
Using Google without a Google+ profile - davidcgl
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/everything-in-its-right-place.html
======
nogridbag
I find it incredibly amusing and also very frustrating that all the top
comments to this article are simply G+ re-shares that add absolutely no value
to the comments section and simply more garbage the reader has to sift through
in order to view legit comments.

>>"Google has been doing some rethinking" thanks I already read that

>>"#googleplusupdate #youtube " thank you that was valuable

>>[another summary of the article I just read]

This is also one of my major complaints with youtube. I find it hard enough
just to follow a single youtube comment thread because:

1\. Everyone appears to be speaking a dialect of english that is
understandable seemingly to everyone but myself - some sort of strange mixture
of 90's IRC speak with some klingon thrown in.

2\. People are replying to users but the reply username doesn't match the
display username.

John Smith: That was a great video

> Jane Smith: +Bubba I agree

me: "who the heck is Jane talking to?"

3\. Then finally there're all of those G+ reshares:

John Smith: Look at this video:
[http://www.youtube.com/asdf83289](http://www.youtube.com/asdf83289)

> John Smith's friend: I enjoyed that video

</rant>

~~~
exodust
Yep, it's frustrating. Youtube comments really are hopelessly broken.

Re-shares are not good reading. They are written by users for _their_
followers, not for the people on the actual video page. As you said, they have
zero value.

When I first noticed this way back when Google started publishing re-share
comments under the videos, I would reply to those comments with remarks such
as "I already knew that; yes I know what the video is; why are you repeating
the video name"... and some people responded with "what are you talking about"
because they didn't even know their re-share comments were being published on
the video page. That's how broken the comments are.

~~~
alwaysdoit
To be fair, it's not like YouTube comments were ever working well.

~~~
lmm
They were never great but they were better before.

~~~
rudolf0
If by "before" you mean 2008, then yes, arguably. Starting around 2009 I've
started using various browser extensions to hide the comments, and I've never
been happier.

~~~
mahouse
I don't understand. Can't you just... not read them?

~~~
javajosh
That kind of software is easier to install, but less consistent.

------
bonaldi
It's incredible how lightly they have thrown away the Google+ Account For
Everything stance given how merciless they were in imposing it at the time.
The wails from YouTube in particular have only just died down.

Kudos to them, but a lot of pain could have been avoided if they did all this
listening back then, instead of waiting until their thing was clearly dead.

~~~
AdmiralAsshat
Honestly, I think the sticking point on most of it was the Real Name policy.
Had they stopped the delusion from the outset that they could be a Facebook
competitor and simply made Google+ a correlating landing page for your online
persona, rather than your real identity, I think it would have worked. I
wouldn't necessarily mind everyone knowing that AdmiralAsshat likes Black
Sabbath music videos on Youtube, hangs out on C programming boards on G+, and
comments on various political stories on Slate--I sometimes share my handles
on various online media circles _anyway_. Having them all tied to a single
login would not necessarily be a bad thing. It's not until they demand that
they must know my real name to do so (combined with the fact that, being an
Android user, Google knows my phone number and personal billing address) that
the idea of Google+ suddenly looks toxic.

This is a good step, although the well has already been poisoned.

~~~
hyperpallium
Why did they need real names anyway?

If they build a profile based on your browsing and social graph to show you
ads, what does it matter who you actually are, so long as you have those
interests? Like a node in a graph being distinguished only by the arcs
connecting it.

~~~
gherkin0
I think the use of real names was identified as one of the reasons for
Facebook's success[1], so they just copied that.

[1] [http://techcrunch.com/2008/12/17/myspace-quietly-begins-
enco...](http://techcrunch.com/2008/12/17/myspace-quietly-begins-encouraging-
users-to-use-their-real-names/)

~~~
wmeredith
Cargo culting at its finest. Google is really smart about a lot of different
things, but they know fuck-all about social. They were just going through the
motions.

------
legohead
This is confusing to me. What IS a "Google Account"? Is it my gmail? That
makes no sense to me, it's an email service. A "Google Account" sounds like I
work at Google. If you were to tell me I had a "Google Account", I would
assume it's Google+.

