4 ms·

> Didn't Google learn from Buzz that the world didn't want another social network of the kind that already existed? I guess not. I disagree - I think a lot of

> Didn't Google learn from Buzz that the world didn't want another social network of the kind that already existed? I guess not. I disagree - I think a lot of people were expecting exactly that[1]. But I think the big mistakes were a_ forcing every Gmail/Toutube user to use it (and with real names, which was even worse), and b_ stop halfway and claim "it's not a social network, it's an identity service", essentially giving up. Had Google stuck to the "Facebook for those that hate Facebook", I think it could have worked. [1] http://xkcd.com/918 http://xkcd.com/918

joesmo 11y ago
That's possible, but it would have required proper execution from the Buzz, and later, the G+ team. From a security / privacy point of view Buzz was worse than Facebook almost instantly, though it clearly tried to emulate Twitter feature-wise. Considering that the security / privacy angle was the reason most people who didn't like Facebook didn't like Facebook, Buzz failed miserably, exposing conversations and connections that its users didn't want exposed. That was even more of a mistake than the real names issue as it instantly destroyed credibility in the network (at that time I don't even think Buzz had been completely rolled out). At that point, at least, a shrewd executive would have realized Google's inability to deliver a proper social network (as if the Youtube social experience didn't already indicate this) and not started G+. Either way you look at it, G+ was an avoidable failure with years of warnings that it would fail and at least one defining failed preceding network (two if you include Youtube).