Shared publicly  - 
If a social network falls in a forest…

What are your thoughts on this?
James Jung's profile photoDaniel Tomek's profile photoDaniel Crossley's profile photoMaurice Griffin's profile photo
There was no outage in my service.
If a second rate news service makes a false outage report in the forest...
My personal reaction was: It's Google, it will be back in a few minutes.
I've been on Google+ all morning and even was in two separate Hangouts On Air. There was no outage. I have no idea what you're talking about.
The outage wasn't very widespread.  I only know of one other user who experienced it of the several hundred I interacted with this morning.  This article gets an F-.
Also worth noting the outage was rather early for most of the U.S. 
Great article title, but ultimately meaningless, the outage was brief, not-widespread, and US only - but that's not even the real reason. G+ is a service that people are not "on," such as FaceBook (as the article alludes) - it's service that you poll. 

Most people probably just experienced a quick "cannot connect to service" in the G+ viewers, tried again and connected.
It wasn't completely down for everyone. You make it seem like the site went down, much like that tree in your picture, when really maybe just a leaf or branch that fell off. I only experienced problems when searching. I didn't have any issue reading the stories in my feed.
I was watching awesome videos of meteors on G+ this morning. Didn't experience any downtime. Maybe the issue is that the downtime was isolated?
Dan O
Funny but stupid, especially if you understand the power pf G+ and actually use it.
I've become recently very active on G+, mostly due to Ingress. Mostly seems to be a place where I connect with new people based on interests, rather than Facebook where I don't like to friend anyone who isn't actual family, friends, or at least acquaintences.
I was under the impression that G+ is still growing quickly where as FB's numbers are starting to drop.
Regardless of the image, these things happen. No civilization lasts forever; social networks aren't an exemption. As one falls, another one builds up.
If G+ went down, I'd be less distracted. If Facebook went down I'd also be less distracted but would also be unable to reach certain people who I don't always have up to date email/phone for.
Did Google go down? No, Did Gmail go down? No, Did G+ go down for all of 20 minutes? Yes - I am sure if FB went down for 20 minutes there are billions of cat pics/gifs that will be fine
Techcrunch, its clear no one on G+ likes you and that you don't like G+ ...
Got about halfway through and it seems biased against google plus already, and the image alone being posted here seems designed to just fish people.

It's quite possible noone noticed because it went down in a time when barely anyone's online anyway or wasn't off for very long. Either that or it was fairly localised. Maybe all.
+Christopher Ducra " if FB went down for 20 minutes there are billions of cat pics/gifs that will be fine" that is extremely funny!
Im here :-) And i think I would miss the site if it woulb gone. I come here nearly everyday.
But it is a bit diffrent for me than facebook. I dont realy have a lot people to follow i actualy know. None of my close Friends is useing it. I come here to find links to articles and to and funy stuff. Its not lik Facebook, but i do use it more often then facebook  
Tweet about it and compare responses, then how about you get back to us.
I think you need to be very clear that there was a partial outage in some parts of the world.  If it was a complete, global outage of G+, I think this would have been a different story.  I have been using G+ constantly since 8.30 this morning (yes, I'm aware that's over 12 hours!) and I didn't notice a single blip.
Terrible article. Already commented on the blog.
I didn't experience any outage. With that said, terrible article. I think some tech journalists are just not techy or social media savvy enough...
A good representation of the crap tech reporting I have grown to expect from TC.
Does the photoshoping technique of this post bother anyone els? 
I think this TC writer does not understand how people use FB, G+, and other SNS differently. G+ can't replace FB until all my friends join. FB can't replace G+ until it respects privacy as much as G+.
How do you know? Your "golden boy" writer Alexia emo-quit G+ month ago and her top story from today is the Harlem shake video. Journalism at its finest.
I think it's time to move to engadget, arstechnica and leave tech crunch in the company of daily mail and gizmodo.
Google+ is not as hip or established in the public eye as Twitter, is a long way from being a behemoth of Facebook scale, BUT it is a long term play by Google, who have no need to make money off it directly. Since it is so polished at this early stage, and Twitter and FB are going to need to find more and more ways to monetize (read: make the user experience annoying with ads) I see a good future for this platform, once they get better APIs and perhaps some rebranding.
Add a comment...