
Google+ Was Never a Facebook Competitor - Anon84
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_was_never_a_facebook_competitor.php
======
Firebrand
>Contrary to popular belief, Google+ was never created to directly compete for
people's time on the internet. A simple, ad free system, Google+ was launched
to compete for users' personal data. Becoming the primary platform for social
networking would simply be a bonus

So it is a Facebook competitor then?

~~~
mkross
I think the author is trying to make a poorly articulated argument that the
_intent_ of G+ is not to "kill" Facebook, but instead improve Google's
targeted advertising capabilities. To some extent, this is true, but I'm not
sure if it is a relevant distinction. If Google had the option to replace
Facebook wholesale, I'm sure they'd jump at the chance. Perhaps "not
competing" is merely a way of lowering expectations?

------
lwhi
Probably one of the worst articles I've read on HN in a while.

The first five paragraphs contain generic filler, which are then followed by
the bombshell that more information about users provides greater opportunity
for targeted advertising.

Someone's being paid by the word, IMO.

------
jsight
I think I understand the author's point. They aren't trying to compete with
Facebook, they are just attempting to exist in Facebook's market, make money
by all of the same means, and attract the same customers who will then do most
of the same things.

Make sense?

------
badclient
tldr; g+ is about helping google make tonnes more money; it will do that even
after its crappy engagement; don't ask me how.

------
paganel
Insert Oceania joke...

