19 Comments

Summary:

Google+ is the talk of the town. It is on everyone’s lips, even though not everyone has access to Google+ just yet. Epipheo Studios has created this awesome tongue-in-cheek video to explain what is Google+ and why eventually we will all end up using it. Enjoy!

googleplusfeature

Google+ is the talk of the (tech) town. It is on everyone’s lips, even though not everyone has access to it. And despite Google’s stingy invite policies, apparently 20 million have signed up. Google+ is drawing enough attention that Facebook backer Peter Thiel’s Founder’s Fund might post a thesis titled We wanted flying cars and we ended up with + to its website. Folks from Epipheo have created this awesome tongue-in-cheek video to explain what is Google+ and why eventually we will all end up using it. Enjoy!

Video via Curiosity Counts

  1. Google + is cool but many people are in love with Facebook. If this video clip just present what Google + is, it will be cool. In Social Network field Facebook is giant, with 750 Million members.

    Share
    1. lol. that’s the thing. Nobody is ‘in love’ with facebook. I barely know anybody who are fanboys of facebook as a company as I do with people who are fanyboys of Google as a company.

      Share
  2. Social profile was the only thing missing in Google’s global database on people. Just think about what google will know about almost every internet user:

    - what is he or she searching for (search)
    - what sites she is visiting and bookmarking (Chrome)
    - where exactly is she hanging (android)
    - what is she emailing about
    - and now, Google knows exactly who she is and who are her friends

    Google knows everyting about you, and no other corp in the Internet has access to that amount of information. And again, he who owns the information, owns the world. Really nice job, Google)

    Share
    1. So how is this different than facebook?

      - what is he or she searching for (search) (FB partnership with bing)
      - what sites she is visiting and bookmarking (via facebook connect)
      - where exactly is she hanging (checkin /status updates via fb mobile app on all platforms)
      - what is she emailing/thining about ( fb sharing/posts)
      - and now, Google knows exactly who she is and who are her friends (fb obviously)

      So FB already knows everything about you, enough for companies to do a background check on you through your profile. So FB owns the information just as much google does!

      Share
    2. So how is this different than facebook?

      - what is he or she searching for (search) (FB partnership with bing)
      - what sites she is visiting and bookmarking (via facebook connect)
      - where exactly is she hanging (checkin /status updates via fb mobile app on all platforms)
      - what is she emailing/thining about ( fb sharing/posts)
      - and now, Google knows exactly who she is and who are her friends (fb obviously)

      So FB already knows everything about you, enough for companies to do a background check on you through your profile. So FB owns the information just as much google does!

      Share
  3. I love this style of video. Does the style have a name? What software do you use to make them? Does anyone have any links to tutorials suggesting how to do these?

    Share
  4. I find it “interesting” that someone would let Google to control all of their essential services. We are already enslaved to Google because of its search engine and Youtube. And now you want to put all your privacy information into Google+ as well?

    Share
    1. Not arguing your basic point about data, but in the details, you’re completely screwed up. Search? Video? ow is _anybody_ locked in to that? Just go to Duck Duck Go and Vimeo.

      Share
    2. And we are enslaved by FB because of its social integration with things you use such as netflix(outside US), facebook deals, embeded youtube/other videos you watch, your friends, your likes, your fans, your relationship, your job, all is known by fb, i don’t see how google knows less about you than facebook does!

      Share
    3. I’m confused. How is ANYONE “enslaved to Google”? Google provides things many of us use. If we don’t like using them, we certainly don’t have to. But the fact is, the things Google provides are useful and efficient. No one is holding a gun to your head saying you must use Google for a web search (and many do not). But the simple fact is, for me, it provides the best results for the things that I typically search for. I hardly call that enslavement. That’s just common sense.

      If I had a choice between several public transportation companies, and one got me 6 miles closer to my destination, *I’m* probably going to choose that one. That doesn’t make me “enslaved” to that company. It simply means they’re providing a service that better meets my needs.

      On top of which, your premise is somewhat skewed. If you think Google (or Microsoft, or Yahoo) doesn’t already HAVE all your privacy information, you’re fooling yourself.

