Shared publicly  - 
I predict that Google+ will go from 0 to 100,000,000 users faster than any other service in history.

Okay, that's a bold proclamation - here's why I think it will achieve that.

The service is great. It is timely. People are engaging with it like crazy. There are rumors that there are already 4.5m people. That might be high. It might be as low as 1m, or even lower, but my guess is that it's more than 1m people already. That already is probably the fastest growing service (0 to 1m) ever. Now it's not completely fair, since when Facebook started, and when Twitter started, etc. those were tiny companies, and Google is huge. However, the product is extremely well executed, and a lot of people are smitten.

The next year will tell. Will there be bumps in the road? Sure. Will Facebook and Twitter fight back with more innovation? Of course! But I'm saying that Google+ is already good enough, and the team on Google+ is being so responsive in a way that makes me believe they have a real winner here.

Let me know what you think. Am I being too optimistic? I can't wait to see how this next year in Social Networking plays out.
Konstantin Kladko's profile photobruno bisogni's profile photoMarlo Perez's profile photoPedro Donaire's profile photo
Its all about timing and google hit this market at exactly the right point.
I'm wondering if number of people is an arbitrary metric. Perhaps it's not how many people but how engaged users are. If there are 10,000,000 people that are 10x more engaged than 100,000,000 which is a better victory?
I'm not quite as bullish. It's a great launch, but it's not clear there's anything that will keep people here after they try it out.
I fear the moment the noise starts to add up, before Google implementes a proper solution to filtering a lot of those 100*10⁶ will leave faster then they came.
I kinda agree with you Bill..I know facebook is still a giant in Social networking arena but given Google background and faithful google users, I am pretty sure G+ will catch up very quickly.
+Bill Gross I'd agree that the uptake on G+ will be incredible. What's as interesting, however, is the speed with which Chrome has become a platform that accelerates the incorporation of new functionality.

In looking for an accelerant, Google+ has probably added more to the adoption of Chrome as a browser (and Chromium as a lightweight operating environment). It will be worthwhile tracking Chrome adoption in the next weeks.
I believe that people are getting slightly tired of facebook, and are looking for an alternative to it. I think Google+ is a strong contender for filling this void, and I wouldn't be surprised if your prediction pans out.
Bat Perez
One of the things that Google+ is doing that Facebook and Twitter have not quite done is asking in the beta group what their wants, needs and desires are. When you work with your test group like that and really listen it will only make your product better but will make it more successful...IMHO.
I just don't see the point of using the service without the additional features that Google has yet to bake into the service, like deep Google "office" integration. It's a good service and I hope it does well, but I don't see the need to defect from Facebook.

I think it is "unfair" to say Google+ will be more successful, because in the future Google accounts will include + anyway, so any new users to Google will already have a Google+ account. Is a large user base a fair metric for measuring the service's performance?
I agree, Myspace and Blackberries used to be giants as well, let's just hope that G+ doesn't get junked up in the future...
Agree completely, especially if they open up G+ to developers (even tiny bits of it to start with). Google+ is using some of the bits and plumbing field tested in GoogleWave, so its robust and should scale well.
David Din
Switching from Facebook to Google+ is a little bit like changing from Windows to Mac. A bit odd at first, but you will not go back.
it will be huge. In fact, if you look at the coordination of other services already: talk, mail, plus, cal. Its easy to see where they are headed. google+ is the new corporate portal.
+Rich Miller. Excellent point. I use different browsers dependent upon what site I'll be visiting/working with. For me it's a no brainer to use chrome here. It will be interesting to see the statistics on chrome usage related to google +.
I don't think the number of unique monthly users is a metric that matters in the slightest but it will be a lazy, misguided shorthand in the media about the relative success of the platform. Engagement is the key. Time interacting with the platform (not just logged in and on the site) and the nuanced structure of how that time is spent and the complex interactions that develop.

