And another thing about that "Google+ is dead" guy...
I mentioned the ironic hilarity of another non-user of Google+ stepping into the trap of proclaiming Google+ "dead," which tends to result in getting overwhelmed with disagreement from said "dead" community.
Specifically, Steve Denning, writing on Forbes, trots out a list of 5 reasons why Google+ died (http://goo.gl/gKhLOc
His first reason is "Misstep #1: Spamming Grandma for cash."
Although he doesn't attribute his subtitle to me, he's quoting me from an article I wrote in April of 2011 slamming Google for getting social networking wrong again: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2507173/web-apps/larry-page-s-first-blunder.html
He does attribute another quote from that article as being written by "ComputerWorld."
This article appeared a few months before any of us even knew Google+ was coming, yet he references it as an example of why Google+ failed. He'll no doubt respond by saying the internal incentive for Google+ employees continued into the Google+ era.
Yes, the incentive program was dumb, but inconsequential. I doubt it had any effect, positive or negative, on Google's place in the social networking world.
In any case, I find it disingenuous for him to quote without proper attribution about Google+'s "failure" a guy who believes that it's succeeding.
Regardless of the hate campaign by the non-users and the echo-chamber tech journalists, Google+ has succeeded in the sense that Google created the greatest social anything ever, and it's still better than Facebook, Twitter or any other social network.
No, it's not as heavily used as Facebook. It also doesn't suck like Facebook.
What's YOUR definition of success?
Anyway, feel free to leave a comment for Steve Denning here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2015/04/17/five-reasons-why-google-died/#Google+(Photo not even remotely related.)