Google+ is on life support... Android and YouTube to be seperated from Google+?!?

[dibblebill]

I use GOogle+ for photography. My feed's hyperactive with that (and politics...)

 

[DragonSlayer95]

i aim to please lol :beer: hope you saw my karaoke performance before the vid got pulled

Funky doing karaoke? Man I'm depressed I missed that :rofl:

 

[Colchicine]

Hardly ever use Google + for anything. None of my family and friends ever took to it

This is exactly what I was talking about what people don't get. G+ is where you go to meet new people. Replacing your friends list from FB on G+ doesn't do you any good. Out of the 300+ I have circled, only about 10 are also on FB. And just like what others have said, FB is where I go to hear people complain and talk about their children.

I have literally met dozens of people in real life that I first met on G+. Whenever I travel, I likely will have someone from G+ nearby. I have attended ~10 parties and lunches this year that are all coordinated through G+ events. I especially enjoy posts from my Canadian and Australian friends on there.

 

[Stuntman]

I wish my family would use it

Be careful what you wish for. :evil:

Hardly ever use Google + for anything. None of my family and friends ever took to it so I could care less if it goes bye bye. LOL

The concept was good but Facebook already had the bigger following. I even quit using Twitter last March. Did not see the point of trying to maintain that too. Droped MySpace December 2009.

The difference between Google+ and Facebook is that FB connects you with people you already know, but may not share the same interests. Google+ connects you with people you don't know, but share the same interests as you.

Having my family on Google+ will not improve Google+ or my social media experience. I already connect with them via Facebook and WhatsApp, so doing something I already do using another service does not improve my social media experience. Google+ does something that no other social media app can do for me which is connect me with people that I'm not already connected with who share the same interests with me.

 

[AnonGuy]

The difference between G+ and FB is: FB is where you go to be "friends" with people from high school, and your family. G+ is where you go to meet new people and people you actually WANT to talk to.

I don't want to talk to strangers. I want to talk to the people I know...

Also, I've tried to find an active community for one of my interests, and it basically doesn't exist. I don't have many interests, so it's pretty simple and cut/dry with me...

What does exist is a cesspool of bullying, verbal (written) battery, and aggressive group think - especially if you wish to comment on any tech blog posts about anything that is even remotely polarizing.

I don't understand how Google+ users can honestly put forth the notion that it is any better than Facebook in that regard. In fact it is even worse, from what I've seen written on there and then looking at the equivalent post shared on Facebook by the same entity/outlet.

My real life social interactions are increase way more than it ever did with FB.

I fail to see how using Google+ instead of Facebook can increase your Real Life Social Interactions more, considering Facebook has 4x the active users and I'm not even sure what you mean by that, exactly...

I find that the criticisms I see about G+ are from people like at the beginning of this thread: animosity about Google's services integration. I have not yet encountered someone that used both FB AND G+ equally and decided they preferred FB.

Service integration is great. Microsoft is doing some of that, and it's working great for them. The big difference is in approach. Microsoft is not making Windows Phone users sign up for Soc.l just to send a Picture to someone else in Skype, or Group Video Call, or Leave a Review on the Windows Store, or use Xbox Live services, or Auto-Upload Images with OneDrive, among *several* other things.

Google's approach was horrible. It wasn't integration, it was Google+ encumbrance.

 

[AnonGuy]

The difference between Google+ and Facebook is that FB connects you with people you already know, but may not share the same interests. Google+ connects you with people you don't know, but share the same interests as you.

Having my family on Google+ will not improve Google+ or my social media experience. I already connect with them via Facebook and WhatsApp, so doing something I already do using another service does not improve my social media experience. Google+ does something that no other social media app can do for me which is connect me with people that I'm not already connected with who share the same interests with me.

There is no difference.

The main differences between them is in some specific features or services one may have that the other doesn't.

Google is superior if you're big on Photography, but you could just use Flickr for that and easily share to a bigger following on Facebook.