Will they reach 100 million really quickly. Yes. Have Google made it extremely easy for the 100 million to interact with the site even whilst busy doing something else? Absolutely.
I agree on that @Alexander Ainslie .
So far it's been great for professional circles; LinkedIn + Twitter + Blog. Family and friend circles still need to be proven. I follow professionals on Twitter but not on Facebook because the pro-content creates too much noise in my social stream. Not if, but when, Google+ figures out how to allow us to publish pro-content to our public streams without defaulting it into our family and friends streams will it be able to compete with the casual Facebook experience.
Reference the recent Facebook "We have an Awesome Announcement!!!" press conference. Zuck looked rattled.
Bill - Agree with you, but I think it's much simpler. All about that little red indicator button on the top right of google services ( right. Everyone uses Google, and Pavlov was right.
G+ has a unfair advantage over other web services, as basically it's just an addon to Google's existing web services, so it's a bit unfair to compare it's takeup rate to completely new services like facebook or twitter.
I think you are being optimistic. The market is not ready for two social giants and I also doubt there is a demand. I don't think Google+ make it to mainstream. The reason is simple "people do not need a second social network". And one more point: Product innovation is not sufficient enough to compete with facebook.
Bill I find it really interesting that you ask what we think about things but don't reply and don't @ people in general. That means you're not experiencing a big chunk of how these services work conversationally, which I think would give you some other insights. (But I also remember the speed at which you work and push things out so it doesn't surprise me :-) I share your general optimism about G+. There are many reasons the adoptions rates will be unprecedented but the main reason they will be so enormous is because data-based thinkers are seeing that the relational is driving everyone's behaviour (and always has). I still think we're very very early in the "socially conscious" web (meaning web builders are now aware that social behaviour is a major need). And @BatGirl Twitter did engage with people on the service a lot (in a more obvious way) early on in its development. ie. That's where the hashtags and @ incorporation came from. The numbers of people Google has engaging with us here is impressive and shows a massive shift for the company. Their mobile implementation will be really key and should be the next main thing (once convo on the platform moves beyond G+ and this experiences is simplified a bit for less hardcore nerds), IMO that drives numbers through the roof.
If Google+ isn't even clear about how many users they currently have, how can anyone accurately predict growth? Any way to gauge how many non-geeks are actively using it?
With a large base of Android users, ubiquity of Gmail usage and the power of social media to spread "good things", i would be really surprised if it didn't happen... The real challenge IMO is going to be getting to Facebook scale..
G+ is so easy to use and is so logically constructed, a quick 100m is entirely possible!
Bill do you think it can continue beyond that to 200m. 400m. 1 billion say 2015 ish.
I'm not sure I'm ready to jump on this boat yet. Sure, it's huge in early adapter circles as well as social media and SEO, but the real question is the general public. Even if they do come over, it will certainly be more than 1-2 months.

Integration is great - but think back to what we're integrating. How many twitter accounts are actually active? How many individuals really use twitter as it should be used? That's just one example - I think Google+ will be great for the professional sharing circle (to use Google's term), perhaps shift it off of Twitter, but I'm not sure the general public's going to be as committed.
It will be big, how big? bigger than Gmail is my first prediction. But until businesses can get on, it won't compete with Facebook.
Am I being too optimistic? ...
well may b yes may b no .. who knows ..
bt the road is nt smooth ahead .. FB n Twitter .. they r pretty old n hav learnt frm their mistakes ..
and i think hav better solutions in the box for any kinda mishap ..!!
I suggest that we all take a closer look at how easily we engage with each other in discussions. I believe that google has managed to give us the tools that actually invite us to make new connections fast and in a useful way.
You can decide to +1 any comment, follow the commenter etc. And you don't need to ask, wait and consider whether you really want to be friends. The stream concept and the profiles makes it easier to create a mutual relationship later - and this way it's not just a "personal publishing system" with comments. It's becoming a medium for developing complex social relations.
If the non-geeks get it, then G+ will surely be a big hit.
I do not see what is Google+ more than Facebook for the "average" user. Anyway for me is a platform that provides more value compared to facebook's value/spam. But is all about quantity of users when it comes to long term sustainability of a social platform, I guess. So, if Google+ ensures a steady growth of the platform 100k won't be a problem.
It appears that the G+ developers are actively pursuing user feedback and then acting on that feedback. (how un-Facebook like of them...) It will take a while to work through bugs and refining the user experience. So far the users seem enthusiastic about providing feedback and dealing with minor travails.

