6 ms·

Deep comparison Google+ vs Facebook

17 points by urlwolf 15y ago

seagaia 15y ago
"For the most part, Google has lived up to its “Don’t Be Evil” slogan. Which company would you rather have as the steward of your personally identifiable information?" Well, I'm not sure. I don't think either of them would do anything EVIL (sell my personal information to some person to come threaten my family), but don't both of them use all of our info to sell to advertising companies (which in a way, is practical, and kind of evil?)
- reso 15y ago
  How is them targeting advertisements at you in any way evil? First of all, it lets you use Facebook/Google+ FOR FREE. Secondly, well-targeted advertisements are far-and-away better for both consumer and advertiser than blind advertising. Several times on Facebook I've seen an ad that was so perfectly targeted, it meant a new good experience for me, and a conversion for that advertiser.
- nbm 15y ago
  Advertising networks (including Facebook and Google) select the advertisements from their catalog to display for a particular user and page (based on information that they have on the user, the page, and the advert and competing adverts). At no point is the advertiser ever given identifying information about particular users, although demographic/summary data may be provided.
Shenglong 15y ago
Facebook, on the other hand, does not make an effort to warn people the they’ve been tagged (possibly in an unflattering or compromising photo) and give them an immediate chance to remove the tag. What? It definitely does. I get an email every time someone adds a picture of me. I also think a lot of us make an effort not to delete unflattering photos. Not every picture posted is nice, but it adds new dimensions to your online personality. If you don't like people adding your pictures, you can always change your privacy settings. Most of these reasons other than data liberation are very one-sided. Facial recognition can be seen as a bad thing, but some would argue it's a nice feature. Although, honestly, what information on my Facebook would I want to liberate anyway? My years-old wall posts of "Omg I miss you" and "lol up!!!" that I never even look at?
- thomasgerbe 15y ago
  I also get updates on Facebook if I've been tagged. And if you remove the tag, no one can tag you on that photo ever again.
  - unicornporn 15y ago
    If I understand things correctly... On G+ the notification email tells you someone _wants_ to tag a photo of you (it can't be tagged without your consent). On Facebook it gets tagged, you get the notification and you have to go to Facebook to remove the tag. That is an important difference.
- reso 15y ago
  Agreed. Some of the points were downright incorrect. The "Mobile App" one completely disregards that, while the G+ Android app may be superior, G+ doesn't even have an iPhone app, while Facebook does.
  - kanamekun 15y ago
    I think the larger point the author was making is that Google has a massive installed base of Mobile OS users, through its Android platform: "Google will seek more and more ways to make your Android phone a seemless appendage of your Google+ social platform." Google+'s iPhone app is coming soon, and in the meantime you can access its web app through your browser: http://www.google.com/mobile/+/ http://www.google.com/mobile/+/ Facebook just has mobile apps, and no mobile browser or OS (at least, so far). This positions Google+ fairly well in its efforts to build a social networking beachhead to compete with FB.
- thurn 15y ago
  I'll admit that I'm deeply biased by being a Facebook intern, but why is Data Liberation better than the equivalent feature on Facebook?
  - Shenglong 15y ago
    Because we're actually aware of it. I've been using Facebook since 2006, and I've never heard of such a feature on Facebook... and I know all about privacy settings and other features. Does Facebook actually have an export feature?
teilo 15y ago
This article would be more believable if they removed the word "deep" from the title. A deep analysis would show that other than the Google platform integration, these so-called differentiators fall apart. Hangouts is unique -- for now. I'm pretty sure Facebook is already working on something similar. The only real differentiation I have seen is the UI. The Facebook UI is getting very hairy. It is hard to find things. You shouldn't have to Google (oh, the irony) to find out "how do I do X on Facebook?". So Facebook's real vulnerability, as I see it, is platform creep. It's due for a major re-write, but of course they then risk alienating their user base at the worse possible time. Google's move is therefore quite strategic.
- rryan 15y ago
  I've heard others describe the difference as a UI issue and I can't disagree more. It takes an engineer to realize, but the dynamic real-time updating of Google+ is /not/ a UI issue. You can't just sprinkle some front-end magic on a system to make it work this way. It takes major backend work to allow that to happen. Minor point, but the photo quality of Picasa is truly making the experience for me. Facebook's photos are low-quality and built to scale massively, while Picasa has been built as a Flickr competitor. The quality difference and design tradeoffs really show. I'm a photography nerd though, so maybe this does not matter to others as much. Also, as many have said I think the major hook for Google+ is that notifications are integrated in every Google property.
  - waqf 15y ago
    For the benefit of those of us who aren't familiar with both platforms, can you explain what "dynamic real-time updating" features Google+ has and what Facebook does instead?
rufibarbatus 15y ago
s/deep/overtly biased/ I'm not really a big fan of Facebook; it's gotten to a point where I resent it for how locked into it I am right now [1]. I'm very much rooting for someone to come up with a product good enough to reduce the Facebook effect. That said, this article is shallow, disputable and occasionally wrong. And it reaks of link bait. If you haven't clicked the link yet, don't waste your attention. [1]: http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral-me-silicon-valley-social-networking-devin-friedman?printable=true http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral-me-s... Ctrl+F friction

