10 ms·
Google+ is now the second largest social platform by active users
- cloudwalking 14y agoWhat is considered an active user?
- EduardoBautista 14y agoI want to know this too. I don't know of any of my facebook friends that actively use Google+.
- IvyMike 14y agoIf you follow the links to the source Globalwebindex doc, they defined it as "Used or contributed to in the past month".
- dangero 14y agoThis could be a little bit invalid because of things like Hangouts. My dev team has started using Google Hangouts as a free alternative to conference Skype. I bet I'm considered an "active" Google+ user because I have participated in a Hangout. It gets posted to my Google+ wall every time I do it. I'm actually kind of annoyed every time I have to log onto Google+ to do something because I know they are about to add me to some press release statistic. There's something "evil" about that in my opinion. Google's strategy is putting them in danger of becoming more hated than Facebook. At least I intentionally signed up for Facebook. Who at Google thinks they are going to beat Facebook by forcing anyone who uses Google services to be a part of Google+? It feels very Windows 95 let's integrate the browser into the kernel in the sense that I know as a user, this Google+ portion is not necessary to the product I'm trying to use, but it's being forced on me anyways. Same thing happens every time I'm on Youtube now. No, I don't want my Google+ page updated when I watch a video on Youtube, nor do I want to use my "true identity" when browsing Youtube, nor do I want to explain why I don't want to do that in a way that fits into Google's 4 prefabbed reasons that don't seem to include, "I'd just like to be anonymous, now get off my back about it." The rate their going, I wouldn't be surprised if by next year something will be posted to Google+ when I read my Gmail and I'll be an "Active User". What ever happened to making your product better so that people want to use it instead of "tricking" them into being a part of it?
- hayksaakian 14y agoWhy wouldn't using hangouts count as using Google+? Its a feature of Google plus. You're using it to interact with your peers. Just because the feature set is not narrowly defined to Facebook standards does not make it less of a social network.
- magicalist 14y agoThe methodology of "active" users is always more than a bit suspect, but a) the source for this post (by some random person on g+?) isn't even from google and b) this: > I'm actually kind of annoyed every time I have to log onto Google+ to do something because I know they are about to add me to some press release statistic. There's something "evil" about that in my opinion. is a bit of an overreaction. You use hangouts and you dislike (if) that gets counted as an active user? Who on earth cares that much about self-promoting press releases?
- andybak 14y agoI agree about the overreaction but if you dial it back a bit there is a valid underlying point. If he does nothing social on Google+ then he isn't really contributing anything to it's growth other than a single digit in some statistics. I'd like to see some better metrics although I can see the practical difficulties in obtaining them.
- danmaz74 14y agoHow is talking with other people "nothing social"? Did you mean "nothing public to the World"?
- andybak 14y agoNot exactly but I agree I'm not being terribly precise. I'm floundering in trying to clarify to myself what the difference is but no-one usually describes email as 'social media' even when you use the cc field.
- jrockway 14y ago
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Sami_Lehtinen 14y agoGoogle+ posts are rated unsurprisingly much higher in Google results than Facebook posts.
- andybak 14y agoAre Facebook posts even indexed? I don't recall ever seeing one. I just tried a few searches and can't find anything. Is there even such a thing as a 'personal Facebook post that's public'? As you can tell I'm not a regular user...
- nwh 14y agoYes there is, it's just not included in search engines.
- jrockway 14y agoFacebook's robots.txt looks pretty restrictive: http://facebook.com/robots.txt http://facebook.com/robots.txt Their sitemap doesn't even load for me. (I don't use Facebook so I don't know how much this covers, but it's an interesting read compared to http://plus.google.com/robots.txt. http://plus.google.com/robots.txt.)
- nwh 14y agoUser-agent: * Disallow: / Yep, pretty much everything.
- hosay123 14y agoAccording to the definition from the source document, visiting this link is probably sufficient for you to be counted as a Google+ user.
- Kylekramer 14y agoIs there any measurement of social networks that doesn't count people viewing a web page on the social network as a user?
