G+ was competing with Facebook and Twitter? Over what? The title of most reviled internet presence?
Lawyers, Janitors, the guy making the coffee every morning, the guy drinking all the coffee every morning without making new one,... not just the programmers, you know?Alexander Kirby said:Really? It takes more than 1000 people to develop and operate a social network? What do they all do? I mean, social networks change things up a little like once every 6 months. Does that really need hundreds of people to make those decisions and write the code for them? I know they need A LOT of servers... but how many people does it really take to operate them?
Then again, knowing these large companies most of that number could well be their lawyers.
This is why I despise rumour being published on news sites. Is it so hard to wait until things are confirmed? Will the rumours really generate that much traffic?All this information, however, is pretty dubious. Google has issued a statement that Gundotra's departure will have "no impact on our Google+ strategy."
Err....I already had elsewhere. Almost every service they provide I was doing somewhere else already. Hell, the primary function of the social media was to rival Facebook, and I already have Facebook, and most of my friends use Facebook. Why would I switch to a service nobody cared about and nobody used? That's why they decided to force it, and that's why people are rejoicing. Because I doubt more than a couple hundred people would have cared if they hadn't shoved Plus integration into our other services.Shadow-Phoenix said:Hearing people rejoice to thinking it;s dying clearly never liked the service, didn't bother to look elsewhere.
Even though (even) if this rumour is true (and it's not), the service isn't dying, they just won't be shoving it down our throats. That's not death, and it's not even "apparent death." Unless the part you like is that they're forcing integration on people that like it. In which case, I'm wondering what similar service you're going to find to celebrate.PS, if you're going to parade it's apparent death then that by all means gives me free rights to do the same for something you've loved in return, wanna treat me like that and I'll do the same in return.
I'd settle for them ceasing the breaking process. By and large, I have no issue with YouTube as it is. Well, the stuff they've done that are superficial changes. I remember when YouTube was a reliable player, though, and that's where I have issues.epicdwarf said:Hopefully this turns out to be true! I still remember people claiming that Facebook was the new myspace because of Google plus. Google plus just got in the way of everything. Now all Google needs to do is to start fixing youtube.
Fucking millions. That's probably the sort of realization that triggered this.SonOfVoorhees said:Thing is forcing someone to sign up for google+ doesnt mean those people will actually use the thing. I wonder how many dead accounts their are? lol
Sure, as long as you've been forced to use it. I see this line of argument a lot with maths, some people love maths and yet it's socially acceptable to outwardly hate it. It's because it's compulsory. I don't care what people like in their own time and I'll probably respect their feelings about it, but you have to admit my hating G+ is not analogous to you hating something I like that you don't have to have anything to do with.Shadow-Phoenix said:PS, if you're going to parade it's apparent death then that by all means gives me free rights to do the same for something you've loved in return, wanna treat me like that and I'll do the same in return.