Quote :

"but i like the idea of being able to send super fast messages between groups of friends on my phone, whether that's for meeting up somewhere with a group or just bullshitting with groups of high school and college friends like a lot of them did with BBM (literally the only thing they used it for). old technology, but it's something facebook doesn't offer. taking and uploading pictures in google+ is also much faster and easier than with facebook mobile. i can access photos, along with both the options to take a picture or upload one (which is automatically uploaded from my phone anyway if i have the option selected), and i have the same option from my stream. with facebook you have to navigate all the way to the home screen, select photos, then upload, and it usually takes longer than it should. the whole process is just easier and takes less time while not having to deal with an app that frequently shits itself. "

Sounds like you should just get a better phone.

7/11/2011 6:21:18 PM

Quote :

"Sounds like you should just get a better phone. "

or i'm talking about the differences in functional capabilities of two different apps?

7/11/2011 6:26:04 PM

See, one of the nicest things about Windows Phone 7 (especially with the Mango OS) is that if I want to upload an image to Facebook, post a status on Facebook, chat with someone on Facebook, or view my pictures (or my friends' pictures) on Facebook, I don't have to even go near the Facebook app. All that stuff is integrated. Not a single one of them has me tapping more than four times and at no point do I have to wait for an "app" to load.

I can also create groups and text them all at once.

So again, it sounds like if that's stuff you want to do, maybe you should just get a better phone.

7/11/2011 7:27:27 PM

^ i don't know enough about you to know whether or not that's a serious post

just learned that g+ allows you to edit posts, too. that's nice.

7/11/2011 8:17:10 PM

I'm dead serious. Your biggest issues with Facebook seem to revolve around how it integrates with your phone and saying that Google+ has made this experience much better.

But I have absolutely none of these issues.

All that aside, all the best features of Google+ seem to revolve around people actually using it, but since it's a relatively closed beta, people can't. And, in my experience, even when people can access it, they're not really using it.

I don't know, I'm just not impressed in the slightest.

7/11/2011 9:46:23 PM

^ if you go back to my previous posts, you'll notice my biggest issues with facebook are not just how it integrates with my phone. my issue is facebook has had a shitty user interface for a long time that has become increasingly more difficult to manage and navigate over the years, both with privacy settings and general layout. the issues with the mobile app for android are just an extension of that. but keep on keepin on with your windows phone 7 and defense of facebook. stay on the cutting edge.

and i can create group texts and send them all at once, too. there are also better methods of reaching multiple people.

[Edited on July 11, 2011 at 10:16 PM. Reason : .]

7/11/2011 10:15:41 PM

just to speak on the merits of sparks, i just entered jack white and josh homme as interests and learned i can instantly get any recent articles that have mentioned their names just by clicking them on the side of my stream. as a result, i learned the raconteurs are going to play a show in september and that josh homme did a collaboration with eddie vedder and 2 members of the strokes on an upcoming album featuring collaborations with lots of other artists i'm into. can your facebook do that?

7/11/2011 11:06:56 PM

i honestly have no problem controlling facebook's privacy settings exactly like i want it.

friend lists = circles, then put the lists in the categories of what you do or don't want them to see in the settings. simple enough.

and with comparing google+ and facebook, seeing how everyone is already on facebook and established and all that, it does nothing for me if they are equal, google+ has to bring something new to the table

7/11/2011 11:26:50 PM

I think you all just have some shitty friends on FB... I like getting the random shit posted, for me at least it has lead to a LOT of things to do here in Atlanta that I might have overlooked otherwise, e.g. "holy shit, Ben just bought tickets to a beer festival, I didnt know about that, let me buy that shit too". I have blocked all the things/people that annoy me so its fine now.... whereas G+ is kind of neat, the circles interface is cool but aside from that I dont really like the interface anymore than FB, probably less so just because I am not familiar with it, and it seems like people are posting on it just to do it, like "hey, I posted 5 things on FB today, might as well go put one random one on G+"

7/11/2011 11:38:46 PM

^ +1

[Edited on July 11, 2011 at 11:58 PM. Reason : ]

7/11/2011 11:58:02 PM

Quote :

"friend lists = circles, then put the lists in the categories of what you do or don't want them to see in the settings. simple enough"

i think it goes a step farther, though. as far as i know, you can select who can't see your posts on facebook, but i don't think you can micromanage it at the time of the actual post the way you can with google+. for instance, say i wanted to post an article about nc state football. if i have a circle with nothing but my nc state friends, i could choose to only post the article to appear to that particular group of people. my friends who didn't go to state wouldn't care about it, so i'm not cluttering their stream with something irrelevant to them. but maybe you can do this on facebook. i'm not entirely sure.