They are both basically Social Networks and aside from a few differences, can be used in the same ways. If you want to use Facebook for people you're "interested in the same things as," it can be used that way. The same way Google+ can be used just as easily for keeping up with friends and family.

Google was talking like it was the best thing since the invention of fire when it was coming out, even limiting the invitations and everything. It wasn't until it simply didn't catch on that they started talking it back (and rate of growth compared to Facebook and others isn't Apples:Apples cause the market has changed since then).

 

[funkylogik]

I don't want to talk to strangers. I want to talk to the people I know...

How did you meet the people you know lol??

I can understand people not liking g+. What I don't understand is the hostility I sense from them in a discussion about it

 

[Colchicine]

I don't want to talk to strangers. I want to talk to the people I know...

I am very sorry to hear this, it must be terribly difficult to abide by this rule.

What does exist is a cesspool of bullying, verbal (written) battery, and aggressive group think - especially if you wish to comment on any tech blog posts about anything that is even remotely polarizing.

It would be challenging for you to prove this phenomenon is unique to G+. I posit you will find this behavior anywhere people interact remotely without having to suffer real life consequences, including FB.

I fail to see how using Google+ instead of Facebook can increase your Real Life Social Interactions more, considering Facebook has 4x the active users and I'm not even sure what you mean by that, exactly...

The number of total users is irrelevant. It matters who I WANT to interact with, which is what G+ is better at: finding "strangers" with similar interests. It's pretty easy to understand what "RLSI" is, I've been invited to exponentially more parties, events, lunches, dinners, and out of town meetups than FB. It would seem that people on FB are content with only interacting on FB.

 

[zuben el genub]

It could very well depend on what type of group you are dealing with. If the group is just plain photography, there are Nikon and Canon fanboys and both can be vicious. Even worse than Apple/Android. Even if it's just one brand, there will be fusses about "L" lenses, and multifocus lenses.

I checked out a couple of craft groups, and they were mostly very egotistical or authoritarian about how something was done or to be done. Sometimes the ladies can be the worst.

If the group is not moderated, the control is not very good.

The Yahoo groups I belong to are moderated. If the group is about small 60mm refractors, most have those or smaller. The scopes run the gamut from Unitron, to my Shrine Manon, to new Orion 60mm. There are no remarks that these scopes are useless and to "get a Dob"
A Dob is a reflecting scope on an alt-az platform. Decent performers and do give a lot of bang for the buck.

I still think + is based on the old usenet groups which Google took over. In astronomy, amateur we got sex spam, a bunch of idiots blathering about planet X and astrology. You can block them, but will everyone? Most might leave, or some might even get a kick out of the nonsense. A true moderated group will squelch these trolls and attention getters fast.

I don't particularly want social interaction, I usually want information. With Facebook,I just check kid's page for pictures, sometimes attach a URL she will like, revoke temporary permissions, logout and leave. If I want to talk to her, I'll use Viber.

 

[AnonGuy]

I don't want to talk to strangers. I want to talk to the people I know...

How did you meet the people you know lol??

I can understand people not liking g+. What I don't understand is the hostility I sense from them in a discussion about it

School. Work. Training Facility. Through Friends and Family. Real Places with Real People, not in some random discussion group on the internet and then suddenly "hey let's meet and get together." I'm not into that, sorry.

Not online on a random Social Network. I don't get on Social Networks to meet friends. I do that locally in real life. People had no issues meeting others before these services existed, so I'm not sure why people are suddenly acting like they need them to have a decent social life. They don't.

I use these services to connect and stay in touch with the people I know, not to meet new people. And, if I wanted to do what other people are doing on Google+, I can do the exact same thing on Facebook - with ease. There are very few advantages to using Google+ over Facebook, and vice versa. The main difference is the people I know are on one, and ignore the other. That is ultimately what matters in Social.

I'm not going out of my way to bash this service. I could not care less who uses it, because I don't and that's all that personally matters to me.