Google messed up when it tried to make some master account with Google+. Maybe
everything _could_ be incorporated into one account, but the way they've done
it is one of the most complicated and confusing systems I've seen in computer
engineering, and that's pretty sad considering it's Google.

Take YouTube. When I go there now, I have my Google+ account, but I have my
old YouTube account that has been consumed by the Google+ account, but yet
it's still separate on YouTube?? Now when I use YouTube, I have to make sure
it's my old YouTube account being selected instead of my Google+ one. Why is
this so hard? What's going to happen to my old YouTube account when it gets
owned by this new "Google Account"?

If you can't do this right, which is obviously an issue, then just keep
everything separate. Stop Google-fying services that are separate.

~~~
silverbax88
I wish they would just get it right, and let me create different accounts for
the apps I want to use. I just want a YouTube account. No Gmail. No G+. No
tying my adwords account to anything else unless I request it.

This is extremely simple, and Google has made this horribly invasive and it's
flat out broken at this point.

~~~
colinbartlett
But we all know why they forced the unification of these accounts. So they can
correlate our activity across services to "better serve us". (Read: serve us
ads.)

~~~
silverbax88
Even if that is the goal (which is likely), it does not explain the need to
force me to create accounts for applications I don't want, like Gmail. That's
like going to a car dealership, buying a sedan and the dealership forces you
to take five crates of crab apples with you at gunpoint.

~~~
reagency
It is more like a car dealership putting their dealership license-plate holder
and the car make/model sticker on the back. And the crappy non-replaceable
Navi system.

------
amit_m
Opening paragraph, the honest version:

"When we launched Google+, we were scared of Facebook winning over the
internet and knew how powerful the network effect is. So we decided on a
douchebag move - abuse all of our monopolistic powers and superior engineering
in order to shove a Facebook killer down our users' throat at maximum speed,
integrating it with each and every google service in existence (whether it
made any sense or not) and killing social features that actually work in
exchange to experimental G+ social features that might work eventually.
According to our analytics, it didn't work, so... Never mind."

------
dimbirol
Why is this not a Google+-post?! Why should we use it if even google isn't
using it?

But maybe they tried signing up but failed getting a custom G+-url. We see
that you registered google@gmail.com, but we can't let you use
google.com/+google, why don't you use google.com/+google1425 and
youtube.com/c/12868126nvesfz1761, which you can change to
youtube.com/c/google6823_xw once you reach 500 subscribers.

~~~
balladeer
Yes. This is exactly where I had kinda foresaw G+ was going down, either today
or some other day in near future.

------
dimbirol
Using the google sign-up process was one of the most infuriating things and
definitely one of my worst UI/UX experiences.

In order to create a consistent online profile, it's ideal to choose a name
which is available on all major social networks.

Google is just not capable of offering a service like that:

You can't check in advance if a given g+ or youtube name is available. If you
sign up for a gmail-account, the new account newname@gmail.com doesn't mean
you get youtube.com/newname or plus.google.com/+newname.

A custom youtube name oddly gets created at /c/username and not
youtube.com/username and I somehow had to switch profiles (I think between my
youtube account, for which I signed up using my gmail-account and my
g+-profile which was created when signing up for gmail?!) while logged in into
youtube to make changes which was extremely confusing.

Getting a custom g+url is even more difficult, as google adds some patronizing
and suggests a name, which can not be edited.

Why is it not possible to register a consistent name accross all google
products with 1 signup process: a gmail-account, a youtube username, a g+
account? Creating a new page or signing up at any other social media site
maybe takes 5 minutes, the "Google experience" took 1 afternoon (!) with not
the desired result.

~~~
wyclif
I agree this was a major problem, I have been using G+ off and on since the
very beginning. It was annoying that I could not select an available username
instead of the one Google thought I should use, and I wasn't happy that I
couldn't use /c/myusername even though I knew it was available. No consistency
whatsoever in the UI/UX. It should have been a cinch to sign in on the same
username across all Google services.

You're also correct that this is something you'd think a company like Google
would be able to execute well on. Well, you guessed wrong...

