4 ms·

There's a lot of wishful thinking in these G+ posts of late. People hope that G+ won't have to make the painful compromises FB has, though without much justific

There's a lot of wishful thinking in these G+ posts of late. People hope that G+ won't have to make the painful compromises FB has, though without much justification. The two are so very similar, if G+ catches on most everything people hate about FB is going to reappear in some form. Regarding the post, I expect Google to be even more restrictive than FB with 3rd parties. They'll refuse to have their name tarnished by crappy apps. iTunes app store style review wouldn't be surprising to me. Spam free feeds are a selling point for G+, after all.

dspace 15y ago
I'm ok with apps on G+ if they provide an option to turn off all notifications / spam. You can "turn off platform apps" in Facebook but still have to hide the posts individually. I've probably manually blocked 30 apps at this point, which is annoying.
jsavimbi 15y ago
Yeah, Google wants no part of those sketchy, third-part crap apps in their ecosystem. http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/10/google-secretly-invested-100-million-in-zynga-preparing-to-launch-google-games/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/10/google-secretly-invested-10...
- clobber 15y ago
  This deserves more attention, especially by those that think Google can do no wrong. Thanks.
- toadstone 15y ago
  Current Zynga games aren't that bad. The production values and gameplay are a lot better than the werewolves/vampires style games that they started with. Given a few more years, their games might even be comparable to traditional, non-social games. I think the HN set is unfairly hard on companies like Zynga. The entrepreneurial of mind should know that a start-up can't always afford to act nobly or to invest in quality. Sometimes the right strategic decision is to make cheap crap and spam now, and reform later once you're out of mortal danger.
  - clobber 15y ago
    Unfairly hard huh? Have a look at this and be sure to watch the video: http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinkus-faceboo/ http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinkus...
    - toadstone 15y ago
      I know they did shady things in the beginning. A lot of businesses have to do that, and many don't stop. That's just how the game works. As a user, of course you don't have to take it. Just don't buy what they're selling. There's no reason for outrage. Let them scam people dumber than you, and with that money maybe they'll develop something you like.
      - clobber 15y ago
        A lot of businesses don't HAVE to do anything. Why try and justify this? Ethics be damned, I guess.
        jsavimbi 15y ago
        > can't always afford to act nobly No, they cannot in all cases. But they can afford to not steal from their customers or direct them into a trap where they'll be stolen from on a recurring basis. It's not about the quality of the apps as the majority will be shite anyways, it's about the ethics of the people involved.

dspace 15y ago

I'm ok with apps on G+ if they provide an option to turn off all notifications / spam. You can "turn off platform apps" in Facebook but still have to hide the posts individually. I've probably manually blocked 30 apps at this point, which is annoying.

jsavimbi 15y ago

Yeah, Google wants no part of those sketchy, third-part crap apps in their ecosystem. http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/10/google-secretly-invested-100-million-in-zynga-preparing-to-launch-google-games/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/10/google-secretly-invested-10...

clobber 15y ago
This deserves more attention, especially by those that think Google can do no wrong. Thanks.
toadstone 15y ago
Current Zynga games aren't that bad. The production values and gameplay are a lot better than the werewolves/vampires style games that they started with. Given a few more years, their games might even be comparable to traditional, non-social games. I think the HN set is unfairly hard on companies like Zynga. The entrepreneurial of mind should know that a start-up can't always afford to act nobly or to invest in quality. Sometimes the right strategic decision is to make cheap crap and spam now, and reform later once you're out of mortal danger.
- clobber 15y ago
  Unfairly hard huh? Have a look at this and be sure to watch the video: http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinkus-faceboo/ http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinkus...
  - toadstone 15y ago
    I know they did shady things in the beginning. A lot of businesses have to do that, and many don't stop. That's just how the game works. As a user, of course you don't have to take it. Just don't buy what they're selling. There's no reason for outrage. Let them scam people dumber than you, and with that money maybe they'll develop something you like.
    - clobber 15y ago
      A lot of businesses don't HAVE to do anything. Why try and justify this? Ethics be damned, I guess.
      - jsavimbi 15y ago
        > can't always afford to act nobly No, they cannot in all cases. But they can afford to not steal from their customers or direct them into a trap where they'll be stolen from on a recurring basis. It's not about the quality of the apps as the majority will be shite anyways, it's about the ethics of the people involved.