- hosay123 14y agoA social network that does nothing but serves web pages isn't a "social network", it is a "web server" A social network that does nothing but allow the user make use of web applications is not a "social network", it is often called an "application server", or perhaps still "web server". A social network as originally defined, was a particular kind of web application where one could describe real-life relationships to a machine which would then attempt to assist the user in maintaining those relationships, for example by sharing drunk shots or funny cat videos. Google+, in almost all its integrations with other Google products, does not count as a "social network" in the traditional sense -- rendering a "G+" button in an endless series of places where it might accidentally be clicked does not constitute helping the user maintain real world relationships. Forcing users of older web applications to create a Google+ account in order to remain a user of that older web application does not constitute helping the user maintain real world relationships. Integrating arbitrary applications tightly with Google+ does not unconditionally constitute helping the user maintain real world relationships. In every conceivable way Google+ is a failure as a social network: almost everyone uses Facebook for what Google+ tries and fails to achieve, these "stats" only serve to highlight this each time they appear in the news. In the meantime, it has turned into some kind of mediocre blogging platform, except it doesn't support RSS (because that would encourage people to never visit the site – undistorting the stats against Google's favour). To count me as a "social network user" I would first expect said network to have helped me maintain real life relationships somehow – Facebook does this, and not by pilfering my Gmail address book, not by tricking me into clicking a share link while I watch a lolcat on YouTube, not by crippling my favourite applications (Reader), and least of all not by rendering blog posts. Google's only successful social applications to date (IMHO) have been Gmail (including Talk) and Reader, and they already managed to kill one of these in their panic to beat Facebook.
- blablabla123 14y agoIs there a correlation to Google asking me yesterday to merge my Youtube account with my Google account?
- rjd 14y agoWheres the MSN Live/Skype/Xbox network?
- jyap 14y agoThere are lies, damned lies, and statistics. Here is the blog post to the "report": http://globalwebindex.net/thinking/social-platforms-gwi-8-update-decline-of-local-social-media-platforms/ http://globalwebindex.net/thinking/social-platforms-gwi-8-up... According to the article: “Active Usage” (defined as “Used or contributed to in the past month”). Now according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmail): As of June 2012, it (Gmail) is the most widely used web-based email provider with over 425 million active users worldwide. Do you really believe that 80% of Gmail users are "active" Google+ users?
- mctx 14y agoI'd love to see some statistics relating to time spent on the site, or number of page views. I suspect that G+ would be orders of magnitudes lower than Facebook
- paganel 14y ago> I suspect that G+ would be orders of magnitudes lower than Facebook Ignoring Facebook here, this chart should give them food for thought: https://www.google.com/trends/explore?hl=en#q=instagram%2C%20google%2B%2C%20tumblr&date=1%2F2010%2037m&cmpt=q https://www.google.com/trends/explore?hl=en#q=instagram%2C%2...
- taligent 14y agoExplains the recent move to trick all the YouTube users into signing up for Google+. I mean seriously why does creating a private video playlist require a public Google+ page.
- blablabla123 14y agoI stopped using Youtube's customization features years ago. I don't want everybody to know what kind of music I listen to and what my interests are like. Google does not seem to get that. In fact I might stop using Youtube completely soon, except for watching linked Videos. As we all know a login is necessary to watch Videos that are not for children. In fact Google search has become weird since they more or less half-publicly track which sites I'm visiting from Google. Seriously, this has to stop.
- jonathanberger 14y agoIt just doesn't matter how many stats they release. The stat just doesn't "feel" true. I have never read a report from anyone who has signed into Google Plus, who has reported anyone but Google employees or their friends using the service. The only thing bragging about statistics from the service does is make people trust Google less. It does not further engender confidence in Google Plus. I agree with those that point out that Google Plus is counting "active" users in fallacious method. Common sense of millions of users has to square with the stats companies are releasing. Facebook's? They make sense. Google's? They just don't.
- saraid216 14y agoYour comment doesn't "feel" true to me. But I'm signed into Google Plus on a daily basis and while it turned out that one of my coworkers is married to a Googler, she's the only Googler I interact with on a semi-regular basis. And I pretty much met her through G+; it was months later that we actually met in real life.
- pilif 14y agoWhen G+ initially came out, everybody here was excited to have an alternative to Facebook. Posts about their increasing user numbers were celebrated and everybody was excited. Then it became clear that Google, like Facebook was going to force people to use real names and since then, everybody likes to hate on G+. Whatever they do is said to be even more evil and whenever they or others publish user numbers, everybody is explaining how the data must be wrong and how G+ is a ghost town and a failure. Can't we just be honest here? Yes. The real name policy sucks. But does this mean the whole G+ is a failure and every evidence to the contrary must be wrong? Just because you dislike it doesn't mean everybody does.
- fiendsan 14y agoThat's actually the only reason i dont care about google+ , the real name policy doesnt only suck its freaking dangerous!!!! cause if facebook goes after your account, so what, you lose some pictures and posts? but you can make a new one and find your friends fast! its bothersome, when google goes after your account, you lose your mail, your documents, your adwords, your adsense, your android.... its a web apocalipse, and for what? for not using your real name? wtf is that! so i dont think avoiding google+ is a question of dislike, more like a preemptive attempt to keep your valuable data safe.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- timothya 14y agoPlease don't spread misinformation. If Google has a problem with your name, they will at most prevent you from using Google+ until you fix it. The other Google products you use will be unaffected.
