4 ms·

Is "security" your first priority, or is adding features your first priority? How about uptime? How about profitability? Only one of those can be your first

Is "security" your first priority, or is adding features your first priority? How about uptime? How about profitability? Only one of those can be your first priority, so which is it? I think Google+ is also one of their first priorities.

RivieraKid 12y ago
> I think Google+ is also one of their first priorities. If they're smart, it's not. The aggregate value Google+ provides is negligable compared to their other services.
- MattCruikshank 12y ago
  I upload photos to Google. I want to chose who I share them with, that's Google+'s Circles. I also upload videos, create documents, write blog posts, etc. If I couldn't chose who I share those things with, I wouldn't be using those things. The value G+ adds... makes those other services usable.
  - RivieraKid 12y ago
    > The value G+ adds... makes those other services usable. For you. The aggregate value Google+ provides is negligable compared to their other services, such as search, maps, email, YouTube, Chrome or Android.
    - MattCruikshank 12y ago
      In Search, I see results I personally +1d. I also see blog posts from friends in my Circles. In Maps, I see reviews of places written by my friends. I rarely share YouTube videos publicly. Most of my videos are shared privately with Circles. Google Play shows me reviews for Aps from people I've Circled. That affects my Android use.
      - RivieraKid 12y ago
        I'm not arguing that G+ doesn't have value for you. I'm saying that it has negligable aggregate value compared to other Google products. That's why it shouldn't be a priority. For example, I'd say that I use G+ more than 95% Google users and I wouldn't mind much if it disappeared.
  - barrkel 12y ago
    I deleted my whole G+ account just so I could make an anonymous YT comment. FWIW.
Ensorceled 12y ago
That's a silly argument and shows a complete misunderstanding, or at least naive view, of product development. Security, uptime and profitability are all table stakes. Not priorities. Google+ just went from table stakes to priority #2.
- MattCruikshank 12y ago
  Knowing who you are, knowing you you like to Follow, knowing who you like to share with, those are "table stakes," to use your term. Google didn't know who you were, who you followed, who you shared with, and so Google+ looked a lot like a product to you.
  - Ensorceled 12y ago
    I think you are too emotionally involved or don't play poker and missed the reference. If Google+ is now a feature that divisions can choose to integrate or not, it's not table stakes. No silo of Google gets to choose whether to be secure or not or what level of scalability or whether they'll decide to be profitable or not.
    - MattCruikshank 12y ago
      It's table stakes for a company to know how to do social integration. Not all products that a company offers need social integration.

RivieraKid 12y ago

> I think Google+ is also one of their first priorities. If they're smart, it's not. The aggregate value Google+ provides is negligable compared to their other services.

MattCruikshank 12y ago
I upload photos to Google. I want to chose who I share them with, that's Google+'s Circles. I also upload videos, create documents, write blog posts, etc. If I couldn't chose who I share those things with, I wouldn't be using those things. The value G+ adds... makes those other services usable.
- RivieraKid 12y ago
  > The value G+ adds... makes those other services usable. For you. The aggregate value Google+ provides is negligable compared to their other services, such as search, maps, email, YouTube, Chrome or Android.
  - MattCruikshank 12y ago
    In Search, I see results I personally +1d. I also see blog posts from friends in my Circles. In Maps, I see reviews of places written by my friends. I rarely share YouTube videos publicly. Most of my videos are shared privately with Circles. Google Play shows me reviews for Aps from people I've Circled. That affects my Android use.
    - RivieraKid 12y ago
      I'm not arguing that G+ doesn't have value for you. I'm saying that it has negligable aggregate value compared to other Google products. That's why it shouldn't be a priority. For example, I'd say that I use G+ more than 95% Google users and I wouldn't mind much if it disappeared.
- barrkel 12y ago
  I deleted my whole G+ account just so I could make an anonymous YT comment. FWIW.

Ensorceled 12y ago

That's a silly argument and shows a complete misunderstanding, or at least naive view, of product development. Security, uptime and profitability are all table stakes. Not priorities. Google+ just went from table stakes to priority #2.

MattCruikshank 12y ago
Knowing who you are, knowing you you like to Follow, knowing who you like to share with, those are "table stakes," to use your term. Google didn't know who you were, who you followed, who you shared with, and so Google+ looked a lot like a product to you.
- Ensorceled 12y ago
  I think you are too emotionally involved or don't play poker and missed the reference. If Google+ is now a feature that divisions can choose to integrate or not, it's not table stakes. No silo of Google gets to choose whether to be secure or not or what level of scalability or whether they'll decide to be profitable or not.
  - MattCruikshank 12y ago
    It's table stakes for a company to know how to do social integration. Not all products that a company offers need social integration.