I was tiring of Facebook and I sense that many others are, as well. G+ is designed for adults. That makes a difference to me. I really enjoy the ability to post whatever I want, secure in the knowledge that I can direct my post to a preselected audience. It isn't all or nothing. G+ will continue to grow and refine. I really don't care how long it takes to get to a certain subscriber level unless it positively enhances my user experience.
M. LaFrance said... " I really enjoy the ability to post whatever I want, secure in the knowledge that I can direct my post to a preselected audience secure in the knowledge that I can direct my post to a preselected audience."

Illusion. Ask yourself this... What can the recipients of that so-called secure-in-the-knowledge, directed post do with it? Yep. Send it anywhere they want. Baaant. #fail.

Every bit of wind G+ takes from the sails of FB and TW is evidence that a future solution to displace all 3 is closer and closer.


p.s. usenet mastered threaded comments in the 1980's. G+ will catch up, but right now it's the "get-it-out-so-our-bonuses-will-not-suck-in-2011" service.
+Dan Farfan A bit harsh re: Bonus driven analysis. We live in a continuous development, continuous delivery software development paradigm. Get used to it. Core functionality and ingredients for a rich experience are here. Now they test, experiment and iterate.
I agree with this predict. Google plus is excellent and it should be successful
1. Making people wait to be invited and included probably upped the popularity of G+ massively at the start; exclusivity is a great ego-booster.

2. I've had a Google profile for years now so simply counting the number of profiles won't tell you how many G+ users there are.

3. People keep referring to G+ as Google's "social networking". For me, it's more like a conferencing system, just like cix.

4. Why isn't Stephen Fry on here yet? He's usually an early adopter.
@DanFarfan- I stand by my statement that I can post to a directed audience here on G+ and that my posting is not all or nothing, as it is on Facebook or Twitter.

Of course, if I am posting anywhere on the Internet (or distributing a printed memo, for that matter), the post can be distributed beyond the intended audience. Anyone with any sense is mindful of that fact.
Scott S
agreed - google+ isn't perfect but it is superior
I like Google+, but I think we need to see what more real people--the kind who aren't going to kill themselves to snag an early invite--think of it. All we know so far is that social-media junkies are fans.
Garry: (couldn't mention you as a whole lot of other Gary Knights came up, none with your picture) saw Stephen Fry mention that the entire world had been inviting him to play here. Wouldn't be too surprised if he is having a nose around incognito.

Re: 3, it isn't a social network it is a social layer and the power of that is only just being lightly scratched.
+Harry McCracken I think "normal people" will come on because it's easy if they already use Gmail. My question: does it have to be as big as FB to be successful? I see it more as an alternative to LinkedIn, with more engagement socially. LinkedIn is so transparent; everyone is trying to "use" each other.
I'm willing to agree. Oh, and I already have "normal people" in my streams. It's pretty neat how fast that came. I'm finding a much more diverse crowd in here than ever before, in any way you want to slice the word "diverse."
+Chris Brogan Agree, when you step out and Circle people outside your comfort zone, you can already see a pretty eclectic stream. Artists, photographers, musicians, cartoonists are all playing with the platform as are people who mostly share animated gifs and cat photos. Fascinating to see how they start to play in the space.
Google+ seems awesome, the only problem I have is convincing my non-tech savvy friends to move/use it instead of facebook
The number of users seems to be growing exponentially at the moment. I tried Buzz and Wave and they were nowhere near this growth. I think your prediction might even be an understatement. I look at my own online behavior: I almost never blog on my wordpress site anymore, I left Facebook a couple of months ago, I almost never log in to LinkedIn (and I've never liked it). I was an avid twitterer, before I joined Google+.
What we're seeing might be similar to what happened when Microsoft launched Internet Explorer many years ago. It killed everything else - goodbye Netscape, goodbye to everything except Explorer. It took years for other companies to start challenging Microsoft in that area. They weren't first with Explorer, but they used Windows as a highway. Just like Google now have access to all the Gmail users.
+Mark Holmes It's GaRRy with two Rs which should narrow it down a great deal. What I do when "+referring" to someone is look at their Profile photo then when I see that photo in the list I know I've got the right Mark Holmes, or whoever.

