3 ms·
These are all valid feelings / hypotheses about what happened, but even with the benefit of hindsight we can’t confirm them. For example, you think the real na
by gretch 6y ago
These are all valid feelings / hypotheses about what happened, but even with the benefit of hindsight we can’t confirm them.
For example, you think the real name policy tanked the effort. But did it really? Twitter verified status is considered to be coveted, people are lining up to get their real named acknowledged. Is that not enough to introduce plausible doubt?
Similarly, we always complain about “network effects” of social media these days - that’s why Facebook can maintain a “monopoly”. Well when G+ was rolling out, it was by limited invitation only; clearly in hindsight an extremely rookie mistake for a social network. Perhaps nothing else matters - perhaps not allowing ppl into your social network dwarfed all other causes.
We may never know as we can’t A/B test history.
It’s really easy to look at failed features in hindsight and say “ah I knew all along”. Statistically, most things fail. And it appeals to our innate desire to seek confirmation.
But I invite you to seek alternative explanations than “corporate messed it up”. And hey, if you really do know how to make successful social products, join ycomb, raise money and go be a billionaire
- ZephyrBlu 6y agoTwitter has a different culture. It's mostly public, whereas YouTube is mostly anonymous. It _does_ sound like a "corporate messed it up", because if they had understood the culture surrounding their products they would have probably done things differently. Here's a blatantly obvious example of that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%2B#Commenting_on_YouTube https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%2B#Commenting_on_YouTub...
- gretch 6y agoWhat about Facebooks 2006 redesign (although to consider this case study, we have to put aside the HN cultural disdain of FB and look at the situation clinically) https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/facebooks-news-feed-is-10-years-old-this-is-how-the-site-has-changed https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/facebooks-news-feed-i... Lots of people hated it can claimed in the moment that corporate ruined everything. Then it went on to become one of the most successful products of all time. Even if you hate FB today, you have to recognize that FB was beloved between 2007 ~ 2011 by pretty much everyone. How was anyone to know, in that moment, whether the G+ name thing would be a major flop or a world changing product?
- ZephyrBlu 6y agoIn my opinion, launching a badly received v1 of a new product/feature is not the same as attempting to forcibly change or go against the culture of your platform. A quote from Zuckerberg's post regarding the News Feed is: "This is information people used to dig for on a daily basis, nicely re-organized and summarized so people can learn about the people they care about." This does not sound like they were trying to push back against users, whereas Google basically said "no, you do it our way".
- ontouchstart 6y agoCurrently, for the side of me as a non-technology user, one service that is the most valuable is the free unlimited high quality Google Photos. I don’t know who made the decision in Google to sunset that and start to charge for quota. That stupid decision is going to destroy a very popular and useful social network service. Then you will have a “G+” hindsight again. Somebody might have already submitted a ycombinator proposal to take over that market when Google Photos is dead.