Quote :

"it does nothing for me if they are equal, google+ has to bring something new to the table "

while it is largely the same, google+ does bring other things to the table that me and other people have been discussing in this thread. while none of these features alone are particularly groundbreaking, they're definitely nice to have, and i've already found facebook to be less appealing without them. i thought sparks would be a stupid gimmick that i wouldn't use initially, but as i said earlier, i found it to be pretty cool in about 10 minutes once i saw how quickly and easily i can get news and information on my interests. on facebook and twitter i'd have to rely on whoever moderates a page that i "like" to post something i may or may not really care about. now those things are displayed on the side of my stream, and it only takes one click to get the latest information. that's something that anyone can find useful.

Quote :

"I like getting the random shit posted, for me at least it has lead to a LOT of things to do here in Atlanta that I might have overlooked otherwise"

living in the DC area, i've found more interesting things to do through reading DC blogs and following their twitter accounts. i don't know that i've ever found anything to do around here from someone posting it on facebook. not saying it would never happen, but the activities i've found have all come from other sources.

Quote :

"the circles interface is cool but aside from that I dont really like the interface anymore than FB, probably less so just because I am not familiar with it"

you kind of are familiar with it since it's so similar to facebook, and facebook could change their interface next week anyway, and then you're in the same boat.

7/12/2011 8:19:19 AM

Yeah, but pretty much everyone I want to keep up with is already on FB and already uses it regularly. Most of the people on G+ are people from here, and a few "techie" friends, hardly any "normal" people, and the ones that are on G+ are pretty much just using it as a novelty for now, posting maybe once a day just tonsay they did.

7/12/2011 9:16:21 AM

Are the G+ mobile apps yet?

7/12/2011 9:17:31 AM

Quote :

"but i don't think you can micromanage it at the time of the actual post the way you can with google+."

You can do exactly this, whether it be lists you create or individual people.

Seriously, how is it that every 12 year old girl on the planet has figured this out, but you're struggling with it?

7/12/2011 9:21:30 AM

^Dude, you are seriously way too butthurt over this shit. WTF?

Seriously, MOST people are NOT familiar with what you can do in Facebook because it's not user friendly and it changes every fucking 2 months. 12 year old girls don't know anything about security and they post every thought that passes through their little minds and share it with the world. Nowhere is it obvious that a little lock below your posts designates who you're sharing it with. Granted, perhaps you have absolutely nothing to do and therefore stay on FB 12 hours a day but for most of us, hopping on to G+ & typing something out and seeing EXACTLY what circles it's being shared with DIRECTLY below the text box is a whole lot easier than noticing a little lock that says fuckall about anything until we click on it to see what's up. When I go to my albums and see what photos I'm sharing, I see exactly who can see it right at the top in G+. In FB, I have to edit the album to see who can see it.

If you don't understand how this is simpler & easier to use then you're a fool. Shit man, if you don't want to use it, don't. Just stop being an idiot about it and saying that there's no advantages to anyone and acting like FB is a paradigm of UI design & user friendliness. There haven't been uproars each time they change something for no reason.

7/12/2011 10:16:24 AM

Quote :

"Seriously, how is it that every 12 year old girl on the planet has figured this out, but you're struggling with it? "

just since you claim that every 12 year old girl on the planet has figured this out, and since apparently i am unaware of the feature, i've gone on facebook to look into it. it's not difficult to figure out, but in my opinion it's easier to do with google+. i guess i was always just more concerned with who couldn't see any of my posts period than i was with digging deeper and deeper into the settings on facebook to get anything done, so it's hardly a struggle so much as becoming aware of a feature and being able to utilize it quickly and easily with less of the hassle that comes along with doing anything with user settings on facebook. now that i've seen the same feature used in two different formats around the same time, i still think google's works better. like your example with facebook and your windows 7 phone taking less time than mine or whatever, doing a thing with google+ takes less time and fewer clicks than it does with facebook.

Quote :

"Nowhere is it obvious that a little lock below your posts designates who you're sharing it with."

thank you. i just happened to figure out how to do it because i clicked the lock icon out of curiosity. i almost came back in here and asked how to do it at the risk of looking like an idiot just to prove that there's nothing obvious or intuitive about the process other than thinking, "oh. uh. a lock icon. security? settings? maybe this is what i'm looking for, but i don't know." like you said, G+ shows me right below the text box and allows me to click. much simpler.