Yes, it's possible Stephen Fry is on here already as lord_melchett or something. Or he might be very busy at the moment. He's been tweeting about working on some film or other recently.

I know that G+ isn't a social network; it's just the phrase I've seen bandied about a lot, possibly by people who were attracted here by others using that phrase. And it's obviously more than just a conferencing system. Probably the only label it needs is "Google+".
I like it so far...and even though I'm a Google fanboy I'm a little hesitant to enter all my data into Google for everyone to view. On Facebook I lock down my data as much as I possibly can. Before Google+ I disabled my Google profile because I don't care for people I don't know to know to much about me and find me via a Google Search.

However I do see that Google has provided the user options to hide data or choose which data they care to share with user. Functionality wise everything needed is there...the only thing missing for me are users to interact with. So far the majority of people I know on Google+ are my friends who are tech savy. I do not see any "casual" or main stream users on Google+, however as with any new product user adoption takes time.
Bill, I've heard that it's 4.7M.

"What would a social platform look like if it was released now, not 7.5 years ago: Google+"
def. has the potential, but I see a few key roadblocks at the moment:

1. Yes it's better than Buzz and Wave, and yes they have a huge advantage with Gmail integration...but honestly it's still too complex a system for the average Joe. It takes too much (continued) work in it's current state to be something everyone is going to be doing.

2. It's unclear how open or closed the system will be until we see the first bits of an API...without the API, we are at the mercy of using everything however Google wants us to (which isn't always how users want to)...the API will be very telling on just what the service will/can become (how easy will it be for people to build custom clients? how easy will it be for people to use the service in ways that were never imagined? how easy will it be to build/play games? If it's easy for all of these things, people will continue to flock and engage here).

3. Google's advantage to date has been in 'finding' stuff, not 'generating' stuff...right now Google+ is almost entirely about generating stuff (and in fact, it's pretty darn hard to 'find' anything here) they evolve/tackle the problem of pointing out the right content to each user at the right time is IMHO the real key to their success. They should be able to solve this part of the problem better than anyone else right now (especially better than Facebook and/or Twitter) and that would go a long way in servicing the 80% of people that just want to read stuff and rarely (if at all) generate stuff. [[disclosure: I'm biased here as this is pretty much what my project is aiming to help with as well]].