I just reject the idea put forth by Google (after they realized this had very little traction) and the people who repeat them ad nauseum that it is anything other than a Facebook clone - cause it is. That's just a bad excuse to take the focus off of the terrible performance of this service compared to Facebook in drawing in and retaining people's friends, which is the main draw to using this kind of service.

I can upload and share pictures on Google+ all day long. Check In. Post Status Updates. Review Products. Etc.

None of that matters, cause everyone is at Facebook and the only people that will see it are those I don't give a **** about. That's not very "social" and that's not fun at all.

And Google made it completely worthless to even try by walling it off from every other major social service on the internet (where the people I know are).

Facebook is as much a "Social Layer" and "Identity Service" as Google+. The difference is Google+ is limited to one major set of services (Google's) while Facebook is being leveraged everywhere (Microsoft, Yahoo!, Apple, etc. services all integrate Facebook for example). The biggest disparity between the two are the sizes of their Active, Engaged User Base (not simply the number of people who use it as a Glorified RSS Feed, or those that have accounts because other services demand it... the people who actually Post, Share, +1, etc. content on the service).

 

[AnonGuy]

I am very sorry to hear this, it must be terribly difficult to abide by this rule.

Facebook has all my friends there, so they abide by it quite easily...

It would be challenging for you to prove this phenomenon is unique to G+. I posit you will find this behavior anywhere people interact remotely without having to suffer real life consequences, including FB.

Where did I say it was unique to Google+. I simply said that it is no different than Facebook in that regard. I'm making a comparison, not pointing any service out as being unique in that regard.

Not even going to bother with the third section of your post, except the almost last part of it...

Services like Facebook and Google+ are too vast to fragment what you do on each one, since the data you give them affect the user experience. The only thing I'd siphon off is Media Management like Auto Upload, since I think a Social Service is one of the worst places to "Back Up" your photos and Videos (my opinion). I use OneDrive for that, and if I ever decide to delete my Facebook Account it will still work flawlessly.

Sorry, but what kind of user experience do you consider "seamless" or simple?

I can't do half of Social At one place and the rest somewhere else, unless the Feed/Timeline can adequately serve as an aggregator and the sources services allow easy automatic publishing to the aggregate timeline.

If Google+ had automatic publishing to your Facebook Timeline the way Twitter does, it would have really lowered the barrier for a lot of people with dedicated Facebook friends (that likely won't migrate over, especially the ones that don't even use Android or have a Google account) to move completely over to Google+ while still keeping their friends on Facebook informed (with the added benefit that it would get more people to click through to Google+ and hopefully be interested) - without spamming their inboxes. Sharing to a Facebook Post-By-Email address is not the same thing, and is a poor substitute.

 

[chanchan05]

Facebook has all my friends there, so they abide by it quite easily

Actually, you're already breaking this rule by talking to us here.



However I must say that Google+ handles communities better. In Facebook Groups, you have to really dig in to see posts by other people, inquiries and the sort. I find Google+ Communities easier to navigate than Facebook,

 

[funkylogik]

Plus most of the g+ groups I use are well moderated. I even moderate a few.
Chanchan has a great point. You use these forums to talk to strangers with a similar interest. That's exactly how I use g+ :thumbup:
Facebook is for talking to non-strangers. (friends/family) who aren't passionate about the same things I am

 

[AnonGuy]

Actually, you're already breaking this rule by talking to us here.

Lolwut?

The purpose of a random internet forum is not equivalent to a Social Network like Facebook... Seriously...

However I must say that Google+ handles communities better. In Facebook Groups, you have to really dig in to see posts by other people, inquiries and the sort. I find Google+ Communities easier to navigate than Facebook,

I disagree, but that's because I don't care to consort with randoms on a Social Network.

That's what forums are for. The purpose of the two different types of services aren't exactly equivalent, so I'm not sure why you're using my being here with a random pseudonym discussing Google+ as equivalent to me utilizing a Social Network to consort with friends, family, and acquaintances.

Google+ has a Real Name policy and Search Indexes posts there. I don't use it as a forum app, and never will.