------
realusername
Can we talk a bit about Google Groups also ? Dear Google, please do something
about Google groups... It's just unusable. Everytime I see a Google groups
link I just don't click. The contrast is horrible, the padding is making 3/4
of the screen useless, it takes forever to load, when you click on something
it's lagging again... And the worst part in all of this is that people are
still using it, please do something about it...

~~~
arto
> And the worst part in all of this is that people are still using it, please
> do something about it...

This probably has to do with the ease of setting up or subscribing to a
mailing list with Google Groups, even despite how its usability has devolved.
There aren't any free mailing-list services that are as easy to get up and
running with--partly, of course, because almost everyone already has a Google
account, making it trivial to join a group.

Still waiting for somebody to create a good mailing-list service based on
"subscribe with GitHub" (i.e., OAuth) to take this all away from Google and
crappy self-hosted Mailman both.

~~~
reagency
Yahoo Groups is still very popular.

------
msandford
Google's new motto:

"Don't be evil, but only after trying really hard to be so, and then
grudgingly accepting that perhaps your users have alternatives that they might
avail themselves of, and capitulate"

It's not as catchy, but perhaps a little more honest.

~~~
chc
Your system of morality has an astonishingly low bar for "evil" if "requiring
a Google+ account for access to a service" qualifies. I don't think something
that harmless would go past "somewhat dickish" for most people. If that's
evil, what's the word you use for people who kick puppies or otherwise cause
harm to the world?

~~~
msandford
Is outing someone against their will and possibly ruining their life merely
"somewhat dickish"?

[http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-outed-
me/](http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-outed-me/)

I'm not saying that annoying people by forcing G+/YT integration is evil. But
presuming that an annoyance to you is an annoyance to all is faulty.

~~~
skj
There's a line to be drawn between "don't be evil" and "don't do evil". With
such a huge organization, things slip through the cracks and accidents happen
that result in bad things. But I find it hard to believe that Google decided
to out someone.

~~~
pjc50
They were warned about the negative consequences of identity conflation, then
built a system that did just that. They didn't "decide" to out someone, but
they built a machine for outing people.

------
colbyh
Though not the end of G+, hopefully it will be the end of G+ as we know it.
From day one G+ should have simply been a social mesh between the many (very)
popular Google properties like YouTube, Play, Maps, etc. Making it a
standalone application was their fatal mistake, and here's hoping Bradley can
lead them towards becoming a social utility instead of a social platform.

~~~
pjc50
_social mesh between the many (very) popular Google properties like YouTube,
Play, Maps_

Genuine question: what do the videos I view, the apps I install on my phone,
and the locations I search for have in common? And what's "social" about any
of those?

~~~
72deluxe
It's social because you get shown which pointless apps your relatives and
friends installed and reviewed when you use Google Play :-)

------
frik
Hopefully they decouple G+ from Youtube for _everyone_. The G+ comments are
somewhat unhelpful below a Youtube video.

Before there were always discussions with answers, nowadays you see mainly
"check out this video my friends on G+" kind of "trash" in the video comments.

------
danso
The OP links to a corresponding YouTube blog post with more specifics about
how the G+ rollback affects the YouTube service (as of today, YouTube comments
will only show up on YouTube, and not on G+, and vice-versa):

[http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2015/07/youtube-
comments....](http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2015/07/youtube-
comments.html)

It also mentions improvements to the ranking system "that reduces the
visibility of junk comments. It’s working—the rate of dislikes on comments has
dropped by more than 35 percent across YouTube."...Is there a whitepaper or
engineering blog post about their technical approach to this?

~~~
djent
Ever since they integrated G+ with YouTube comments, I thought that the
comment dislike button was just a placebo. I've never actually seen the score
of a comment go down upon it being pressed. Has it actually been working the
whole time?

------
try_sincerely
"When we launched Google+, we set out to help people discover, share and
connect across Google like they do in real life. "

Why can't they for once be honest and say something like: "We wanted to get on
the social network train, it did not work out".

Just without these corporate lies about "connecting people"

~~~
Mahn
That's not how PR speak works :) And to be fair, Google+ does have a few
million users doing their thing there, it won't be displacing Facebook anytime
soon but it's not entirely dead weight for them, so whether it worked out or
not is relative.

~~~
redwood
and what a liability those few million are now because they can't get rid of
this thing without giving them a way out

------
Animats
They mean "Using Google with a Google account but without a Google+ profile",
not "Using Google without a Google account". Google pushes really hard for
people to be logged into Google. Google search results pages have a whiny
banner ad if you don't log into Google. (And it won't go away if you have
their cookies blocked.)

Incidentally, Android phones work fine with no Google account. If you buy the
phone new and unlocked, click "Later" when it asks for your Google account,
and delete the "Google first time activation" app, they're fine.

