3 ms·
> -- which was portals. One stop shops to capture and hold audiences. Horribly ugly things filled with desperate salesmanships and terribly packaged content.
by olefoo 13y ago
> -- which was portals. One stop shops to capture and hold audiences. Horribly ugly things filled with desperate salesmanships and terribly packaged content.
Which seems to be the attractor that Google is tending towards now.
Not to detract from the cool things that Google does do, but their main web properties are looking tattered and the metooism of Google+ is not lost on the audience.
- bborud 13y agoI would argue that portals were a very different beast from the "social" sites of today, however I agree that the one-stop-shop is back with a vengeance. Curiously, Yahoo was perhaps a bit ahead of its time with a product called Yahoo 360 which did many of the same things that Facebook does today. But it was too much too soon and I think users were just overwhelmed. As for Google+, I think Facebook still does a better job at being Facebook. Google+ has a handful of small annoyances that push me away and it doesn't seem like Google are fixing them. I would like to use Google+ more, but for the most part I use Google+ for hangouts.