8 ms·

Google to Retire Blogger & Picasa Brands in Google+ Push

186 points by ukdm 15y ago

martythemaniak 15y ago
It makes sense, but they should be careful with the blogger rebranding - it should be integrated into G+, but people need to be able to keep all their templates and customizations. Something like replacing the blogger toolbar with a g+ toolbar and adding G+ widgets (or gadgets or whatever they call them) would work pretty well.
- callahad 15y ago
  From reading the article, it doesn't sound like Google is going to make major functional changes to the products. Rather, the article suggests that Google is going to rename and rebrand the products to be more consistent with their other product names.
  - Lewisham 15y ago
    Yes, the individualized product names don't really fit with the sandbar. Blogger was probably OK (it's clear what it does), but Picasa doesn't communicate what it does well, and worse, the Sandbar calls it "photos" but then you land at the Picasa page, and you're not sure whether it's correct or not.
bretthopper 15y ago
I'm really impressed with the speed and scope of these recent changes Google has made. Most giant tech companies wouldn't be able to pull this off. Could anyone imagine Microsoft doing anything this big and fast? I can't.
- sonnekki 15y ago
  I'm not so sure that it's fast, just well organized. The extreme would be to release the product and restructure the entire system "overnight": the implementation took X years but the changes were made available quickly. This looks more like the pieces just falling into place, though I agree, the scale is a bit staggaring.
- nostrademons 15y ago
  Internet Explorer. You could argue that this is Google's Internet Explorer moment. Disruptive technology comes along that threatens entrenched tech giant's core business. Tech giant is still lead by its brilliant, passionate founder, and still filled with many smart people. Big long memo is sent out by one of the company's VPs. Senior engineers are pulled off other projects and brought together on one team, first to catch-up to the new challenger and then to surpass it. The rest of the company is realigned to support their efforts. Remember that Microsoft did do something this big and fast once - they won the browser wars. They probably couldn't do it now that Ballmer's in charge. But in Microsoft's heyday...yes, they could.
  - code_duck 15y ago
    I'm hoping this isn't what I'd call Google's Microsoft stage - being focused on an area that a relative upstart dominates, with little results. Internet Explorer was 'successful', but mainly as a block to prevent anyone else from being dominant in the browser space. What comes to mind is Microsoft's attempt to replace Google by imitating them thoroughly with Live search and then Bing, that coming after other projects such as MSN, an equally lame clone of AOL.
    - nostrademons 15y ago
      There does seem to be a big cultural difference between Google and Microsoft in that Microsoft was always focused on winning while Google's is focused on innovating. It seems baked into their corporate DNA. I know many Google+ engineers that will bristle if you suggest that it's just a Facebook clone. It's a necessary evil that it looks a lot like Facebook now, because there's a certain baseline set of functionality that users need in a social network and you can't just ignore it to be different. I'd be very disappointed, and I think many other Googlers would too, if Google+ was only just as good as the incumbent. Of course, a lot will depends on what comes down from the top - the reason IE is lame is because it was destaffed after Microsoft won the browser wars. From what I know about Larry Page's personality, though, this doesn't seem like something he's likely to do.
      - 15y ago
- bittermang 15y ago