~~~
marssaxman
It's ironic that one of the features which originally motivated my switch to
Google was the way they didn't seem to care whether I got an account or not.
I've almost completely stopped using any of their services now that they're so
pushy about getting you to log in.

This includes Android phones: I don't know why people claim that they can't be
used without a Google account, because I'm on my second, I've never put any
Google account credentials into either one, and they've worked just fine.
Can't use the app store, but I don't care about that anyway.

------
helly
To me, the UI of Google+ feels so bulky and slow. Everything seems to be out
of place.

It's a mystery to me, whom they are targeting.

Does anybody like their UI? If so, what device are you using? What do you
think of FB vs G+?

I mainly use Firefox on the Desktop. And Facebook is somewhat ok. G+ feels
completely out of sync.

~~~
sidcool
I liked their mobile app UI. It was fluid and snazzy. The only issue was
content and users.

------
vezzy-fnord
A surprisingly large number of FOSS developers (though mostly Linux developers
in particular) use G+ and post interesting status updates on it. That's the
extent to which I care about it.

~~~
TillE
Also tabletop RPG people for some reason. It's a quick substitute for a blog,
with better comment support than Tumblr.

~~~
mcv
It's the best RPG community on the internet. There's also a lot of political
discussion, science/tech discussion, and it seems to be popular with
photographers and various game developers.

Google+ is being used by a lot of really interesting people with cool
interests. The quality of content is very high. Well, it was, until Youtube
got hooked into it.

And all that in a very freeform manner, in a way that makes it easy to find
people with similar interests. To me, it's the closest thing to usenet since
usenet.

------
mangeletti
I've been confused about Google+ for the longest time, wondering what reason
there was for Google+ to exist in the first place, other than the (perceived)
low cost of getting users (via marketing on their search page).

What new value does Google+ add? Does anybody sign up for Google+ for reasons
other than 1) Google Hangouts, or 2) accident? How is Google+ "quickly
becoming a place where people engage..." and yet I don't know anybody who uses
it? Am I hanging out with all the wrong people? I don't really actively engage
with people on Facebook, but everybody I know uses Facebook in some capacity
and people talk about it from time to time. I've never heard a single person
in my life talk about Google+, other than, "I think you have to have a Google+
account to..." (e.g., Hangouts).

~~~
dannyr
Believe it or not, there's a lot of activity in my feed on Google+.

Am I hanging out with all the wrong people?

I don't watch big Bang Theory and I don't know who does but it's been on for 7
seasons and their cast is the highest paid on TV.

~~~
mangeletti
Good point (re: Big Bang theory), and also I thought that show just came out
last year... proves the point even more.

------
joesmo
It's about time, though mostly for Google's sake. I personally don't care if I
can't review apps or create YouTube channels or do anything that requires
Google+ as the features that have required it are mostly useless or I have
found alternatives. It is annoying that I would even be asked to review apps
constantly, however, when I'm not signed up for the idiotic Google+. I
actually wouldn't mind reviewing some apps, but not at the expense of having
to start Google+. The Google+ fiasco has mainly hurt Google itself by making
them lose all their customers who didn't sign up for Google+ from such
features as well as the unfortunate developers who rely on good app ratings
that they won't get now because Google essentially put up a nasty firewall
around that system. Then again, there's nothing new about Google or Apple
pushing its own woes onto developers, so I assume mobile developers have made
their peace with the tactics of their industry.

------
Pxtl
I honestly think G+ had some great ideas, but they just bungled too much.

They were much too clever with YouTube - the whole "posting to your G+ feed is
the same as commenting on the video" thing was a bone-headed idea. They're
different intents, they should be handled differently. Let G+ handle both of
those actions, but don't call them _the same action_.

The nymwars thing was another one - when you try to sneak new social
integration through the back-door like that, with a massive existing userbase?
You can't be opinionated about it. You have to accept and work with all the
existing workflow, and that includes allowing pseudonyms.

I liked the idea of a unified social layer... hell, unified _anything_ in
Google's sprawling service map. But G+ had too many mistakes, and broke too
many promises over and over and over again.

------
joeevans1000
Thank god. However, the G+ debacle was a wake up call to the fact that at any
point the use of my good ol' email account and search page could become an
absolutely complicated mess, and completely out of my control.