[Edited on July 12, 2011 at 10:21 AM. Reason : .]

7/12/2011 10:17:16 AM

So what exactly did you guys think the lock did? I mean, you mouse over it and it jumps out with a sharing setting (for example, mine says "Friends Only"), so I'm not sure how you could both be so oblivious.

It's not a huge mental leap to go "oh hey, it's a lock. Maybe it has something to do with how locked down my posts are".

7/12/2011 10:40:08 AM

Seriously man? It's a tiny grayed out padlock that's small enough to not be noticeable. Further, if I'm sharing something, I'm not necessarily thinking "OMG, I don't want Frank to see this post, I better lock him out". Often, I'm thinking "Dude, Sarah, Jake, & the rest of the crew from XYZ are going to love this". Why the fuck would I look for a lock in that case? That's right, I wouldn't. For most people, that little lock is completely ignored because it's small and you don't use it very often. With G+, I have a bright green circle that shows who I'm sharing with and a link beside it that says "+Add more people" right below the box I'm typing in. How is that not simpler? How is having the option hidden behind a small icon a better (or even equal) option?

Wait, I get it. "I can do that on Facebook if I spend 50% more time so G+ isn't better."

7/12/2011 10:57:19 AM

Quote :

"Dude, you are seriously way too butthurt over this shit. WTF?"

7/12/2011 11:01:33 AM

Quote :

"So what exactly did you guys think the lock did? I mean, you mouse over it and it jumps out with a sharing setting (for example, mine says "Friends Only"), so I'm not sure how you could both be so oblivious."

Quote :

"It's a tiny grayed out padlock that's small enough to not be noticeable"

7/12/2011 11:01:41 AM

So what I'm gathering is that if the lock were bright green, you'd both have been able to find it?

You guys seem to think I'm a huge fan of Facebook, which I'm honestly not. I just don't see the benefit in getting super excited about a social networking site that doesn't have an active, nor large population. If that changes, cool -- I'm in on the ground floor!

But really, I'm sorry that you've both found Facebook so difficult to use. I didn't know people actually struggled with these things.

7/12/2011 11:22:57 AM

I didn't notice anyone that is super excited. Yes I like it but if all social networking sites disappeared tomorrow, you wouldn't see me shed a tear. I'm just glad that there's an alternative to FB to actually works better (for me).

I'm pretty sure it's also abundantly clear that I found the lock but that doesn't mean a damn thing about it being easy to use. You can ignore it all you want and keep shouting "But there's a lock!" but the argument is for G+'s overall ease of use compared to FB's lack of user friendliness. I don't care if they make it flash purple & green and 5" tall on the screen. It's still a poor alternative to having the information directly below in plain english.

Be a smart ass all you want but find me one person that thinks Facebook is EASY to use and has a great UI and I will show you an idiot. By your reasoning, there's no use for power windows & mirrors in my car. Hell, manual was pure simplicity to use so why should I switch to the others? Windows XP worked just fine. Why should I upgrade to 7? And seriously guys, my Android 1.5 phone is great! There's no reason to upgrade to 2.3! Overall though, I really enjoy my Windows Mobile 6.5 phone. It may take 20 minutes to change some options but you're crazy if you think it's hard!

7/12/2011 11:47:05 AM

Quote :

"So what I'm gathering is that if the lock were bright green, you'd both have been able to find it?"

it's not an obvious thing that screams "control which groups of people see this thing you are going to post!" i was unaware that anything changed and just continued posting the way i always posted, and i'm sure millions of other people did the same thing. people don't automatically associate a lock with locking down your posts or whatever. i wouldn't really be thinking "security" when i'm about to post an article on my news feed. other people's minds don't work the same as yours does. in other news, water is wet, the sky is blue, etc.

Quote :

"I just don't see the benefit in getting super excited about a social networking site that doesn't have an active, nor large population."

because it has all the same features and more, only they're better in layout in execution. i've wanted another option like this for years. there was orkut and diaspora, but neither of those really ever had much of a chance. people use google for a lot of other things, and it's finally a viable alternative to a social networking site that has frequently frustrated me and thousands of other people for a long time.