Now... We can all assume that the readership of an Android-specific forum will generally be biased in favor of Google+. Go ask about it on the Windows Phone, Blackberry, and iOS forums and see what kind of glowing reviews you get on the service, and how many users on average actively use it... It will be quite a bit different.

 

[AnonGuy]

Plus most of the g+ groups I use are well moderated. I even moderate a few.
Chanchan has a great point. You use these forums to talk to strangers with a similar interest. That's exactly how I use g+ :thumbup:
Facebook is for talking to non-strangers. (friends/family) who aren't passionate about the same things I am

The fact that you choose to split your activity across two services when one serves the purpose speaks more to what kind of user experience you prefer than what one or the other "is for," cause you're completely wrong in that baseless/overly broad description of the Facebook service.

Like I said, I'm in Facebook groups. They do basically the same thing that Google+ Communities do, and existed well before Communities. The same way you can moderate Communities, you can Moderate Groups. So I'm kind of confused on what your point is on that... Sometimes I have friends make tastless comments on my posts/photos, and I simply delete them and move on (after notifying them via Facebook Messenger). This is no different on any other social service. Google+ isn't special as far as that goes.

Facebook is not for talking to non-strangers. It's for talking to anyone. The difference is that it's a lot easier to keep everything narrowed down to only the people you know on Facebook than on Google+, and it's a lot easier to keep Facebook out of other services you use.

Google+ doesn't do anything Facebook doesn't do from that perspective (who you talk to, Communities vs. Groups are basically a wash, etc.), so it's not about what the service "is for" but about what you use the service for, which is virtually impossible with Google+ because of the way it integrates its social services with its other products.

I don't have time to use 2 Social Networks to accomplish what one can do, especially given the relative lack of diversity in the Google+ userbase compared to Facebook (should I ever feel the need to branch out and converse with random people).

The main draws to Google+ for users is features that are implemented in other apps, but require it. But I don't have to worry about that, because I've moved everything out of Google Services after deleting my account and creating a new one and only use it for Play Store access due to the prolific Google+ encumbrance in other services.

If anything, the Google+ encumbrance has actually caused me to use Facebook MORE these days, not less.

I don't know, literally, anyone that actually uses it as a Social Network where they Check-In, Share & Tag Posts/Videos/Pictures, Review Places.).

I can use Tapatalk to access forums (where the entire readership of the website is more likely to visit more consistently). I don't need Google+ communities for that stuff.

 

[funkylogik]

Yeah I'm explaining how I use each service.
Who are you to tell me that a forum site is different from g+ but g+ and Facebook serve the same purpose?
Again I'm sensing hostility.
What is your actual problem?
You don't like g+, no one, not Google, not me, are forcing you to use it.
You're telling us you don't want to talk to strangers online but that's exactly what you're doing here.
Other than the way it's layed out, how is this different from a g+ community?

 

[Stuntman]

Facebook is as much a "Social Layer" and "Identity Service" as Google+. The difference is Google+ is limited to one major set of services (Google's) while Facebook is being leveraged everywhere (Microsoft, Yahoo!, Apple, etc. services all integrate Facebook for example). The biggest disparity between the two are the sizes of their Active, Engaged User Base (not simply the number of people who use it as a Glorified RSS Feed, or those that have accounts because other services demand it... the people who actually Post, Share, +1, etc. content on the service).

Perhaps I've just been using G+ differently than FB due to the people who are and are not on either network. You can't really connect with people you know if they are not there. I guess I've just been able to connect with people I don't know that share interests with me or whose posts I like to read.

One thing with FB is that you need the other person to accept your friend request. In G+, I can choose to read someone's public posts without that person needing to confirm.

Lolwut?

The purpose of a random internet forum is not equivalent to a Social Network like Facebook... Seriously...

I disagree, but that's because I don't care to consort with randoms on a Social Network.

That's what forums are for. The purpose of the two different types of services aren't exactly equivalent, so I'm not sure why you're using my being here with a random pseudonym discussing Google+ as equivalent to me utilizing a Social Network to consort with friends, family, and acquaintances.