~~~
marssaxman
Makes me glad in retrospect I never switched over to gmail. My email
experience hasn't changed in a decade but it still works just fine and I never
have to worry that some megacorporation is going to arbitrarily change it out
from under me in order to better pursue their corporate goals.

------
balladeer
It was with such extreme frustration that I had deleted everything on my
Google+ profile after trying for 30 minutes to get the G+ URL of either <my
first name>, or my <last name>, <or may first + last name>, or <part of my
first name>. I stopped using it, made everything private - what I couldn't
remove (at that time).

All were available.

Close to 2, or at least more than 1 year later - all those URLs are still
available.

But no, Google still thinks I must add a digit or two to that URL. I had
forgotten that I have a G+ profile. I don't know anyone who uses this. I mean
I don't know about others but why would I even want to use such a tool that is
this effed up. While some might defend or even be kinder to G+ (well...) but I
personally just can't accept a service this broken.

------
Zikes
One very important change they can make on the G+ mobile app is to make the
Share button open up the Share Intents menu, instead of just re-posting to my
own G+ page. G+ can't very well grow without escaping its own echo chamber,
can it? Let me post links to Twitter and such!

------
devNoise
For all the problems Google+ had, the one that irked me the most was not being
all to merge/linked Google accounts. I had a gmail account and a Google Apps
for Work account. Every time I would try to associate the 2nd email, I would
get "is already associated with another Google Account" as the error. Even
though I deleted the Google+ account on the 2nd email. Then somehow I would
created a Google+ account again.

I just as soon forget about it, but I'd like to have the google voice messages
go to the Google Apps for Work email.

------
amelius
Honestly, I would be happier to use this product if it were not from Google.
They already know too much.

~~~
theseatoms
That's funny, because I've been thinking, "They already know so much already
anyway."

Probably how they were hoping/expecting people would act.

~~~
Zikes
I'm an Android user, they can already see my contacts, thus they can already
deduce who I know.

As someone on the internet, they can already crawl any publicly available data
about me, including blog posts, tweets, forum posts, mailing list emails, and
social network metadata like marital status, gender, etc.

Google+, in theory, doesn't really tell them they don't already know, or can't
easily figure out already, so it's purely value add.

~~~
theseatoms
Exactly my reasoning. Also an Android user.

They're the most prolific internet crawlers anyway. The Pandora's box of my
personal information is blown wide open (to them), so I'm just trying to
contain the blast. They also have my search history, which is a better diary
than I could ever purposefully write.

~~~
amelius
> so I'm just trying to contain the blast

Information becomes more powerful when you connect all the dots together.
Hence, it is better to divide information among services, so they all know a
bit, but cannot decipher the "big picture".

------
cmurf
The part of Google+ I didn't like was certain compulsory behaviors that seemed
to have nothing to do with Google+ itself. And I see those same problems still
in Hangouts. For example, this completely batshit idea in Gmail, when I click
on Hangouts Conversation icon (middle icon bottom left), and then click on the
magnifying glass to search, type in "mom" and this fucking goddamn piece of
shit displays everyone's mom and not my mom. Why the fuckballs would this
thing show results of people I don't know, have no way of knowing, don't know
any of the people they know, and yet not my own mom? At least give priority to
my contacts?

Shit like that, added with, you have to accept it mentality. It's what gets
people deranged and they want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. So
this blog entry just demonstrates to me they don't get it still.

Edit: Yes my mom is "mom" in my contacts. When I type in my sister's name, it
does the same crap, it shows me everybody else with the same first name as my
sister, but not my sister. WTF?