Quote :

"But really, I'm sorry that you've both found Facebook so difficult to use. I didn't know people actually struggled with these things. "

it depends on what you mean by "difficult." if you mean i give up halfway through an attempt at doing something, then no. i utilize a lot of facebook's functions, but i can't tell you how many times i've thought, "this just seems like it shouldn't have to be this complicated," or "god damn it, they changed the privacy and account settings AGAIN, so now i have to relearn the layout AGAIN," or "oh great, i just read in this article that i have to go into my settings (hooray!) and opt out of ________." not to say that i may never have to do that with G+, but i don't think it will be as big of a headache since it looks like they've really done their homework on things that work and found ways to improve the things that make people frustrated. google has a pretty good track record of LISTENING to its users when they have issues. facebook does not.

just because you find facebook a pain to navigate around at times doesn't mean you're functionally retarded.

[Edited on July 12, 2011 at 11:52 AM. Reason : .]

7/12/2011 11:49:35 AM

Quote :

"Are the G+ mobile apps yet?"

Like what? The G+ mobile app on android at least launched with the website

7/12/2011 1:07:49 PM

was just checking out some comments on reddit about people already preferring G+ to FB. noticed this comment in reference to being able to control which groups of friends see your posts:

Quote :

"I agree, and I like Google+ approach better, it's just that I have seen this brought up as as advantage over Facebook several times now. It seems most people don't even realize Facebook can do this...which might be an indication that it isn't obvious enough on Facebook."

glad it isn't just me.

7/12/2011 1:25:38 PM

usability is an extremely large factor in the success of a webapp. something like ^ is a prime example. facebook is obviously a huge success in its own right, but it shows that even the big boys don't get everything just right.

so far, i'm liking the G+ deal but i still see it taking a very different role vs facebook.

7/12/2011 2:45:17 PM

i scrolled through all my posts from the end of april through today, and i noticed that a majority of my facebook posts share some sort of content, whether it's a news article, a video, a picture or music, and of course there are comments on other people's posts, too. i just think that, other than the current lack of users, G+ is the better social media platform. although i'm sure not everyone i know will jump over, i think a fair enough number will, and the people who actually care about the content i post would probably be among them. i'd really have no more use for facebook if that ended up being the case, and i think i could finally just walk away from it for good and never look back. also, this

7/12/2011 3:14:12 PM

^whoever made that graphic is either quite biased and/or stopped reading the terms after the legal notice

An almost identical statement to the Facebook statement in question is listed in the Google ToS, section 11.1, which is applicable to picasa and all of Google's other services.

"By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services."

http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?hl=US

This is a very common stance for any web company that allows its user base to share content of almost any type.

7/13/2011 3:02:06 AM

fair enough, but it was from the picasa legal notices. i see where it's a bit misleading, though. this is from picasa's terms of service

Quote :

"Your Rights Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Picasa Web Albums. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Picasa Web Albums and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Picasa Web Albums, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content through Picasa Web Albums, including RSS or other content feeds offered through Picasa Web Albums, and other Google services. In addition, by submitting, posting or displaying Content which is intended to be available to the general public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services. Google will discontinue this licensed use within a commercially reasonable period after such Content is removed from Picasa Web Albums. Google reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion "

i'm not sure how long a "commercially reasonable period" is (could be 10 years for all i know), but it's my understanding that google will at least stop using any content i've uploaded on picasa at some point after i remove it from that service. i have to delete my facebook account in order to do the same thing there. and even if i delete it, they still lay claim to any content i shared with others unless they delete their accounts as well.

7/13/2011 8:49:13 AM

Quote :

"i have to delete my facebook account in order to do the same thing there"

No, you don't.

7/13/2011 8:55:27 AM

eh crap. guess i misread that last line. still, i have a hard time believing facebook's license ends as soon as you delete the content given their sketchy privacy practices in the past, but i don't really have the time to look them up now. i probably will when i get home.

7/13/2011 9:12:24 AM

^^Correct, you have to delete your account or delete the pictures at which point FB will still continue using them as long as any other people still have them in their accounts. That is not the case with G+ who may very well use them for 50 years. Both are somewhat bullshit.

My biggest issue is the terms of FB that allows them to transfer & sub-license your photos. I don't understand the need for that except for actually selling the photos.

I think they're both something that most people need to not get worked up over but neither is "good".