I find that forums are similar to FB or G+. You post something and people may comment on what you post. The difference is with forums, they tend to be for more specific topics than FB or G+, although there are facilities in FB or G+ for more specific topics. What I post on various places and services depends on which audience I want to see my post. I generally don't cross post across different services because the audience doesn't overlap a lot. If what I want to post warrants posting to different places, I will do so, but it is generally not the norm for me.

 

[Stuntman]

The fact that you choose to split your activity across two services when one serves the purpose speaks more to what kind of user experience you prefer than what one or the other "is for," cause you're completely wrong in that baseless/overly broad description of the Facebook service.

I split my activity across different services based on who uses them. It seems that a number of people I connect with on G+ are not on FB and vice versa.

Like I said, I'm in Facebook groups. They do basically the same thing that Google+ Communities do, and existed well before Communities. The same way you can moderate Communities, you can Moderate Groups. So I'm kind of confused on what your point is on that... Sometimes I have friends make tastless comments on my posts/photos, and I simply delete them and move on (after notifying them via Facebook Messenger). This is no different on any other social service. Google+ isn't special as far as that goes.

FB groups are very similar to G+ communities. I do participate in some FB groups. Primarily, I see FB and G+ more for who is on them than the actual service itself. Since I already connect with many people I know, I don't bother with groups. I ended up exploring more in G+ as there are few people I actually know on it. Perhaps if everyone I know was on G+ and few were in FB, the way I'd use each would be totally reversed.

 

[chanchan05]

Lol. People already answered for me. Anyway, it depends entirely on how you use it. Google Communities existed BEFORE Facebook, and seems to have just been integrated to G+.

The whole problem stems from you putting labels on G+ and Facebook to their purpose, when both clearly have gone beyond your said purpose. Both G+ and Fb have become communication areas for companies for example, where you can contact them and ask for help and troubleshooting. Developers have tured to Google+ as to create help communities for their use. People have started using Fb as promotiinal and online selling as well.

Basically, both Facebook and Google+ have transcended your limited label of 'Social Layer'.

What I'm seeing is, you keep on trying to push G+ as useless, when people find it useful for a different purpose than you do. It doesn't matter. You don't like it, then don't use it.

Edit:

I forgot to type this in. Google+ nowadays is like Tapatalk in some ways. It's become a collection of forums, especially since app devs and other programmers use it as their help site. Most of the communities I follow are the help pages for various Elder Scroll mods and Android apps. So yes, interacting in a random forum and G+ is the same, because in my usage, Google+ is the dev forum place.

 

[AnonGuy]

Yeah I'm explaining how I use each service.
Who are you to tell me that a forum site is different from g+ but g+ and Facebook serve the same purpose?
Again I'm sensing hostility.
What is your actual problem?
You don't like g+, no one, not Google, not me, are forcing you to use it.
You're telling us you don't want to talk to strangers online but that's exactly what you're doing here.
Other than the way it's layed out, how is this different from a g+ community?

The only one that sounds hostile is you; or maybe just a tad defensive.

Maybe my English is too hard to understand, because you're twisting my words since I'm pretty sure what I mean was obvious upthread.

Google+ = Social Network
Facebook = Social Network

I do not use Social Networks to have conversations with random strangers, period. I use them to network with people I know.

An internet forum is not a Social Network, unless you want to branch out and have a rhetorical argument about what constitutes a Social network. They are not Social Networks in the vein of Facebook and Google+. That good enough?

Communities? They're Analogous to Facebook Groups, which can do much of the same crap that Communities do, and I certainly don't view Facebook Groups as an Internet Forum Equivalent. Do you? (Not sure if I even want an answer to that...)

