Comments on: Has Google really learned that much from Buzz and Jaiku?

By: Solomon Garner

Solomon Garner — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 02:17:52 +0000

I think Google is right in creating a good product and putting effort into it. The users-decide-the-features thing that worked with Twitter (and apparently Facebook developed that way too; is that what you’re saying?)— that’s not going to make people switch from Google+ to Facebook now that Facebook is monstrous. That would work if Facebook weren’t monstrous and people were trying out this fun thing called Google+ and it grew from there. But that day is probably over: people are going to have to rethink how they grow a social network. They need features first and then people. Now I’m not saying that if they build a good product people will automatically come, but Google should definitely start with building a good product. As for how to get people to come, I have no brilliant ideas on that one.

By: Kyle Lyles

Kyle Lyles — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 04:19:27 +0000

Google Voice is a free VoIP phone service that is unmatched in the marketplace. I’ve been using it for nearly two years. Free domestic phone service? Love it!

Are you talking about Google Voice Actions aka Voice Search?

Voice Search recognition accuracy is 4% higher than Nuance’s that Siri uses. That is a massive difference, much more so than the % appears. Siri is not the speech reco – Apple pays Nuance to develop the speech reco. Google’s Speech reco team is superior to Nuance’s, coming from the original Nuance and their predecessor SRI Int’l. Nuance is actually an amalgamation of several companies bought by ScanSoft, and renamed Nuance when they bought the original Nuance, but the key people left because ScanSoft is hated in the industry.

Your future vision of where the market will go with Android is hilarious. Are you an Apple fanbois? Sheez, you’re really clueless about what you deign to speak with authority.

By: Kyle Lyles

Kyle Lyles — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 03:28:12 +0000

Horse potatoes!

http://www.disruptiveconversations.com/2011/07/fascinating-chart-of-growth-of-google-relative-to-facebook-and-twitter.html

By: Kurt Thams

Kurt Thams — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:24:35 +0000

We are lauding Steve Jobs for *not* listening to customers and giving them what they thought they wanted, but are critical of Google. A variant of the adage that the winners write the history?

By: harish

harish — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:59:14 +0000

Google has several instances of products that’re good, really good and prescient, but somehow don’t blow the market away.
Google Voice had so much going for it; it could’ve really beaten Siri. Nopes, that didn’t happen.
Android has so many small faults of design; eventually the market will veer away from it. They are just not seeing the future.
I doubt Buzz/Jaiku (both could’ve been twitter killers) did anything for them to really learn their mistakes. They saw what Twitter could do but didnt design the product well.
Google+ is much better and well thought through. But somehow it seems that there’s something Google didn’t think through.
With Facebook, you’re quite sure that the emphasis is on sharing. For Google’s myriad products, a central focus does not shine through.
I think in the end this lack of focus will be their undoing.

By: Waheed

Waheed — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:00:17 +0000

Google+ Now become Successfully improve features

By: David

David — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 05:06:35 +0000

Google+ is not a success and Goggles own staff will tell you so. The numbers dont lie. 40 million world wide is a failure. Growth is much too slow. Users dont understand the product. Defaults are all wrong. No stream just for who I choose but frustrating circles which are a one by one selection. Porn to the N’ th degree. Cut and paste not working in comment boxes. Mobile Translator not integrated. No communication with users. No wonder Facebook is keeping its numbers as no one is here to talk with. A great idea done by people who aren’t themselves members yet!

By: Bruce

Bruce — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 03:33:54 +0000

I disagree, Facebook was successful because they made a better product then its competition at the time. It sported a better interface, worked faster, and had more useful and interesting features. The interface was better, simple and clean (just like gmail when it came out). It had features people wanted: Tag people in photos, See relationship status, recommend friends. Facebook also marketed itself by going for specific targets that would jump on it, mainly being University bound in the beginning.

Later on, the addition of games helped gain even more market share, but mostly had people staying on it for longer period of times. I doubt anyone ever joined or joins Facebook, because of the apps built on it.

Google+ for now I find has done things more polished then Facebook, but it is lacking a lot of features, and does not market itself as well. If they address these, they have a good chance.

By: Avatar Odin

Avatar Odin — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:55:18 +0000

google+ is successful as it is. it could have been more successful in terms of people-numbers, but the bottom line is an increase in over-all revenue across google products.