  Yes. See: Xbox. Within only two console generations, they went from having zero presence in the market outside of publishing some games for Windows, to one of now only three major players in the landscape. For millions of gamers, the Xbox is their first choice for games. They pushed Xbox Live to market, after years of Nintendo and Sony saying consoles were going to go online. They weren't the first console to go online, as the Dreamcast shipped with a modem, but Xbox Live was the first wild success. Nintendo and Sony scrambled to launch their not ready for market Ethernet adapters for the Gamecube and PS2. Microsoft pulls over a billion in revenue annually with the Xbox Live Marketplace, a digital distribution avenue that didn't exist on consoles until they created it, that Sony and Nintendo again moved to emulate on their platforms. Source: http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2009/02/22/just-over-half-of-xbox-live-subscribers-pay-to-play/ http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2009/02/22/just-over-hal... Then, four years after the Xbox 360 had already been in homes across the globe, they reinvented the platform with the NXE (New Xbox Experience) update, that moved to make the console more family friendly, pushed entertainment options like Zune and Netflix to the forefront, and arguably set the ground work for what was to come with Kinect. Yes. I could see Microsoft do something big, fast. Because they did.
  - bretthopper 15y ago
    (this reply is also to nostrademons' comment) You're both correct that Microsoft has done product launches which were big and done quickly, but that's different than what Google is in the process of doing. Yes, Google launched their big product: Google+ which would be comparable to Internet Explorer or Xbox. But Google has also redesigned all their main products, integrated many of them, and is going to rebrand other products. That's much more difficult than just launching one product. It involves more cooperation and effort from the entire company rather than just a division.
    - bittermang 15y ago
      This is true, and something Microsoft has shown to lack, cohesion between units. One of the reasons Internet Explorer 4 was integrated as deeply in to Windows as it was, is that Microsoft was betting on the Internet being a big deal, but executing it in the wrong fashion. Beyond integrating the browser in to the OS, there wasn't a real plan there, and it came to be a security issue by the time we got to IE6 and XP. Microsoft tried to relaunch/rebrand Windows as a gaming platform with their Games for Windows initiative around Vista, which integrated Windows games to some degree with Xbox Live. But the idea was never fully integrated in a way that added any value for consumers, and many publishers skip the Games for Windows branding as it requires additional certification to attain the branding. Then there's the Zune, a perfectly capable device that was never able to find its niche. The Zune name lives on in the music and video marketplace on the Xbox dashboard, but a synergy between Microsoft's products, brands, and services with the Zune was never struck, and now the device is dead. So in this, Google's ability to draw everything together with a laser like focus, and actually seem to commit to this thing is a switch, for them or any company. I agree.
ChrisArchitect 15y ago
I wonder what becomes of the 'Blogger' name/domain etc. I'd say it's a pretty valuable 'word' -- an iconic brand somewhat.
- joejohnson 15y ago
  I would guess that it will just forward to whatever domain Google chooses to use for Google Blogs. I think this happens with Picasa already when accessed through G+.
- jrockway 15y ago
  It will probably redirect to Google Blogs.
- rufibarbatus 15y ago
  (DISCLAIMER: not terribly relevant, may contain nostalgia.) It's not that big a deal that a big company is rebranding its products. I certainly won't rant or protest that. But since I no longer have a blog, I thought I should leave an in memoriam here. Their retiring the "Blogger" brand makes me a little sad. I made my first blog there at age 13, and I learnt a lot about HTML and CSS over the following years thanks to Blogger. In a way, Blogger was my BASIC. I eventually outgrew its simplicity and scope, got a domain and some space (at a friend's mom's server) and started mixing Blogger's templating code with PHP and Perl. That site was my platform to learn code and its political implications. Forward to high school, a few friends and I had a group blog which got sort of popular among the student body. We had buttons pressed with the Blogger logo. We wore it with pride. The implications of the web were gaining momentum among our generation right about then. I will miss seeing that big orange B around.
  - Apocryphon 15y ago
    I have to agree that the retirement of Blogger is saddening. And Picasa is such a snappy name!
  - esrauch 15y ago