G+ Communities and FB Groups are a nice way to Siphon Off Discussions and Shares for a Specific Topic to their own bubbles, but they're still governed by the policies, rules, designs, and restrictions of the Social Network to which they belong. It goes well beyond how they "look" (Lol)... They're nice because (on FB, at least) they allow you to still keep in touch with people that you do not want to Add as Friends (who can see everything you put on your Timeline). Apart form that, the Group basically functions like the real Facebook, except instead of posting to your own Timeline, you post to the group's timeline. Google+ Communities are quite similar to that...

Being in a Random Community on G+ for <Some Sport> is not the same as being in a Facebook Group for <Your Sports Club> where the people you train and compete with are actively engaging in the group. Those people aren't there. The experience is not the same. The way you engage in the group, therefore, will not be the same. I don't want to upload Geo-Tagged Photos and Tagged Videos to a group of Random Strangers on Google+, but I do upload that a group of people who all know each other and regularly see each other IRL on Facebook. It completely changes the entire dynamics of the user experience...

You can say what you said about Groups on many services (Flickr Groups, G+ Communities, Facebook Groups, etc.) and it would be equally wrong when applied to all of them.

Do you understand what I'm saying now?

I think: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevefaktor/2014/05/01/what-killed-google-and-what-will-save-it/

... sums up many of my issues with Google+ quite well.

I don't have to be hostile to find a network devoid of Real Life Acquaintances using it utterly useless. I think millions of people and several tech press bloggers have pretty much summed it up exactly that way.

The reason why a lot of people have adapted to using Google+ like some Twitter/Reddit/Slashdot hybrid is because that's all they can do. If there was a mass exodus from Facebook (what many were hoping for), everyone here would be using Plus the same way everyone else uses Facebook (as it was intended) and raving about it. The lack of RL Friends/Acquaintances on Plus pretty much dictates that I will use it differently. Not because it was designed to be used differently, but because the dynamics of these services changes depending on the people using them.

 

[AnonGuy]

Here's a quick analogy to get that point across:

Let's say we have two movie theatres. Except, they're slightly different. One is 2D and one is 3D.

One day you go to the 2D theatre and you get a phone call. Your phone vibrates, but you don't answer it, because every seat in the theatre is packed.

The next day, at the 3D theatre, you're the only one watching the movie, and your phone vibrates. You answer the phone anyways, because no one is there - just you, maybe throw in a few close friends...

They're both movie theatres. The only difference is:

1. One is 2D, the other is 3D
2. One is packed and the other is empty

The Atmosphere completely dictated how you reacted when that phone vibrated in your pocket.

These Social Networks work similarly to me...

On Facebook, all the people you know are there. There is less "reason" to depend on the randoms on the network for the "Social Aspect."

On Google+, because the people you know aren't there... Well... You have no choice but to lean to the randoms, because otherwise the service would be basically useless to you, except to have an empty profile for Auto Upload and other functionality that depends on Google+ to work in separate services (what Google has done to drive their numbers up, superficially).

Which is why I find it fairly ignorable when someone says "I just keep the people I know on Facebook and converse about interests on Plus..."

A. In the majority of cases, the people they know aren't even active on Plus (even if they have profiles), so there is really no "compartmentalization" going on; and
B. No one is stopping them from talking to strangers about their interests on Facebook. Engagement in Facebook Groups clearly states that. Engagement on Company pages clearly states that.

 

[mikedt]

Here's a quick analogy to get that point across:

Let's say we have two movie theatres. Except, they're slightly different. One is 2D and one is 3D.

One day you go to the 2D theatre and you get a phone call. Your phone vibrates, but you don't answer it, because every seat in the theatre is packed.

The next day, at the 3D theatre, you're the only one watching the movie, and your phone vibrates. You answer the phone anyways, because no one is there - just you, maybe throw in a few close friends...

They're both movie theatres. The only difference is:

1. One is 2D, the other is 3D
2. One is packed and the other is empty

The Atmosphere completely dictated how you reacted when that phone vibrated in your pocket.

These Social Networks work similarly to me...

To use the movie theatre analogy. LOL.

