

Google+: A few big improvements before the New Year - nidennet
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/12/google-few-big-improvements-before-new.html

======
cydonian_monk
I really, really, really wish the Google+ Desktop site worked on my iPad like
/most every other non-Flash site on the 'net./ It's so bloated with heaven
know's what (JavaScript?) that all I get is a tantalizing preview of G+ before
Safari crashes. Even regular Google crashes Safari if I'm logged in on my iPad
(thanks to the new Google Bar?). G+ is the last 'Desktop Only' website I use.
(Outside of work, at least.) This makes it considerably less useful for me.

I'd even be happy with a native iPad app, as long as it supported some of the
'desktop only' features like Shared Circles.

~~~
nullymcnull
Not sure why this should be downvoted; G+ really is an atrocious mess when one
tries to view it in most mobile browsers. This all applies to Android too,
amazingly enough. If Google wants people to _use_ G+, then they really do need
to get it on a javascript diet -- or at least start seriously testing it,
starting with their own devices.

I got the Galaxy Nexus on release day. Upon trying to visit a G+ post that was
linked here (the one about Goog making some guy's daughter cry), it
consistently crashed the browser. Every time. Within seconds of load, clearly
while doing js gymnastics. A friend with the same phone reproduced. Previously
I had seen occasional G+ page crashes or hangups on a 3.0 tablet (TF101), and
had a pretty dismal experience with G+ pages on 2.x, but this was outright
killing the browser on every single attempt to load it. Whatever the problem
was, it didn't go away until several days ago. And while it may no longer
crash, G+ is still stupidly sluggish in the browser.

All of this on Google's new flagship ICS phone. Why would I put time into
engaging with G+, when it seems like they're drunk on javascript bloat and
have no one minding the shop on actual end-user experience? If people will
have a terrible experience or need to download a dedicated app to view my
posts, that's a critical fail. Nevermind these "big improvements'. Get the
basics done right first, goog.

~~~
laconian
If you're on Android, then why not use the Android app?

~~~
rhizome
Apps sometimes appear to be reinventing bookmarks.

~~~
laconian
Not the case with the G+ Android application: instant photo upload, background
polling, offline content caching, video Hangouts. It's certainly not a browser
page facade.

------
Leynos
The volume controls for circles are a great idea. I prefer this to the
algorithmic approach taken by Facebook.

It's a pitty that pseudonymns are still not mentioned here though. NSFW
controls would be nice too (as opposed to the blanket ban on NSFW content in
place at present).

~~~
swah
I have to change the volume for each user?

~~~
abraham
> I have to change the volume for each user?

You don't "have" to do anything, but if you wish you can change the volume for
each circle.

------
ben0x539
The only improvement I wish for would be to let middle-clicks open things in
new tabs, like it does in all those other websites that aren't drowning
themselves in clever javascript.

~~~
simoncion
When this is broken, please use the "Report an Issue" button to let folks
know. I am told that the fancy JavaScript-ized links are supposed to work just
like ordinary anchor-tag links, so any user-visible deviation from this
behaviour is a bug. (Don't ask me why in the hell Google is so fond of
breaking their fancy links.)

------
Matt_Cutts
Volume sliders for circles is something I've wanted for a while. My wife and
parents are posting to Google+ now, but sometimes I miss their posts. Now I
can pump up the volume on my "Family" circle to 11 and I'm more likely to see
their posts.

~~~
chime
You might like my Plus Minus extension for Chrome:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pidkbnhjgdngcfcaik...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pidkbnhjgdngcfcaikoocdanfijkgdli)
\- it has 10k+ users and enables hiding specific circles from the main stream.

------
hybrid11
There was such a huge influx from my friends to use Google+ when invites were
first sent out, but now, barely anyone in my circles use it anymore. However,
when I do check it, my feed is filled with posts from 2-3 power users from my
Randoms Circle, so this "graphic-equalize" feature is very welcome!

Just curious, has anyone stopped using other soical networks and are using G+
instead, or do you use G+ on top of them?

~~~
Leynos
I've pretty much switched from Facebook to Google+. I find G+ a much more
comfortable place on the whole, but I get the impression that Facebook isn't
really aimed at me.

What Google+ is missing when compared with Facebook is the event planning
tool. The one time I find myself returning to Facebook is when someone is
organizing a party or a night out.

~~~
hybrid11
Yah that's true, I use the event planning a lot in Facebook.

I find that G+ is good for finding content on topics, and creating a community
around them. I just don't see any use for more personal social networking as
long as all my friends are on Facebook.

------
babarock
I might have missed it, but I cannot believe they haven't implemented
"nicknames"/pseudonymes yet. I thought they had promised it a while ago. How
long till we see it?

I'm usually not the paranoid 'Google-has-all-your-data-be-afraid-of-your-data-
on-the-Internet' type. But nicknames would be cool. There's so much more to
"me" than my Google+ profile, thank you very much.

~~~
ergo14
You can already specify your nickname/pseudo in your profile, im not sure if
it carries any specific meaning in the app yet.

------
kenjackson
What is usage on Google+ like now? I still don't know anyone, but internet
celebrities and Google employees, that use Google+. I've yet to encounter a
single person who has recommended that I use Google+.

These few improvements only seem interesting to people who are current users
of G+, and I feel like that's a really small group -- but maybe I'm wrong.