...anyway it's still early in the game and so it's hard to say what will happen...but I'm glad I'm here and along for the ride...and I'm glad that players like Google continue to get back in the game as it helps to keep pushing all the social services forward!
Well I predict that Seesmic moment has arrived.... cos Tweetdeck won't be fast to implement G+ on their platform since now owned by Twitter.
Google+ seams to be what people are looking for, look out Facebook.
+Garry Knight There you are. Sorry for totally missing the spelling of your name. Some kind of surfacing of people who have commented within a post would likely help for the unobservant like me. ;)
+Kevin Marshall I actually think Google have done a pretty good job of wrapping the complexity in a simple, accessible interface. I do hope that they resist the urge to over complicate it at the behest of an admittedly tech savvy early adopter group. We can all see power user additions that would be fantastic but I hope they first deal with the nuances that may add friction in the simplicity of the platform. When they do add more power user features I hope they continue to concentrate on making them simple to access, use and understand. ... also don't underestimate the capacity of wider humanity to adapt. ;)
Not in my country, I hope. Lol.
+Mark Holmes It would be nice if the drop-down list were more context-dependent. If I hit the + key when commenting in a thread, I want the names of the people who have already commented in the thread to appear at the top of the list rather than just have the whole thing in alphabetical order. Since it's relatively unlikely that two people with very similar names will be commenting on the same thread (unless it's a Bill Gross post... oh, wait...) then the name I'm typing will be very near the top. I've now seen Mark Zuckerberg's name twice while commenting on this thread... :-)
Exchange of dialog and ideas will drive G+ to 1,000,000,000. That's why its so good right now...a very engaging userbase.
+Mark Holmes agree, posting is fairly simple (though there is still a bit of confusion to most people as to just who can/will see something when they post)...the reason I say it's still too hard is mostly on the consumption side of's not jut an interface play, but also one that speaks to time and do I know about the stuff I would be interested in, from the people I'm interested in, ignore the things I wouldn't, and do it all with as little effort as possible...feels like G+ is heading in the right direction but there's def. a long long long way to go to make it 'good'....just my humble opinion though ;-)
The fact that I can 'reset' my online social efforts and ditch those guys I haven't seen in 18yrs let alone spoken to in the last 5 without having to go through the embarrassment of dropping them from my friends list is a welcome relief. No more ignoring the 'friend' requests from folks I met once in a kitchen at some party. Now I can have my cake and eat it - I can share with only the folks that matter and ignore the ones that dont. I can follow without sharing. My FB engagement lacked any commitment to my family as I'd end up having to share (at an earlier time certainly) family pics with folks that they would never be shared with. The fact I can share by email to non users, with ZERO commitment from them to share or engage back is a huge relief. 100mil? As we say in the UK - Easy-Peasy-Lemon-Squeezy
G+'s social graph is based on email and not friendships. It de-facto makes it spammy in nature. One can notice a strong early engagement, based on everyone's willingness to explore new pastures and also build a strong presence on a new social network. However, the vast majority of G+ users are the early adopters. I doubt G+ sticks with the larger population. Talks of reaching 100MM users becomes irrelevant if not attached to user-engagement metrics. I would argue that many of us might grow tired of the service within 30 days!
+Kevin Marshall Agree to a point that there is a way to go to make it frictionless but I also think, even amongst the tech savvy here, people are taking a little time to understand the nuance inherent in the platform and their ability to be in control of their experience. Users will surface how they want to interact with the platform over time.
I think Google+ will fragment the social media space, not necessarily take over Facebook as the dominant social platform. With an asymmetrical content sharing model, Google+ will likely be adopted by teachers, over-protective parents etc. I really see Google+'s philosophy of content sharing (ie Circles) as so markedly different than Facebook, that each platform will find its niche. Social is big enough for two incumbents, I firmly believe that.
I think it depends on how the product is realized by its users. It seems like GOOG is trying to create a new social network on the enterprise end, but with real social context... (Something an Oracle couldn't do.) If it succeeds it could then potentially create the social contextual targeting its always been dying for... Then Google will have succeeded with a true killer product.
I agree and I think the trumpcards lacking probably in FB and twitter's game is an extremely robust and adaptable underlying substructure
Maybe so, but this argument doesn't prove it. The current user growth rate number is significantly influenced by the fact that early users are highly socially connected and active connectors and influencers. This makes the network appear to grow faster than it really is growing because the rate will not be sustained when the doors are opened to the less connected general user base. It is an old trick...and it doesn't work.

Noting also that 100 million users means nearly 50% conversion of the existing gmail user base I believe. This is very aggressive and not supported by real numbers associated with previous success stories,i.e. gmail itself.
Google+ will easily reach 100 million accounts, but most will not be diehard users. It will be something they create as an internet placeholder (yes, I know Google Profiles existed before Google+) simply because Google is pushing it hard on their homepage/other properties. That does not necessarily mean it will be 100 million actively engaged users.
+Pete Touschner Agreed. The issue at stake is that G wants our social experience to evolve in the G ecosystem. However, the very G ecosystem is not built on friendships but rather email relationships that are full of noise.
+Karim Guessous The asymmetric nature of the platform rapidly allows it to diverge from your email based graph. Mine are nothing alike within a few days.
I want one place to manage my life and relationships. Google will be that place for me. Social networking is a feature, not a product and works best IMO when integrated well with all the other things I NEED to use everyday (e.g. search, email, IM, maps, etc.).
+Mark Holmes That's what G hopes for indeed. However, I doubt asymmetry would translate beyond the early and hyper adopters! As long as FB is a product focused organization, they will keep on iterating and innovating enough to keep their happy customer base sufficiently engaged. G+ is the same as FB trying to build a marketplace. Consumers at large associate URLs with certain defined utilities. G is search and FB is identity/social -
Add the -1 Button and you have pure gold.
People also forget one thing... Google hasn't made any advertisement for google+ yet ! I mean when they will display an advert on the main page of like they did with Chrome, the adoption will be huge !
They really don't need because Google is already the homepage of millions of people and its just a matter of click the +Name (or +You) link at the top left.