7/13/2011 9:56:08 AM

On the "facebook can already do that, though" points being made here and elsewhere with respect to grouping your contacts and selectively sharing things:

I realized yesterday and pointed out on reddit that the reason G+ is still better for me is that it's forcing me to organize my friends as I add them. Circles are central to the experience and will have been since the service's inception. Many times I've tried to sit down and group my facebook friends, but there are just too many of them and it would take a lot of work to get it right. I'm sure a lot of people have or will put in the time to organize their facebook friends, but I didn't and I just don't feel like it. A better UI for this functionality in facebook would go a long way, but since I haven't been doing it the whole time, it's still going to be a non-trivial amount of "work".

7/13/2011 11:09:52 AM

Friends > Manage Friend List > Hover over Friend's Name and Select List.

I'm also pretty sure that when you accept a friend now, you're given the option to put them on a list right away.

I will say though that it is annoying that you can't put them on a list directly from their profile page.

7/13/2011 11:47:26 AM

^^ Agreed. I'm not taking the time to sort through 150 people to group them. The only time I do is when it's someone that annoys me. Then they either get dropped or, if it's work/family related, they'll go into a group to separate them without having to worry about the "why'd you drop me on FB" crap.

7/13/2011 12:15:17 PM

Quote :

"Friends > Manage Friend List > Hover over Friend's Name and Select List."

I get it, I know exactly how to do it. My point is I don't really feel like doing that for the hundreds of "friends" I've accumulated.

7/13/2011 12:18:31 PM

Quote :

"the "why'd you drop me on FB" crap"

when i purge my friends list (which i do every couple of months) and this comes up, i just say facebook messed up and did it

7/13/2011 1:17:05 PM

^I've done that a few times but it seems to always result in another friend request which eventually results in a "Hey, you didn't accept my friend request.." That's when I started putting them into the ignore group.

7/13/2011 1:29:36 PM

Noticed this for the first time:



Content created by G+ users displays with your profile pic in the search results

7/17/2011 9:57:19 PM

i don't really use facebook chat, but the changes they made to it seem pretty moronic to me. looks like there's been a pretty fair amount of backlash and frustration with it. i don't know why you'd roll out something like that right after a major competitor arrives.

7/19/2011 10:31:15 AM

Anybody got a spare invite?

7/21/2011 1:25:48 PM

Got it thanks, if anyone needs one I'll pay it forward.

7/21/2011 2:04:14 PM

/thread

12/10/2018 5:17:13 PM

So should I change my Google password? Can they decode the password from the hashed password?

12/11/2018 5:58:10 AM

^ if it's "been a minute" and/or you're not using 2-factor: probably a good time to update things. Actually, any time you feel like asking that question the answer should probably be yes.


Hashed passwords can't be "decoded", that would be encryption. Hashing only goes one way.

But possession of the hashes eliminates any throttling or lockout periods that might be used as an additional layer of security. With the hash they can try over and over as quickly as they like.

Which doesn't make it inherently insecure - well implemented hashing is still cryptographically secure: it would take bazillions of guesses if you used a well-crafted password.

The problem is in that well-crafted password. People still use their dogs name with 2-digit year and an exclamation mark to get by with the absolute minimum on the password field and then use the same password in 17 different places and every shady fart sound app in the play store.

12/12/2018 12:07:05 AM

Googe + is clearly going to win this race to be the top social media platform.

12/12/2018 8:59:16 PM

^^ thanks!

12/12/2018 11:19:04 PM

The life of this thread pretty much mirrored the life of Google+

12/14/2018 8:22:34 AM

Quote :

"The world has changed since facebooks rise and I predict that barring a ground up rewrite, google plus will kill Facebook within 5-7 years (an Internet generation), just like Facebook killed myspace. Most Internet access will be mobile, and google was built with this in mind, Facebook wasn't. There is too much legacy code in Facebook that it's going to seem glitchy and clunky next to plus. I already like the google ui better based on what ive seen on coworkers that have it. "

Quote :

"Facebook was the Apple of social networks in their time. Facebook was more limited but it was neater and cleaner. Obviously it wasn't about who had more people in the beginning. I'm not saying Facebook is dead by any means but I guarantee we see an inflection in facebooks development due to google. And social networks, like every new technology, has had a huge insidious effect on society. It's had as big an impact as tv or phones. It's amazing how people, esp younger people, don't realize this. "

I was wrong about Facebooking being killed, but right about social media being insidious, mobile internet, and facebook changing a lot.

12/17/2018 11:17:21 PM

I dunno how anybody used Google+ and thought "man, this is gonna be huuuge!". Google itself has some smash hits, but this one never seemed that way.

12/17/2018 11:19:39 PM