See both the Google+ and the Facebook theatres are really quite empty for me, except for a couple of people I know in each and go there occasionally to stay in contact, who are some close friends in the UK actually. I mostly go to Tencent's Chinese Theatre down the road, where many people I know hang out. :thumbup: ..."Tencent's Chinese Theatre" being WeChat and QQ.

EDIT:

I've just this moment removed the G+ app from my phone, when I looked at how much data it was using. Presumably because of the polling or whatever it's doing. That's one nice thing about having a rooted device, can remove or install the Google apps and services you actually need or use. Can still do G+ from my laptop or phone's browser if needed. Don't need immediate updates of what everyone in my circles is doing and friend suggestions coming though in real time. I don't use the FB app either, just do that in a browser.

 

[chanchan05]

Looks like you didn't understand my post very well. To use the movie theater analogy.

Facebook is a movie theater showing the most recent hits. Let's say Spiderman 2, Brick Mansions, Rio 2, Las Vegas and Transcendence. People flock to Fb theater, you see everyone you know and a lot of people you don't. Some people there may have the same interests as you, but it's not as easy to find out people with the same tastes, or get to interact with them. When you try to find people who are into what you are into, you have to wade through pretenders, bandwagoners, people who have no idea, etc.

Google+ is more of that art theater, who while the popular theater is showing what everybody is doing nowadays, is showing international or indie films which aren't hipster, nor mainstream either: Il Postino, Rorouni Kenshin, On the Job, Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels. I go there and see that those who go to RK are Otakus, and since I like anime, I go there and interestingly find amazing conversations with people on guessing who the "Other" one is in Another, or how difficult it is nowadays to find copies of the World Masterpiece Theater Series, or how will FUG react now that Baam is with his buddies. And it's easy to strike up a conversation since I know everybody is an Otaku. Or say, Il Postino, and I find it easier there to get recommendations in Italian life-revelation films. .

You're(Anon) the guy who walks past and says, how are these shops even still open? Very few people go there. I'd never even think of going there, it's full of strangers and snobs.

Basically, Facebook is mainstream, so much so that hidden gems are buried too deep to easily find, and your feed is cluttered with your friend's posts that you may or may not be interested in. Google+ for me is, well a social community that conforms to my interests. I only see posts of things I'm interested in, like the latest in CT scanning technology, and new planets; and not posts by my friends who are Taylor Swift fangirls who post blurry pictures of her concert, or their beach pictures last summer (although these aren't so bad ).

Just because you (Anon) doesn't find any sense in using G+ doesn't mean that it's useless, especially not when the ones I subscribe to does not exist on Facebook. Like Chesko, an independent game developer and the author of Frostfall, one of the best immersion mods for Skyrim, has an active and lively community in Google+ for his mods and his current game project, but does not have a Facebook page. Basically THAT IS HIS INTERNET FORUM. There's no similarity or anything, his G+ Community page serves as Chesko's help forum, Sure it's not a full forum place, but a place for his announcements and and people asking for help, but that's all he needs for his forum anyway.

Anyway, from what I read of your replies, all your arguments are basically: no one you know is on G+, or at least they aren't active, and you haven't found anything on G+ to interest you. Which basically, means nothing to us here who reply because we found people we know on G+, or found ones who we care to interact with. My feed is actually quite active on G+, averaging 10 posts an hour. I get the posts for new beta apps/mods by devs, and several posts by people on a page for either funny or inspirational pictures.

In a way, I don't understand your animosity/hatred for Google+. Whether it lives or dies is of no consequence to you. If you add no one and just use it to comment on YouTube and Play Store, it will just serve as sort of a post history for either site. It's not that big a deal, especially when this was already being done by Google via Google Profiles (which was the base on which Google+ was made on) long ago from the days of Friendster.

 

[chanchan05]

Looks like you didn't understand my post very well. To use the movie theater analogy.

