Forgot your password?


Displaying poll results.
Yes -- and it's great
  6617 votes / 18%
Yes -- and it's OK
  9882 votes / 26%
Yes -- and it's lame
  1835 votes / 5%
No -- but I'd like an invite
  7348 votes / 20%
No -- and you can keep it.
  10991 votes / 29%
36673 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.


Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @04:16AM (#36730854)

    I don't get the technology community. It seems like google do what they want with you data they get away with it. Google+ doesn't do much more for your privacy than facebook or myspace. The other day people were up in arms about yahoo scanning emails but we all know google has been doing it for years, whats the difference?

  • Re:facebookg+ (Score:5, Interesting)

    by molnarcs (675885) <> on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @06:57AM (#36731470) Homepage Journal

    facebook is miles better than g+. g+ is just another me too social network. almost every feature is identical to fb, and video chat in fb is much better because skype does it.

    Care to point out where I can extract my photos from facebook in one click (download a single zip file)? Care to point how to export my facebook profile data in a standard and open - json - format? Where can I download my connections and contact information? Where can I download my posts and store it locally? All one click of course. G+ does that [], and much more.

    Circles run circles around group management in facebook, and I already have skype, but skype doesn't do what Hangout does. Besides, Skype is owned by Microsoft now - not really future proof for people using alternative operating systems. Hangout uses open protocols, and it's much, much cooler than Skype in many ways.

  • by Anrego (830717) * on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @08:33AM (#36731954)

    Of course, the other point is the question of trust. Can people trust Google?

    This is kind of my issue. A few years ago google+ would have been just enough to push me into the whole social networking thing. As others have joked, it's a facebook that's not facebook. At present though, I no longer have that kind of semi-blind trust of google that I once did.

    Don't get me wrong, I still think that stacked against all the other big players, google comes out looking pretty good. They are however no longer spotless. They are big and established and making a metric ass-tonne of money, and now have the requisite amount of bad press, pseudo-evilness, and people that just plain don't like them because they are big that comes with it.

    If I had to choose between google+ and facebook there would be no contest... but I don't really know if I want either yet.

  • by mcvos (645701) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @11:09AM (#36734366)

    I agree with this. Google might have a somewhat questionable business model, but as a company, I trust them a thousand times more than Facebook, Yahoo, Microsoft, or any other giant. Also, Google gives us more in exchange for this privacy invasion than any other giant.

  • Re:facebookg+ (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Zebedeu (739988) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @02:08PM (#36737530)

    To me the killer feature is the asymmetric relationships (a-la Twitter).

    The difference to Twitter is that the posts are much richer (a-la Facebook) since they can contain much more information.
    This transforms G+ into, essentially, a blog framework where people can follow you. Kind of like using an RSS reader for people who don't know what RSS even means.
    It's good for readers since your posts will show up in their normal feed, and for authors since they can have an idea on who their audience is.

  • by hedwards (940851) on Tuesday July 12, 2011 @05:15PM (#36740684)

    The difference is that it's easier for Google to promise a certain level of privacy and professionalism in terms of how that information is handled. They know exactly what's being done with it. So, if they screw up they screw up, and you know who screwed up. But with FB, who knows who it was that abused the information, could be anybody, you'd probably never know.

    That doesn't necessarily make Google any better, but there is a certain amount of accountability that comes from being the only party that's handling the information.

This is now. Later is later.


Forgot your password?