      I’m not a Google fanboi… I just simply find many (though not all) of their products to suit my needs better than anything else.

      Share
  5. Is it a good idea for one company to know so much about people? Google is huge and aggressively going after platforms by building me too technology, it seems they want to capture it all? What about giving away consumer products to undercut companies that sell consumer products directly through retail. Google has a business model revolving around making money harnessing user data, they are a data collection advertising agency. what is so good about this? How does this foster transparency and open ethics? When has advertising been considered an ethical ambassador of good? It seems Google has an insatiable appetite, and can’t stop eating. As it continues consuming and making billions of dollars. Is it becoming a super power corporation? What about Eric hanging out more in Washington DC? I understand lobbying is common, and its said the US has the best government money can buy, but what is so good about this. There is law, and there are morals and ethics, and some words “do no evil” which to me means be good. Does anybody think this is odd? Really if you think about it and where this is heading, does it seem right? Why? If you think ahead a bit; think about our physical environment and how we tap the internet for information. The future; the web will contain enough info to where it will be holographic data. Increasingly becoming a parallel environment to our physical world. We will work play and entertain. A company controling that world? Why is it good? What about democracy? I’m obviously pretty ahead of the game here, but do you think a powerful company decides to give up power when they become more powerful? And it is curios to me why it seems Google gets a free pass, when other companies get hammered for trying to crush competition, What makes Google the exception? Or are people just blinded by googoo for Google? But then I didn’t understand toward the end of the Tech bubble in late 90′s,why people where still in a stock market frenzy, and popular media was pushing front page news of hot stocks to buy when manufacturing had already started into a recession. Or in 2006 onward, why in the heck nobody was talking about how the tax payers where being put on the hook for mortgages. But then here we are now again with the BS debate about the debt ceiling, and budget. Together we stand divided we fall. Where are morals and ethics? Why is there silence among the people who are effected the most?

    Share
  6. No one company/organisation should have a monopoly in anything.Hence the rise of g+ is necessary to break FB monopoly.I would say the same thing about the rise of bing,android and chrome OS,Mac OS and ios which are breaking monopolies.

    Share
    1. Why not? If a company competes fairly, and no one else can match that company’s products, then a monopoly is completely legal and expected. Currently I don’t find G+ compelling. And Facebook, unlike G+, is completely opt-in: the only data it has is data a user inputs. Unlike G+, which starts out by assuming everything already in one’s accounts is something one wants to share.

      (And I would argue that iOS was well on its way to becoming a monopoly until Android arrived. There was a lot more competition in phone OSes prior to iOS.)

      Share
      1. Well millions find g+ more compelling than facebook.Hence i said that just one company/product/service shouldnt exist!

        Share
  7. Google+ can’t destroy the network effect of Facebook. It’s not Google’s brand (despite their best efforts) and their new features are just that – features. Features that can easily be added to Facebook. To beat Facebook in social I don’t think you can just emulate and tweak it. You need a new paradigm.

    Share
    1. Facebook cannot be beaten, but they can be weakened considerably by google+

      Share
  8. There are a lot of loyal Facebook fans out there, but I think it’ll be interesting if Google can get this off the ground. Here at Infogenix we’ll be watching it closely.

    Share
  9. I think you are underestimating the power of google accounts. Those who use google products would find it attractive to log into one account and have access to their documents, email, chat, calendar and now their social network. I also believe that circles is not just a feature, it is a central element of organization that is extremely attractive. Once google plus tweaks this new paradigm of sharing content (like adding circles within circles), adds more google products (like google calendar), the only advantage Facebook will have is the enormous head start – which as Myspace showed, can be overcome by a superior product. The antiquated Facebook friend list and horrendous privacy issues of Facebook have opened the door for google plus. Kudos to google for thinking of a better way to do social networking.

    Share
  10. The “plus” in Google+ is how it adds up all the data of your life and creates a dossier on your whereabouts, personal habits, friends, associates, and your personal thoughts.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post