Besides, they own for the short URLs when they unlock them, and I'm sure the root directory of will also redirect to
+Clement M Wonder how they will manage advertising on YouTube. Push the private video sharing angle? Of course, they will cannibalize some of YouTube's user base.
It is worth noting that Cityville went from 0 users to 100M users in less than a month. Do you really think Google+ can beat that?
+Nick Caffrey At first I bet they just simply add a Google+ button to the current Share options they have.

As is the buttons for sharing on Facebook and Twitter are the first two options the users will see on YouTube. There will also be +1 button (similar to the Facebook Like button) if you are signed with your Google Account.

The next step is an actual Google+ button to share the video on your feed. There will have to be some sort of option to choose which groups to share with or make public. I assume this Google+ button will be promoted to the first button ahead of Facebook.
If they use your +1s from the wider web to populate Sparks and you can share from there, Sparks will have greater utility.
I've been on Google+ for about 12 hours and I like it! I hope the Big "G" does reach 100 million users ASAP! I wish I had some invites to share!
It may be the fastest from 0-100 million simply because it will start to look like just a feature set attached to all of the other things linked to a Google Account. Unless someone here differs radically, a new account wasn't even created. This is, essentially, an extension of Google Profile as far as I can tell, which started with Buzz. They attempted to simply add everyone to Buzz, by just adding it to GMail. This is ever so slightly different, but it still is essentially a message stream attached to an existing account.

And Gmail really was invented mostly as a lure to get people to create an identity so that google searches could have something to tie to.

Since I currently can't explain to anyone why they really need this, I am going to wait until Google can explain it for me.

(But then again I don't use Facebook for much, and never did except for sharing photos with the family.)
I just tweeted this, but I suspect Zynga (or if we're only talking products, Cityville) will beat Google+. I think this not because Google+ isn't a great product, but because it's using email as the primary mode of invitation. Although it's a highly viral product, it isn't able to take advantage of other "word of mouth conduit" channels like fb or twitter in the same way that Zynga has been able to. I'm not sure how long it took Cityville to reach 100m, but my guess is that it was lightening fast.
+Sarah Tavel Correct me if I'm mistaken ... but I think Google is an investor in Zynga, and therefore, we will see Zynga integration in G+ sooner rather than later.
+Bill Gross I could not agree with you more. The way G+ is growing, I am pretty confident it would have nearly 200 million users by the end of the year and 100 million in the first 100 days of its launch.

Here’s a link where I posted it a few days ago: Currently, I think G+ has more than 7 million users. I am doing a simple math here -- roughly 10% of my FB contacts and 6% of my linkedin contacts are now on G+. There are 750 million FB users and most of us here are the early adapters and 10% of 10% of 750 million is around 7.5 million.

Another way to look at this is that Mark Zukenberg had around15,000 followers on G+ when +Paul Allen estimated the G+ users at 1.7 million. Mark currently has 110,000 followers or seven times as many as he had just aweek ago. Assuming the 1.7 million number is correct, and the penetration of Mark is around the same level, then I would guess that G+ now has seven times as many users or more than 11 million.
I have to disagree with you Bill. History has shown that people are not comfortable hanging everything off of one platform no matter how good it is. This is a replay of Microsoft, IBM, and now Google. I don't want one company to have access to so much information about me, especially a company who is the foremost authority on data mining and targeted advertising. As everyone knows Google makes 99.9% of it's money from targeted advertising (AdSense and AdWords).