    Meh, I had a similar experience with geocities back in the day but it was pretty much already dead to me. With regards to the big orange B, why do you think they aren't going to keep that around?
Pewpewarrows 15y ago
Great news, I hope the Picasa re-branding comes with a much-needed visual overhaul (similar to the redesigns that came to Gmail, Calendar, etc). Picasa and Google Reader are the last two remaining products in my daily use that desperately need a visual refresh.
- r00fus 15y ago
  If Reader were integrated heavily into G+, I would not complain one bit (more likely, I would push more and more of my tweeting into G+ shares).
  - antrix 15y ago
    Definitely. I would love it if my Reader shared items made their way into G+ as shares.
- wmeredith 15y ago
  Yes. I'm also anxiously awaiting a reader Redesign.
CoffeeDregs 15y ago
Nice, but please god let them fully integrate gmail and gapps accounts before they do this. gapps accounts can't create profiles which means they can't join google+...
nrbafna 15y ago
What happens to the name of the desktop version of Picasa?
- abraham 15y ago
  It will probably also get renamed to Google Photos but there is always a chance it will get discontinued.
- wallnutboy 15y ago
  My guess is they'll make that a webapp instead.
  - SingAlong 15y ago
    Webapp? They acquired Picnik and is in Flash. So IMO, they might shutdown Picnik and do something in HTML5 and javascript.
  - georgemcbay 15y ago
    Most of the point of Picasa (the desktop software product, not Picasa Web Albums) is to collect and catalog your locally stored photos. It wouldn't be a good fit for a webapp, even in an ideal everyone-has-HTML5 utopia world.
kloncks 15y ago
Would rebranding YouTube in the near-future make sense as well?
- oldstrangers 15y ago
  No, because YouTube is a brand name that competes successfully on its own. There's nothing they could name it that would have better name recognition than YouTube already does.
  - abraham 15y ago
    Wouldn't the same hold true for Blogger then? "one of the top 10 most visited websites in the world"
    - oldstrangers 15y ago
      No. Blogger has a generic stigma. You say the word blogger all the time, but rarely do you actually think of blogger.com. Actually, I never think of blogger.com. And we're talking about brand power/brand recognition, not how popular the sites are.
      - abraham 15y ago
        YouTube certainly has a stronger brand but when blogger is referenced I only see it either referring to a person who blogs or Blogger and the two are pretty easy to differentiate. E.g. "a blogger", "the blogger" refer to a person blogging vs "on blogger", "with blogger" that refer to blogger.com.
        oldstrangers 15y ago
        Considering that your comment lacks comprehension, I think my point towards 'Blogger' being too generic a term is even more valid. "Bob is a blogger on 'blogger' who blogs about blogging." "Bob is a blogger on 'Google Blogs' who blogs about blogging."
- 15y ago
gojomo 15y ago
These are moves in the wrong direction: Google needs more distinctive brands, not fewer. While the multi-brand strategy didn't work for Yahoo, Yahoo had many other integration/prioritization problems. The fact that YouTube had a different, more-market-appropriate name than 'Google Video' was important for its identity and success. (Or is Google going to rename YouTube to "Google+ Video", now?) 'Blogger' is a uniquely-interesting brand for them to throw away. If launched today, the word would almost be too generic for trademark protection. But its history practically grandfathers it in: its popularity was part of the mechanism by which 'blog' became a generic term. 'Google Blogs'? Blah.
- mikeknoop 15y ago
  From http://www.gplusinfo.com/google-will-retire-blogger-and-picasa-brands-moving-them-under-the-google-brand/ http://www.gplusinfo.com/google-will-retire-blogger-and-pica... "Google has said that YouTube will remain as is."
  - esrauch 15y ago
    I'm not surprised that they aren't rebranding YouTube (it's pretty much the most recognizable website title in the world, way more than Blogger IMO), though I continue to be surprised that they haven't integrated it more by including the horizontal google-bar at the top and doing something about merging YouTube and regular google accounts.
    - jeggers5 15y ago