17 points by urlwolf 15y ago

"For the most part, Google has lived up to its “Don’t Be Evil” slogan. Which company would you rather have as the steward of your personally identifiable information?" Well, I'm not sure. I don't think either of them would do anything EVIL (sell my personal information to some person to come threaten my family), but don't both of them use all of our info to sell to advertising companies (which in a way, is practical, and kind of evil?)

reso 15y ago
How is them targeting advertisements at you in any way evil? First of all, it lets you use Facebook/Google+ FOR FREE. Secondly, well-targeted advertisements are far-and-away better for both consumer and advertiser than blind advertising. Several times on Facebook I've seen an ad that was so perfectly targeted, it meant a new good experience for me, and a conversion for that advertiser.
nbm 15y ago
Advertising networks (including Facebook and Google) select the advertisements from their catalog to display for a particular user and page (based on information that they have on the user, the page, and the advert and competing adverts). At no point is the advertiser ever given identifying information about particular users, although demographic/summary data may be provided.

Shenglong 15y ago

Facebook, on the other hand, does not make an effort to warn people the they’ve been tagged (possibly in an unflattering or compromising photo) and give them an immediate chance to remove the tag. What? It definitely does. I get an email every time someone adds a picture of me. I also think a lot of us make an effort not to delete unflattering photos. Not every picture posted is nice, but it adds new dimensions to your online personality. If you don't like people adding your pictures, you can always change your privacy settings. Most of these reasons other than data liberation are very one-sided. Facial recognition can be seen as a bad thing, but some would argue it's a nice feature. Although, honestly, what information on my Facebook would I want to liberate anyway? My years-old wall posts of "Omg I miss you" and "lol up!!!" that I never even look at?

thomasgerbe 15y ago
I also get updates on Facebook if I've been tagged. And if you remove the tag, no one can tag you on that photo ever again.
- unicornporn 15y ago
  If I understand things correctly... On G+ the notification email tells you someone _wants_ to tag a photo of you (it can't be tagged without your consent). On Facebook it gets tagged, you get the notification and you have to go to Facebook to remove the tag. That is an important difference.
reso 15y ago
Agreed. Some of the points were downright incorrect. The "Mobile App" one completely disregards that, while the G+ Android app may be superior, G+ doesn't even have an iPhone app, while Facebook does.
- kanamekun 15y ago
  I think the larger point the author was making is that Google has a massive installed base of Mobile OS users, through its Android platform: "Google will seek more and more ways to make your Android phone a seemless appendage of your Google+ social platform." Google+'s iPhone app is coming soon, and in the meantime you can access its web app through your browser: http://www.google.com/mobile/+/ http://www.google.com/mobile/+/ Facebook just has mobile apps, and no mobile browser or OS (at least, so far). This positions Google+ fairly well in its efforts to build a social networking beachhead to compete with FB.
thurn 15y ago
I'll admit that I'm deeply biased by being a Facebook intern, but why is Data Liberation better than the equivalent feature on Facebook?
- Shenglong 15y ago
  Because we're actually aware of it. I've been using Facebook since 2006, and I've never heard of such a feature on Facebook... and I know all about privacy settings and other features. Does Facebook actually have an export feature?

teilo 15y ago

This article would be more believable if they removed the word "deep" from the title. A deep analysis would show that other than the Google platform integration, these so-called differentiators fall apart. Hangouts is unique -- for now. I'm pretty sure Facebook is already working on something similar. The only real differentiation I have seen is the UI. The Facebook UI is getting very hairy. It is hard to find things. You shouldn't have to Google (oh, the irony) to find out "how do I do X on Facebook?". So Facebook's real vulnerability, as I see it, is platform creep. It's due for a major re-write, but of course they then risk alienating their user base at the worse possible time. Google's move is therefore quite strategic.

rryan 15y ago
I've heard others describe the difference as a UI issue and I can't disagree more. It takes an engineer to realize, but the dynamic real-time updating of Google+ is /not/ a UI issue. You can't just sprinkle some front-end magic on a system to make it work this way. It takes major backend work to allow that to happen. Minor point, but the photo quality of Picasa is truly making the experience for me. Facebook's photos are low-quality and built to scale massively, while Picasa has been built as a Flickr competitor. The quality difference and design tradeoffs really show. I'm a photography nerd though, so maybe this does not matter to others as much. Also, as many have said I think the major hook for Google+ is that notifications are integrated in every Google property.
- waqf 15y ago
  For the benefit of those of us who aren't familiar with both platforms, can you explain what "dynamic real-time updating" features Google+ has and what Facebook does instead?

rufibarbatus 15y ago

s/deep/overtly biased/ I'm not really a big fan of Facebook; it's gotten to a point where I resent it for how locked into it I am right now [1]. I'm very much rooting for someone to come up with a product good enough to reduce the Facebook effect. That said, this article is shallow, disputable and occasionally wrong. And it reaks of link bait. If you haven't clicked the link yet, don't waste your attention. [1]: http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral-me-silicon-valley-social-networking-devin-friedman?printable=true http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral-me-s... Ctrl+F friction