Facebook is a movie theater showing the most recent hits. Let's say Spiderman 2, Brick Mansions, Rio 2, Las Vegas and Transcendence. People flock to Fb theater, you see everyone you know and a lot of people you don't. Some people there may have the same interests as you, but it's not as easy to find out people with the same tastes, or get to interact with them. When you try to find people who are into what you are into, you have to wade through pretenders, bandwagoners, people who have no idea, etc.

Google+ is more of that art theater, who while the popular theater is showing what everybody is doing nowadays, is showing international or indie films which aren't hipster, nor mainstream either: Il Postino, Rorouni Kenshin, On the Job, Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels. I go there and see that those who go to RK are Otakus, and since I like anime, I go there and interestingly find amazing conversations with people on guessing who the "Other" one is in Another, or how difficult it is nowadays to find copies of the World Masterpiece Theater Series, or how will FUG react now that Baam is with his buddies. And it's easy to strike up a conversation since I know everybody is an Otaku. Or say, Il Postino, and I find it easier there to get recommendations in Italian life-revelation films. .

You're(Anon) the guy who walks past and says, how are these shops even still open? Very few people go there. I'd never even think of going there, it's full of strangers and snobs.

Basically, Facebook is mainstream, so much so that hidden gems are buried too deep to easily find, and your feed is cluttered with your friend's posts that you may or may not be interested in. Google+ for me is, well a social community that conforms to my interests. I only see posts of things I'm interested in, like the latest in CT scanning technology, and new planets; and not posts by my friends who are Taylor Swift fangirls who post blurry pictures of her concert, or their beach pictures last summer (although these aren't so bad ).

Just because you (Anon) doesn't find any sense in using G+ doesn't mean that it's useless, especially not when the ones I subscribe to does not exist on Facebook. Like Chesko, an independent game developer and the author of Frostfall, one of the best immersion mods for Skyrim, has an active and lively community in Google+ for his mods and his current game project, but does not have a Facebook page. Basically THAT IS HIS INTERNET FORUM. There's no similarity or anything, his G+ Community page serves as Chesko's help forum, Sure it's not a full forum place, but a place for his announcements and and people asking for help, but that's all he needs for his forum anyway.

Anyway, from what I read of your replies, all your arguments are basically: no one you know is on G+, or at least they aren't active, and you haven't found anything on G+ to interest you. Which basically, means nothing to us here who reply because we found people we know on G+, or found ones who we care to interact with. My feed is actually quite active on G+, averaging 10 posts an hour. I get the posts for new beta apps/mods by devs, and several posts by people on a page for either funny or inspirational pictures.

In a way, I don't understand your animosity/hatred for Google+. Whether it lives or dies is of no consequence to you. If you add no one and just use it to comment on YouTube and Play Store, it will just serve as sort of a post history for either site. It's not that big a deal, especially when this was already being done by Google via Google Profiles (which was the base on which Google+ was made on) long ago from the days of Friendster.

EDIT: I just realized

Most of your arguments are similar to the arguments of people who don't use Facebook against those who use it. It's basically, those who find it useful vs those who find it useful. There are no winners in this argument, and there are no losers.

 

[zuben el genub]

Friendster and Feedly got banned from some independent groups. It seems that if you used it and got a digest instead of reading posts on the site, everyone got added to a Friendster or Feedly list. I thought + was Buzz reborn.

Maybe that's the objection.

Your groups might be good, but some are not. I've looked at crafting fora, and some of those were pretty bad compared to independent sites. If things are good, then enjoy and have fun. But a lot of people have different interests and those are sites you would not go to so you can't judge.

I tried looking at Android Lounge when the push to join was on. I used a spam collecting Gmail account (not tied to phone) and kept getting pestered with email notices about posts from some Russian dude complaining about coding or other technical matter. I simply got tired of the notices, made everything private, and set Thunderbird and Aquamail to treat anything from + as spam and autodelete.

All I use is Play. If I want to say something about an app, I use the owner's website and I do it via the computer.

I use FB for just one person. Everyone else that I know can get lost. If they want me, use email. I'm not posting any info. I'm just waiting for FB to kick me off since I don't post what most do.