      " including the horizontal google-bar at the top " I believe this would just make everything too complicated than it needs to be for the average user; besides, the likelyhood is that the user already uses Google, so there's no need for Google to try and reel users in via a search applet (that would probs make YouTube look ugly). And, aren't Google Accounts already merged with YouTube Accounts ?
      - esrauch 15y ago
mark_l_watson 15y ago
I have blogger configured to use my domain (blog.markwatson.com) and I certainly hope that Google does not take away this flexibility.
pentarim 15y ago
Am I the only one who doesnt see the direct connection between rebranding Blogger & Picasa & G+ push? I think its more of a good timing for it because everybody focuses towards G+ now. If the growth of the two services were satisfying there wouldnt be need to change anything.
paganel 15y ago
Referenced from the article, I found this (http://www.google.com/support/profiles/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1192471&p=public_profile http://www.google.com/support/profiles/bin/answer.py?hl=en&#...): > We believe that using Google Profiles to help people find and connect with you online is how the product is best used. Private profiles don’t allow this, so we have decided to require all profiles to be public. I couldn't find any such info (forcing user profiles to be made public) about Google+, but anyway I find it a little bit strange coming from Google, or any other company for that matter. For crying out loud, at least FB gave me the option of my name not showing up in any of their searches. That's why when I google my FB profile name it's nowhere to be found in the first 10 pages, because I don't want the whole world to know what friends do I have or which photo did I choose to represent me. It's like giving the option of everyone who has access to the Internet of entering my living room while I'm having a beer with my friends, at least this is how I perceive it. Or maybe Google+ just wants to be more like Twitter and less like FB, I cannot really tell, either way, I won't ever use it because of this.
- abraham 15y ago
  Google+/Profiles also has an option to not be indexed by search engines and I believe the only info required for a Google Profile is name, gender, and maybe age.
- rachelbythebay 15y ago
  So you're essentially making the case of "Real Names Considered Harmful"? But what about the advertisers who crave such tasty, tasty information? Incidentally, if this means that "Picasa" (whatever name it winds up getting) now needs a privacy-leaking profile, that'll be the end of it for me.
shuri 15y ago
It's really nice to see Google with a clear direction, operate with determination, going "all in", consolidate it's different offerings into something that will, I'm guessing, be greater than the sum of the parts.
aaronykng 15y ago
Sad to see the name Blogger go, it's just so much more unique than Google Blogs. They're both pretty generic sounding names, but Blogger has a history behind the name. Google Blogs is like...Facebook Blogs, Yahoo Blogs and (Insert Generic Blog or Blog Host Name Here). I've noticed Google+ imported my Blogger images though, it'll be interesting to see how they incorporate Google Blogs from Blogger into Plus. I'll still be sad to see Blogger go though.
Hisoka 15y ago
Does this means if I own a blogspot blog, the URL will change to a google plus domain? I truly hope that ain't the case...
UofFree 15y ago
Next up Google Windows followed by Google Anti-Virus, who knows one day we might have a Google president.
mkramlich 15y ago
And remember kids: making these kinds of brand/logo changes are what earns folks the Big Bucks. solving hairy concurrency bugs at 2am, dealing with a site outage? $100k/yr. "managing brands", consolidating them, moving the deck chairs around: many hundreds of thousands per year, sometimes millions. it's not about how hard what you do is, it's about "impact" and/or how close you are to the top of the org tree. :)
- ma2rten 15y ago
  To be fair 100k/yr is still a shitload of money to most people.
  - mkramlich 15y ago
    good point. and totally agreed. however between a choice of making 1 shitload per year, and making 10 shitloads a year, or 100 shitloads, I'll go with what's behind door number 3! :-)
nikcub 15y ago
not being able to extend this logic to also renaming youtube should be a hint that what they are doing is a mistake
vishaldpatel 15y ago
Okay, time for renaming fun: Picasa will now be known as Google+Photos and Blooger will become.. Google+Globber! :D

