4 ms·
OT My recollection of the G+ scenario is that they stunted it themselves - for whatever reason. By the time the people I knew actually had access I'd lost inter
by aidos 13y ago
OT My recollection of the G+ scenario is that they stunted it themselves - for whatever reason. By the time the people I knew actually had access I'd lost interest in waiting for my friends to show up. They arrived to find that after a month nothing was going on and they lost interest. I'm not sure how it's doing these days but it felt like a massive missed opportunity.
- darth_aardvark 13y agoCompletely agree with this. Me and some other friends were legitimately excited for Google+ when it was released as beta but couldn't get an invite. By the time it went public nobody cared enough to fill out a profile.
- drzaiusapelord 13y agoDont worry, if you use gmail, youtube, or android you already have a profile ready for you. This idea of shoving everyone into G+ as your default google sign-on and identity is pretty controversial. Most everyone I talk to about it finds it annoying. So they went from being exclusionary to being almost mandatory. Not sure what the long term plan is here. Google probably doesn't know either. They rushed a facebook clone for their own reasons and now here it is, a virtual ghost town.
- egypturnash 13y agoalso see "nymwars", pretty much my ENTIRE pseudonym-loving social circle hopped onto G+ with great enthusiasm, only to be chased off and/or fragmented by Google's REAL NAMES ONLY policy.