Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Down on Google day -- part 3

People keep inviting me to join Google+. OK, I'll check it out.

When I try to join, I get this:

I am now confused. Why should linking Picasa to Google+ have any bearing on me joining Google+?

I ask my buddy at Google. He says:
picasa is being rebranded google photos and will be basic part of google +. So that is the strategic reason google is doing it.
Google did not get great by rebranding. And by "strategic" I think he means some exec commanded it, because I don't think it's required by the Laws of Physics. It gets better.
The reason you should be ok with it is that you don't ever have to share anything in picasa with anyone in google +. Nothing is shared by default. You get to choose exactly who sees what. Very different than facebook.
So I don't have to share, yet I'm being forced to link a private photo account where I picked Picasa because I don't like how Facebook forces you to share all your photos. But he assures me that unlike Facebook I don't have to share my photos. But I do have to link my photo account.


From a customer perspective, being required to link your photo account suggests that you will have to share your photos (otherwise why bother requiring it??) Picasa's main advantage, of course, was that it was a great way to privately share photos. This whole thing is so bad from a product perspective, I don't even know where to start.

Google used to understand customer needs, but the drive behind Google+ as well as the new designer-centric design, it seems to be paying more attention to itself and other companies, not the actual customer.

Finally, I have yet to see anyone, anywhere, actually nail the use case Google does poorly at by Facebook does well at. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?


Blogger Игры рынка said...

Well, you sound like an old-timer. The world is changing. If it is not up to you needs or dreams, it does not mean it is bad.

Disclaimer: myself I also see little value behind facebook or google+ :)

3:09 PM  
Blogger winterspeak said...

LOL! The world has indeed changed, and it keeps changing! Once great companies like Yahoo!, AOL, RIM, MySpace etc. are shadows of what they once were.

I'm still sufficiently connected with the design community that I can recognize why Google made these changes, and the reasons are not good. They fundamentally do not recognize why Facebook has had the success it has, so confuse it with all kinds of other things (mix in rabid internal ambition, and you have the death of many a once-great tech company).

Quick hint: back when I did a project for Facebook, they were wondering whether to let people customize their profile pages.

9:20 PM  
Blogger Игры рынка said...

Well, I like the idea to align search and personal interests. Google clearly has an edge here. Whether implementation or direction is right or wrong - I do not know and leaning pessimistic. But what the heck. Google is famous for trying and killing if it does not work. Maybe in the end they will roll out something really cool. They have money, they have capacity and looks like they have a commitment too.

10:53 PM  
Blogger winterspeak said...

What you type into a search box IS what you, personally, are interested in in that moment.

Facebook actually fulfills a very different need.

1:37 PM  
Blogger The Arthurian said...

In the doldrums, Wint? Run out of economics to talk about? Would I be out of line, asking you to evaluate this for me?

I have no use for facebook, but the movie was good.

3:23 AM  
Blogger winterspeak said...

no, just really busy at work ; P

9:40 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home