186 points by ukdm 15y ago

It makes sense, but they should be careful with the blogger rebranding - it should be integrated into G+, but people need to be able to keep all their templates and customizations. Something like replacing the blogger toolbar with a g+ toolbar and adding G+ widgets (or gadgets or whatever they call them) would work pretty well.

callahad 15y ago
From reading the article, it doesn't sound like Google is going to make major functional changes to the products. Rather, the article suggests that Google is going to rename and rebrand the products to be more consistent with their other product names.
- Lewisham 15y ago
  Yes, the individualized product names don't really fit with the sandbar. Blogger was probably OK (it's clear what it does), but Picasa doesn't communicate what it does well, and worse, the Sandbar calls it "photos" but then you land at the Picasa page, and you're not sure whether it's correct or not.

bretthopper 15y ago

I'm really impressed with the speed and scope of these recent changes Google has made. Most giant tech companies wouldn't be able to pull this off. Could anyone imagine Microsoft doing anything this big and fast? I can't.

sonnekki 15y ago
I'm not so sure that it's fast, just well organized. The extreme would be to release the product and restructure the entire system "overnight": the implementation took X years but the changes were made available quickly. This looks more like the pieces just falling into place, though I agree, the scale is a bit staggaring.
nostrademons 15y ago
Internet Explorer. You could argue that this is Google's Internet Explorer moment. Disruptive technology comes along that threatens entrenched tech giant's core business. Tech giant is still lead by its brilliant, passionate founder, and still filled with many smart people. Big long memo is sent out by one of the company's VPs. Senior engineers are pulled off other projects and brought together on one team, first to catch-up to the new challenger and then to surpass it. The rest of the company is realigned to support their efforts. Remember that Microsoft did do something this big and fast once - they won the browser wars. They probably couldn't do it now that Ballmer's in charge. But in Microsoft's heyday...yes, they could.
- code_duck 15y ago
  I'm hoping this isn't what I'd call Google's Microsoft stage - being focused on an area that a relative upstart dominates, with little results. Internet Explorer was 'successful', but mainly as a block to prevent anyone else from being dominant in the browser space. What comes to mind is Microsoft's attempt to replace Google by imitating them thoroughly with Live search and then Bing, that coming after other projects such as MSN, an equally lame clone of AOL.
  - nostrademons 15y ago
    There does seem to be a big cultural difference between Google and Microsoft in that Microsoft was always focused on winning while Google's is focused on innovating. It seems baked into their corporate DNA. I know many Google+ engineers that will bristle if you suggest that it's just a Facebook clone. It's a necessary evil that it looks a lot like Facebook now, because there's a certain baseline set of functionality that users need in a social network and you can't just ignore it to be different. I'd be very disappointed, and I think many other Googlers would too, if Google+ was only just as good as the incumbent. Of course, a lot will depends on what comes down from the top - the reason IE is lame is because it was destaffed after Microsoft won the browser wars. From what I know about Larry Page's personality, though, this doesn't seem like something he's likely to do.
    - 15y ago
bittermang 15y ago
Yes. See: Xbox. Within only two console generations, they went from having zero presence in the market outside of publishing some games for Windows, to one of now only three major players in the landscape. For millions of gamers, the Xbox is their first choice for games. They pushed Xbox Live to market, after years of Nintendo and Sony saying consoles were going to go online. They weren't the first console to go online, as the Dreamcast shipped with a modem, but Xbox Live was the first wild success. Nintendo and Sony scrambled to launch their not ready for market Ethernet adapters for the Gamecube and PS2. Microsoft pulls over a billion in revenue annually with the Xbox Live Marketplace, a digital distribution avenue that didn't exist on consoles until they created it, that Sony and Nintendo again moved to emulate on their platforms. Source: http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2009/02/22/just-over-half-of-xbox-live-subscribers-pay-to-play/ http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2009/02/22/just-over-hal... Then, four years after the Xbox 360 had already been in homes across the globe, they reinvented the platform with the NXE (New Xbox Experience) update, that moved to make the console more family friendly, pushed entertainment options like Zune and Netflix to the forefront, and arguably set the ground work for what was to come with Kinect. Yes. I could see Microsoft do something big, fast. Because they did.
- bretthopper 15y ago
  (this reply is also to nostrademons' comment) You're both correct that Microsoft has done product launches which were big and done quickly, but that's different than what Google is in the process of doing. Yes, Google launched their big product: Google+ which would be comparable to Internet Explorer or Xbox. But Google has also redesigned all their main products, integrated many of them, and is going to rebrand other products. That's much more difficult than just launching one product. It involves more cooperation and effort from the entire company rather than just a division.
  - bittermang 15y ago
    This is true, and something Microsoft has shown to lack, cohesion between units. One of the reasons Internet Explorer 4 was integrated as deeply in to Windows as it was, is that Microsoft was betting on the Internet being a big deal, but executing it in the wrong fashion. Beyond integrating the browser in to the OS, there wasn't a real plan there, and it came to be a security issue by the time we got to IE6 and XP. Microsoft tried to relaunch/rebrand Windows as a gaming platform with their Games for Windows initiative around Vista, which integrated Windows games to some degree with Xbox Live. But the idea was never fully integrated in a way that added any value for consumers, and many publishers skip the Games for Windows branding as it requires additional certification to attain the branding. Then there's the Zune, a perfectly capable device that was never able to find its niche. The Zune name lives on in the music and video marketplace on the Xbox dashboard, but a synergy between Microsoft's products, brands, and services with the Zune was never struck, and now the device is dead. So in this, Google's ability to draw everything together with a laser like focus, and actually seem to commit to this thing is a switch, for them or any company. I agree.

ChrisArchitect 15y ago

I wonder what becomes of the 'Blogger' name/domain etc. I'd say it's a pretty valuable 'word' -- an iconic brand somewhat.