- nikhilp 14y agohttps://plus.google.com/116098411511850876544/posts/4t8sFLLK4hK https://plus.google.com/116098411511850876544/posts/4t8sFLLK...
- VeejayRampay 14y agoGoogle+ is the most thriving dead platform of the web. People keep on calling it an empty playground and it keeps on growing. Man are people going to turncoat on this shit if it finally makes it HUGE some day.
- taligent 14y agoGoogle can try and force Google+ down the throats of every unsuspecting Gmail or YouTube user. But you know what it isn't an authentic sign up. It is "tricking the user". And it may work in the short term but it sure as hell won't work in the long term.
- VeejayRampay 14y agoYeah, I can see that. I don't know about you though, but I've had the feeling that people really are engaging more on Google+ than they were before. And it's a different demographic too, one that I like better. More technical people and more refined discussions. Just my opinion though, nothing about Facebook per se.
- blablabla123 14y agoGoogle+ encourages Blog-style postings. (I don't know how they do it, but it seems natural -- more natural than on FB.) After all Google+ is pretty cool for people who don't want a private life, unfortunately I don't belong to this group.
- saraid216 14y agoThey do it by not bringing up the word "friend" everywhere, actually. Compare Wordpress versus Livejournal; the latter is practically a synonym for emo angst, even though there are strong intellectual posts on the site, but the former doesn't have such a connotation. The problem with having a network with your friends is that there's a natural echo chamber that inhibits really high quality discussion. It's not impossible, but it's a lot harder. By touting circles as a way to follow completely random people, smart people who want smart posts will naturally gravitate towards other such people and it causes a network effect: at minimum, lots of sharing; at maximum, heavy duty responses. My favorite circled person in my 2000-odd list is some random academic in Idaho who I saw make a comment one day and decided to add. https://plus.google.com/112482032780181267192/posts https://plus.google.com/112482032780181267192/posts
- martinced 14y agoThis entire discussion here reminds me back when GMail touted 30 million users. "It's still a beta", "They'll never get as much users as hotmail or Yahoo! Mail!", "People just signed up to try it!", etc. Now they're the most used webmail and people aren't disputing it anymore. Same when they bought YouTube: "Google is going bankrupt, they bought a money drain, game over Google". On my statistically insignificant level, I do see my contacts (the ones who are both on FB and on G+) post more interesting stuff on G+ and less and less things on FB. The one thing people do still post are vacation brags "Been there, done that, 30 deg Celsius here, must suck to be at home for you guys" and the classic "I hate noodles, now I have diarrhea, life is a bitch" followed by "Like"s and "Be strong mate, you'll be ok soon". That and people who hardly post anymore because of FB security concerns who then post stuff explaining how to harden FB security settings ; )
- graue 14y agoPeople liked Gmail, though. It was a product everyone loved, a major upgrade for webmail. Google+, on the other hand, has some cool features but is also a cudgel that Google is beating us over the head with if we want to post YouTube comments, Google Local reviews or Play Store app reviews, none of which ought to require using a real name. As Gmail users we're constantly nagged to "upgrade" to Plus. These are legitimate reasons to dislike G+; it's not just jealousy.
- zenuts 14y agoi think you are missing the point. using real names decreases spam as was a known problem with app reviews/ratings on play store. i do agree that google+ would be even more awesome if they had post or reply as "anonymous" feature like in quora.
- taylodl 14y agoAnd we care why?
- opinali 14y agoI'm not sure where GWI gets their information, but the number 343m seems a good match to G+'s "total actives", as the last result we shared publicly was 235m but that was almost 2 months ago. The number of G+ accounts was already much bigger due to migration, but the number of "stream actives" (people who actually used plus.google.com, or the mobile clients, in the last 30 days) was lower at 135m (again, on Dec 6). Current numbers are bigger, the stream actives may or may not already be in the ballpark of GWI's claim, but AFAIK we didn't yet share new numbers after Dec 6. Rest assured though that when we officially share "stream active" numbers, it's real stuff no tricks. GWI's comparison is difficult because not all social networks disclose the number of strictly active users -- how many people recently checked their stream/profile/whatever. Most notably, Facebook only publishes the biggest stat of total number of open accounts.
- opinali 14y agos/profile/timeline
- zenuts 14y agoi still remember how people dismissed facebook b/c "everyone was on myspace" or that an average person would never use twitter. google+ is bound to grow b/c people love google products and the new google is trying to integrate these products for a better end user experience. as a heavy google user i can easily see that.