presence cease to exist to that particular person; simply by having a Google+ account, you’re making your on-line presence *public*.
On Facebook, you can make your profile private, so no one can even tell your profile exists unless you choose to friend them. Most importantly, on Google+, adding someone to your circles just means you want to read what they share with you. It is the same as bookmarking a website.
On Facebook, adding someone to your friends list is explicitly creating a mutually agreed upon relationship between two people. That’s *the* key difference between Facebook and Google+: Facebook maps social relationships. Google+ maps reading habits. In other words, when Google set out to develop a new social network… they didn’t develop a social network at all. They developed a publishing platform. Talk about an epic fail.
Notes
POSTED Thursday August 25th