joejohnson 15y ago
I would guess that it will just forward to whatever domain Google chooses to use for Google Blogs. I think this happens with Picasa already when accessed through G+.
jrockway 15y ago
It will probably redirect to Google Blogs.
rufibarbatus 15y ago
(DISCLAIMER: not terribly relevant, may contain nostalgia.) It's not that big a deal that a big company is rebranding its products. I certainly won't rant or protest that. But since I no longer have a blog, I thought I should leave an in memoriam here. Their retiring the "Blogger" brand makes me a little sad. I made my first blog there at age 13, and I learnt a lot about HTML and CSS over the following years thanks to Blogger. In a way, Blogger was my BASIC. I eventually outgrew its simplicity and scope, got a domain and some space (at a friend's mom's server) and started mixing Blogger's templating code with PHP and Perl. That site was my platform to learn code and its political implications. Forward to high school, a few friends and I had a group blog which got sort of popular among the student body. We had buttons pressed with the Blogger logo. We wore it with pride. The implications of the web were gaining momentum among our generation right about then. I will miss seeing that big orange B around.
- Apocryphon 15y ago
  I have to agree that the retirement of Blogger is saddening. And Picasa is such a snappy name!
- esrauch 15y ago
  Meh, I had a similar experience with geocities back in the day but it was pretty much already dead to me. With regards to the big orange B, why do you think they aren't going to keep that around?

Pewpewarrows 15y ago

Great news, I hope the Picasa re-branding comes with a much-needed visual overhaul (similar to the redesigns that came to Gmail, Calendar, etc). Picasa and Google Reader are the last two remaining products in my daily use that desperately need a visual refresh.

r00fus 15y ago
If Reader were integrated heavily into G+, I would not complain one bit (more likely, I would push more and more of my tweeting into G+ shares).
- antrix 15y ago
  Definitely. I would love it if my Reader shared items made their way into G+ as shares.
wmeredith 15y ago
Yes. I'm also anxiously awaiting a reader Redesign.

CoffeeDregs 15y ago

Nice, but please god let them fully integrate gmail and gapps accounts before they do this. gapps accounts can't create profiles which means they can't join google+...

nrbafna 15y ago

What happens to the name of the desktop version of Picasa?

abraham 15y ago
It will probably also get renamed to Google Photos but there is always a chance it will get discontinued.
wallnutboy 15y ago
My guess is they'll make that a webapp instead.
- SingAlong 15y ago
  Webapp? They acquired Picnik and is in Flash. So IMO, they might shutdown Picnik and do something in HTML5 and javascript.
- georgemcbay 15y ago
  Most of the point of Picasa (the desktop software product, not Picasa Web Albums) is to collect and catalog your locally stored photos. It wouldn't be a good fit for a webapp, even in an ideal everyone-has-HTML5 utopia world.

kloncks 15y ago

Would rebranding YouTube in the near-future make sense as well?

oldstrangers 15y ago
No, because YouTube is a brand name that competes successfully on its own. There's nothing they could name it that would have better name recognition than YouTube already does.
- abraham 15y ago
  Wouldn't the same hold true for Blogger then? "one of the top 10 most visited websites in the world"
  - oldstrangers 15y ago
    No. Blogger has a generic stigma. You say the word blogger all the time, but rarely do you actually think of blogger.com. Actually, I never think of blogger.com. And we're talking about brand power/brand recognition, not how popular the sites are.
    - abraham 15y ago
      YouTube certainly has a stronger brand but when blogger is referenced I only see it either referring to a person who blogs or Blogger and the two are pretty easy to differentiate. E.g. "a blogger", "the blogger" refer to a person blogging vs "on blogger", "with blogger" that refer to blogger.com.
      - oldstrangers 15y ago
        Considering that your comment lacks comprehension, I think my point towards 'Blogger' being too generic a term is even more valid. "Bob is a blogger on 'blogger' who blogs about blogging." "Bob is a blogger on 'Google Blogs' who blogs about blogging."
15y ago

gojomo 15y ago

These are moves in the wrong direction: Google needs more distinctive brands, not fewer. While the multi-brand strategy didn't work for Yahoo, Yahoo had many other integration/prioritization problems. The fact that YouTube had a different, more-market-appropriate name than 'Google Video' was important for its identity and success. (Or is Google going to rename YouTube to "Google+ Video", now?) 'Blogger' is a uniquely-interesting brand for them to throw away. If launched today, the word would almost be too generic for trademark protection. But its history practically grandfathers it in: its popularity was part of the mechanism by which 'blog' became a generic term. 'Google Blogs'? Blah.