I would much rather see a clear separation of concerns when it comes to the cloud with plenty of healthy competition. I am going to participate in Google+ but will continue my use of LinkedIn, Twitter, Skype and Facebook.
Well... this post made it to the top of Techmeme already. That too is a pretty good sign.
With Google having over 200 million Gmail users worldwide, I predict that Google+ will go from 0 to 200,000,000 users faster than any other service in history. +1
Well I hit the limit on uploading contacts to circles at 5K. Will see if that is temporary or a hard limit.
Bill, as Eric Schmidt mentioned last week ( - they have "millions" of users already. I think you are absolutely right - and its true that comparison is not fare, it almost like comparing FB launching a new feature and it immediately having 100mm people using it. G+ is another feature that Google launches on their network.

I keep wondering however, what need G+ solves that I can't get with FB/Twitter. So far it seems just cleaner integration of private/public social graphs. What are your thoughts?
Hi Bill, I heard on a video somewhere that Google+ got about 7 million sign-ups in the first 24 hours. Regarding the reasons why I think G+ will be so dominant, please take a couple of minutes to read my post over on Quora. Should we make a new verb, "Happy G'ing"[?]. :::
I like it, but now they have all our info, no need to mine with adware for it anymore. It's like we gave them the key to all of this instead, better Google than Facebook though IMO
It's not that people so far seem to really like it. It's that nerds so far seem to like it. Seems like a service Google has designed for people like themselves. They claim to make social networking simpler, but what they do it add layers of complexity that don't offer much additional functionality over FB. And it is visually uglier than my blog ca. 2004 and only slightly more attractive than my website ca. 1994. It has an aura of nerdy and sad about it.
I am so much curious about Google+. There are some rumors about it that 'Google+' can be the next generation social community. What do you think?@Bill Gross Google is a huge company so that they have to walk fast than Facebook, Twitter. Because Facebook and Twitter is based on only social community. But Google+ is a part of other google products. In this sense I can guess that Google will get much more users in Google+. One thing I have thought that why people go other site because if anybody sign up with any of the Google Products then S/he will be able to use all the things that is exists in web. i.e. Email, Business, Community, Collaboration Tools etc... So Google+ will grow than faster. And Google never should think other social community as it's competitor. what do you think... share please.
With the explosion of G+ there needs to be a way to verify someone's identity. I know others are doing this, because of so many impostors out there (do a search on Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and others).
G+ is the one of the most important project for Google. Roger Fidler ( who spoke about Ipad moree than 10 years ago) told us that there are 3 communication domains: Interpersonal, Broadcasting, Document. The document domain was googlezied with the search engine. the Broadcast domain will be googlezied with Youtube. And Interpesonal? guess?
Roger added "The Internet and consumer online networks will meld with telephone and satellite/cable-TV systems to form a seamless, global computer-mediated communication service".
So if Google will be able to boost G+ on the mobile and to increase the end user experience of these 3 domains, I think that in 10 years it will became a sigle touchpoint for many of us.
I don't think Facebook needs to "fight back with more innovation" I think Google+ does.

It's going to be quite hard to get the older generation of parents and grandparents to switch from Facebook to Google+. Which makes it quite hard for many people to completely move-over to Google+. So far Google+ has no features that would get the older generation to use it over Facebook. Also, Google+ is complicated and hard to use. Overall, I'm not sure if less tech savvy people in general will enjoy Google+. Facebook's interface feels friendly while Google+ feels more cold and calculating.

"Google+ is already good enough" Is that really what Google want's to have, a social network that's meh just good enough? I think Google can do better and they most definitely will have to if they want to be truly engaging.
Rose P
Last week I was superexcited at g+ (the fact it belonged to google and was better than buzz) ..two days ago I was spellbounf by all it has to offer in terms of logic with circles and security settings and the ways in one could share. Today..I think to may have its users...and is great but there is the 'social' element missing. Its got its features, prolly will catch fire..but in time people will stop comparing it to facebook..and compare it to twitter. Unless they have something totally new to offer us once it is officially released.
100M yes )) Another prediction - they will never go to 500M people )

Another prediction - twitter will become history within 3 months ) Twitter IPO will never happen )
bill i don´t understend how you calculatin this numbers and it is true the google + pass over 10,000,000 user today?
This depends on the response from Facebook and Twitter. We must also take into account the treatment of sensitive data security by Google, hence depend on the user response.
Add a comment...