[dgeorge]

(Original post by f1mad)
A UPS and how the users get to the service go hand in hand. That is, the number of users would increase depending on how great the demand for said UPS is.

As you said, Google+ to this day still haven't explained what the real purpose of it is. They try to portray the view of imitating the purpose of Facebook, that is, to section off each part of your daily life into "Circles". Whilst its adopters take the view of it, being a service that connects you with 'like-minded' folk.

Furthermore, creating the service based on invite-only was a ridiculous move. Google must've thought Google+ was bound to go viral: how wrong were they. The only way Google+ was going to go viral was, if there was a real incentive to be there that was not offered elsewhere. Clearly this was not the case. At first they attempted to create a re-built version of Facebook (which was clearly presented at that time - check out the promotions and advertisements), however, they failed at step one by making it invite only.

In 'social media' time is money. Effectively saying to the user: "get an invite or gtfo" goes in the opposite sense of that notion. I believe Google+ would've been a whole lot more successful, had they not be obsessed with the idea of invite-only; which back-fired on them to this day. 100+million users on Google+ is nothing to shout about, when it is plastered on Google.com - the most visited page on the internet.

I agree. I think they were a bit hasty in trying to make G+ go viral with the invite, when there simply wasn't anything pointed out that was specifically/radically different.

Google really botched this one, as it should have been easy to introduce a social networking site that would have easily tied in most aspects of people's internet lives (i.e. search, videos, email, etc).

With the cash in hand, however, I wonder if they will think later down the road about simply scrapping it and relaunching it as something else, since this has absolutely MASSIVE potential

[SpanishInquisition]

If all my friends abandoned Facebook for G+ tomorrow, that'd be great, but it'll never happen. Facebook has everyone's photos, messages, profiles etc. The vast majority of people just can't be bothered to switch when Facebook still technically works. Personally can't wait till Facebook is left to the annoying 12 year olds, like Myspace and Bebo before it, and we all move to something like G+.

[A.J10]

Just wondering, considering how much info facebook apps can access about you, could someone at google not make one to copy/paste your info and photos from facebook to g+?

There's probably some facebook T&C that prevent this though...

[SpanishInquisition]

(Original post by A.J10)
Just wondering, considering how much info facebook apps can access about you, could someone at google not make one to copy/paste your info and photos from facebook to g+?

There's probably some facebook T&C that prevent this though...

I doubt Facebook would approve that, it's basically giving away users to their best competitor.

[eimmas]

I personally think a huge issue with G+ alongside invite-only when it first began was that you had to be over 18. There are a huge amount of social media users under 18 at the time who I guess would've happily switched because of the potential the site had.

Google just seemed to alienate masses of potential users with the invite and age restrictions, in my view.

[Podcaster]

This is what happened to Google +

[tammie123]

What's the point when we have facebook.

[A.J10]

(Original post by tammie123)
What's the point when we have facebook.

Google tend to do things better.

[f1mad]

(Original post by eimmas)
There are a huge amount of social media users under 18 at the time who I guess would've happily switched because of the potential the site had.

Good point.

[Wookie42]

I've been using it since nearish day one, and similarly to you haven't really seen it pick up. I've got plenty of people in circles etc, but it hasn't picked up the general public market yet imo - I've mainly got other web devs/tech guys/people on my course at uni rather than school friends or whoever. Have to say, I am surprised it hasn't done better since most things Google does end up taking the world by storm, however I really can't imagine the mass market moving there just yet.

[lukas1051]

The problem is nobody uses it. It's good, and better designed than Facebook in some aspects, but it fulfils more or less exactly the same purpose, and nobody can be bothered to set up and update exactly the same account they already have on Facebook. I have Google+ and I have 4 people in know in real life as friends, so why bother even using it?

[f1mad]

(Original post by Wookie42)
Have to say, I am surprised it hasn't done better since most things Google does end up taking the world by storm

They've always failed when it comes to social.

[Wookie42]

(Original post by f1mad)
They've always failed when it comes to social.

Still, I think most people rather assumed Google+ would be 'the next big thing' or whatever.

[Bobo1234]

Google what? Nah sorry I'm still too busy using facebook.

[f1mad]

(Original post by Wookie42)
Still, I think most people rather assumed Google+ would be 'the next big thing' or whatever.

Don't see why. Google have failed numerous times in the past and I'm not surprised to see they're failing yet again.

[Wookie42]

(Original post by f1mad)
Don't see why. Google have failed numerous times in the past and I'm not surprised to see they're failing yet again.

Oh I don't know... maybe because Google are absolutely huge and all the media around then was hyping up how much their new social networking site was going to pwn Facebook? Idk, they don't seem to be failing too much though since they're worth a gazillion dollars, run the most popular email service, video site, search engine, blah blah.

[f1mad]

(Original post by Wookie42)
Oh I don't know... maybe because Google are absolutely huge and all the media around then was hyping up how much their new social networking site was going to pwn Facebook? Idk, they don't seem to be failing too much though since they're worth a gazillion dollars, run the most popular email service, video site, search engine, blah blah.

That means **** all, when Google have failed in creating a successful social service in the past (numerous times).

[Wookie42]

(Original post by f1mad)
That means **** all, when Google have failed in creating a successful social service in the past (numerous times).

[Fallen]

They really didn't think it through. Who is going to seriously join G+ when all their friends (y'know, the whole point of a social network) is on Facebook, along with all their photos and social history.

There is nothing majorly wrong with G+, but nothing revolutionary that would make enough people switch over from FB.

EDIT: If you disagree with me, why not reply so we can have a discussion?

[Fallen]

(Original post by Wookie42)
I've been using it since nearish day one, and similarly to you haven't really seen it pick up. I've got plenty of people in circles etc, but it hasn't picked up the general public market yet imo - I've mainly got other web devs/tech guys/people on my course at uni rather than school friends or whoever. Have to say, I am surprised it hasn't done better since most things Google does end up taking the world by storm, however I really can't imagine the mass market moving there just yet.

Google has many more flops than successes (and things like YouTube were bought by them because their own Google Videos failed).

Not that this reflects badly on them at all, it would be impossible to succeed every time, but that's the truth.