~~~
ergo14
I'm using it extensively, so does ~100 of other people in my circle. Try
searching g+ for a topic and then add interesting entries to one of your
circles, try posting on their subject etc. you will quickly see that there is
life there ;-)

------
evmar
I tried Google+ but the red "someone you don't know has added you in a circle"
light was always on when I was doing unrelated things on unrelated Google
properties. I recall a product manager saying they were going to fix this
months ago, but last I looked it was still broken. My account remains deleted.

It is ironic: because of that, I might use the product more if it were made by
any other company. I just rely on other Google products so much that having
this one intrude on others means it's not worth it.

------
freehunter
One thing I would really like is email notification of new posts, even if they
don't specifically mention you. Since there is no G+ app for Windows Phone and
their mobile website sucks, it'd be nice if I could set a couple people to be
an "always notify", where whatever they post that I am able to see, it emails
or texts me to let me know.

Right now the only way I see to do that would be to have them specifically
mention me in the post.

------
nostromo
One big missing feature for me is the wall post from Facebook or the @at
message from Twitter. I didn't realize at first how much I use the 'open
direct message' features on these other networks until I started messing
around with G+.

~~~
ergo14
you start your word with + and you will get a autocomplete that works like @
at twitter ;-) Also hashtags are now supported.

~~~
joejohnson
It also works by using an '@' and typing a friend's name. So, just like
twitter and just like the GP is wishing it would.

~~~
simoncion
G+ will change the '@' into a '+' when you commit the post or comment.

------
joshuahedlund
I can't find them right now, but I remember reading a blog post or two
complaining that manually dividing your contacts into Circles (and maintaining
those Circles over time) was bad/useless busy work to force on users. I wonder
if this Volume thing will feel like just another micro-managing necessity that
makes it worse.

But I'm glad to see that they've added lots of features - like multiple admins
for brand Pages, which was a big complaint during the recent brand Page
rollout. Google is clearly listening to its users and trying hard to compete
in the crowded social network environment.

~~~
bad_user
I read the same article and it was flawed for a reason - it isn't busy work if
you don't use it. You can just have 1 or 2 circles - like Family and the rest
of the world.

It is extremely useful however if you want multiple channels of communication.
Say, you want to post news for Ruby developers and you do that daily ... so
why on earth would you want to spam your friends that aren't even developers?
On the other hand posting pictures of your child should be for close
acquaintances only - friends, colleagues from school / work, family, otherwise
if you get popular you'll regret exposing your personal life ;)

A feature is busy work as long as you don't need it. As soon as you need it
however, it becomes indispensable. Also, this particular problem cannot be
solved by either ignoring it or solving it algorithmically.

~~~
judofyr
> It is extremely useful however if you want multiple channels of
> communication. Say, you want to post news for Ruby developers and you do
> that daily ... so why on earth would you want to spam your friends that
> aren't even developers? On the other hand posting pictures of your child
> should be for close acquaintances only - friends, colleagues from school /
> work, family, otherwise if you get popular you'll regret exposing your
> personal life ;)

That's actually one of the weakest part of G+: I can't post something that's
both public and limited to one audience. If I post Ruby stuff publicly, I'll
spam my friends; if I _don't_ publish it publicly, nobody will know I post
Ruby stuff.

~~~
joshuahedlund
This is why I wish Google Circles were reversed. The current method is fine if
you actually have stuff you want to post to a public database but still hide
from your boss. Otherwise it's only fine if you know exactly what kind of
content every single one of your followers wants to see from you.

I would much rather be able to mark all of my posts as "Technology" or "Music"
or "Politics", where they are all publicly viewable from my page but my
followers decide which kinds of categories they want to see from me in their
feed. Let the end user control what they consider 'spammy' - not the source
user who doesn't know what the end user wants to see.

------
dhruvbird
Why can't they just use up/down vote on a post and determine these numbers
automagically rather than have a user enter a value for each "circle"? I mean
it seems analogous to the problem of spam filtering except that you have a
weight function now instead of a binary 0/1.

------
aestetix_
They forgot to mention their plans to repeal the real names policy. At least,
I'm assuming/hoping that's in the works...

------
laconian
That Circle Volume feature is a great, nonobvious idea.

~~~
anothermachine
It wasn't obvious after Facebook implemented it?

------
voidfiles
Still no write API, wtf?

~~~
flueedo
They have it. But only for few selected partners.
[http://adwords.blogspot.com/2011/11/third-party-tools-to-
hel...](http://adwords.blogspot.com/2011/11/third-party-tools-to-help-manage-
your.html)

------
NotYouOrYours
Google Search used to be great: fast and cached pages made it great! Now it's
slow, no cached pages are available, and it tries to load 'miniviews' of each
page (which is ridiculous).

I tell everyone I know to avoid Google+... stick with Facebook.

Google has severe quality problems... only use them if you have to.

~~~
afsina
That was totally two irrelevant things you mention. Who are you? A random
Facebook employee?

~~~
jrockway
More likely someone whose "online pharmacy" was recently delisted.