mikeknoop 15y ago
From http://www.gplusinfo.com/google-will-retire-blogger-and-picasa-brands-moving-them-under-the-google-brand/ http://www.gplusinfo.com/google-will-retire-blogger-and-pica... "Google has said that YouTube will remain as is."
- esrauch 15y ago
  I'm not surprised that they aren't rebranding YouTube (it's pretty much the most recognizable website title in the world, way more than Blogger IMO), though I continue to be surprised that they haven't integrated it more by including the horizontal google-bar at the top and doing something about merging YouTube and regular google accounts.
  - jeggers5 15y ago
    " including the horizontal google-bar at the top " I believe this would just make everything too complicated than it needs to be for the average user; besides, the likelyhood is that the user already uses Google, so there's no need for Google to try and reel users in via a search applet (that would probs make YouTube look ugly). And, aren't Google Accounts already merged with YouTube Accounts ?
    - esrauch 15y ago

mark_l_watson 15y ago

I have blogger configured to use my domain (blog.markwatson.com) and I certainly hope that Google does not take away this flexibility.

pentarim 15y ago

Am I the only one who doesnt see the direct connection between rebranding Blogger & Picasa & G+ push? I think its more of a good timing for it because everybody focuses towards G+ now. If the growth of the two services were satisfying there wouldnt be need to change anything.

paganel 15y ago

Referenced from the article, I found this (http://www.google.com/support/profiles/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1192471&p=public_profile http://www.google.com/support/profiles/bin/answer.py?hl=en&#...): > We believe that using Google Profiles to help people find and connect with you online is how the product is best used. Private profiles don’t allow this, so we have decided to require all profiles to be public. I couldn't find any such info (forcing user profiles to be made public) about Google+, but anyway I find it a little bit strange coming from Google, or any other company for that matter. For crying out loud, at least FB gave me the option of my name not showing up in any of their searches. That's why when I google my FB profile name it's nowhere to be found in the first 10 pages, because I don't want the whole world to know what friends do I have or which photo did I choose to represent me. It's like giving the option of everyone who has access to the Internet of entering my living room while I'm having a beer with my friends, at least this is how I perceive it. Or maybe Google+ just wants to be more like Twitter and less like FB, I cannot really tell, either way, I won't ever use it because of this.

abraham 15y ago
Google+/Profiles also has an option to not be indexed by search engines and I believe the only info required for a Google Profile is name, gender, and maybe age.
rachelbythebay 15y ago
So you're essentially making the case of "Real Names Considered Harmful"? But what about the advertisers who crave such tasty, tasty information? Incidentally, if this means that "Picasa" (whatever name it winds up getting) now needs a privacy-leaking profile, that'll be the end of it for me.

shuri 15y ago

It's really nice to see Google with a clear direction, operate with determination, going "all in", consolidate it's different offerings into something that will, I'm guessing, be greater than the sum of the parts.

aaronykng 15y ago

Sad to see the name Blogger go, it's just so much more unique than Google Blogs. They're both pretty generic sounding names, but Blogger has a history behind the name. Google Blogs is like...Facebook Blogs, Yahoo Blogs and (Insert Generic Blog or Blog Host Name Here). I've noticed Google+ imported my Blogger images though, it'll be interesting to see how they incorporate Google Blogs from Blogger into Plus. I'll still be sad to see Blogger go though.

Hisoka 15y ago

Does this means if I own a blogspot blog, the URL will change to a google plus domain? I truly hope that ain't the case...

UofFree 15y ago

Next up Google Windows followed by Google Anti-Virus, who knows one day we might have a Google president.

mkramlich 15y ago

And remember kids: making these kinds of brand/logo changes are what earns folks the Big Bucks. solving hairy concurrency bugs at 2am, dealing with a site outage? $100k/yr. "managing brands", consolidating them, moving the deck chairs around: many hundreds of thousands per year, sometimes millions. it's not about how hard what you do is, it's about "impact" and/or how close you are to the top of the org tree. :)

ma2rten 15y ago
To be fair 100k/yr is still a shitload of money to most people.
- mkramlich 15y ago
  good point. and totally agreed. however between a choice of making 1 shitload per year, and making 10 shitloads a year, or 100 shitloads, I'll go with what's behind door number 3! :-)

nikcub 15y ago

not being able to extend this logic to also renaming youtube should be a hint that what they are doing is a mistake

vishaldpatel 15y ago

Okay, time for renaming fun: Picasa will now be known as Google+Photos and Blooger will become.. Google+Globber! :D