Shared publicly  - 
 
Really? G+ seems just fine to me. Why is it if something doesn't change the world in 30 seconds it is deemed a failure?

G+ has had a spectacular rise. It will probably level out now, but so what? I use Facebook, G+, Twitter, LinkedIn. They all serve a slightly different purpose for me. Probably true for many others too.

At this moment in time, it strikes me G+ has a much better signal-to-noise ratio in the tech circles than Facebook or Twitter. If it got more popular I would probably use it less. :)
5
Mathias Magnusson's profile photoGary Myers's profile photoDavid Grimberg's profile photo
4 comments
 
The article starts with stating that Google has bet the company on Google+. Meaning the author thinks that Google defaults if Goole+ fails? As a result, the article lost all credibility in the first sentence.
 
The functionality keeps being extended. The Hangouts on air will appeal to a lot of up and coming performers.
And the Aussie PM started using it last week.
 
I've pretty much dropped out of using Facebook in favor of G+. Like +Tim Hall said the signal to noise ratio is way better here with G+ than with Facebook. I'm fed up with all the Zynga and other 3rd party Spam that Facebook generates.
 
Gynga or whomever becomes the dominant 3rd party apps/games provider for G+. I know G+ has games already, but the fact that I haven't seen any game related Spam in my news stream is a point in G+'s favor.
Add a comment...