------
friendzis
> we’re well underway putting location sharing into Hangouts

You can already share location on Hangouts, but it is deeply broken. Or do
they mean "bring back Latitude"?

Not long ago I had experience where I had to meet online friend, we were on
the same route, just different directions. It all went like sharing our
current location every 5 minutes (with increasing frequency towards meeting
point) and still managed to miss each other, because "you said your car was
grey, but its silver!". Live location sharing is necessary for many workflows
and there are tons of apps for that with disputable trustworthiness.

------
bsimpson
Interesting that his title is "VP Photos, Steams, and Sharing," eg, what
Google+ originally tried to be.

------
potency
Finally! I've been shutting down the daily popup to convert my YouTube account
into a Google+ Page for years. I had a feeling if I waited long enough, they'd
stop asking. Hurray!

------
zurn
Does this mean privacy conscious people will be able to vote in the Android
store?

------
gardnr
I just tried to leave a comment on that blog post to commend them for finally
listening to their users. I was prompted to "Upgrade to Google+" to leave a
comment. >_<

------
Aoyagi
So these two [1][2] popular videos aren't actual any more, huh. Isn't Google
one of the companies that keep talking about how they listen to the users?
Does anyone at all believe them, or Microsoft for that matter, that they do
such a thing?

[1][https://youtu.be/ymkA1N3oFwg](https://youtu.be/ymkA1N3oFwg)

[2][https://youtu.be/LTq8TrA3hb4](https://youtu.be/LTq8TrA3hb4)

------
rayalez
I actually love g+ and was always rooting for it. Too bad it received so much
hate for youtube commenting system and mandatory accounts and such. I always
hoped people will turn around and switch to g+ - functionality and interface
are so much nicer than in fb.

I hate facebook and can't use it, but g+ is really nice, and has all the best
features of fb/twitter/tumblr. I'm still rooting for it.

This sounds like a sensible decision though.

------
unabst
Many entrepreneurs should find this outcome encouraging. No, Google can't just
steal your idea even with the full working product before them. Ironically,
android was the best heist job from Apple, but it's success is arguably due to
market factors, not product competition (they filled the market void Apple
refused to sell to, and when directly competing they seem to still lose, like
in China).

------
pessimizer
This is a great step. Now if they could just un-shit the Google Maps UI, they
could approach the excellent usability of the Google of 5 years ago.

------
ironoxide859
Google + murdered the Blogger community when it expected us to migrate there
while at the same time forgoing our followers widget and Google Reader to keep
in contact with others.

As such, I've deleted my old Google + profile and started over with a new one.
I enjoy sharing on the internet, but too many fragments tied together paints a
picture of me I don't want to share.

------
faragon
I stopped commenting/voting on YouTube since the mandatory G+ thing. I hope
Google think it twice before playing that hard again.

------
ryandreming
pretty sure that's what YouTube's founder was alluding to recently:

[http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/8/5080630/youtube-co-
founder...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/8/5080630/youtube-co-founder-
wonders-why-the-fuck-comments-require-a-google)

they should've just listened to him

~~~
dredmorbius
A couple of years ago. Not quite "recent". But yes.

------
isarat
Plus will have lot of potential if they move away to make it as n identity
service and a social network. They should invest more to create something
similar to Google Now to streamline Google products experience.

------
tdkl
Awesome. I had to re-enable the G+ account to add new Favorites on Youtube.

------
pcx
I guess, it is very important for a good company to learn. Great that they are
setting an example. Google and MS fighting with renewed energy is great for
our industry and sets a good example.

------
wyclif
What does this mean for the evolution of Google+ as a product?

~~~
Mahn
It sounds like they are keeping it around, but it will no longer be a layer
across all Google products, just a standalone app for those who want it (as it
should be).

------
a3n
I'm not even sure I have a G+ profile, things were so confusing during the
Name Wars (at which point I all but abaonded my G+).

------
peeters
Looks like they finally realized that Youtube comment sections are still an
absolute cesspit, despite the real name policy.

------
acqq
Nice to read this, especially as I was quite annoyed with the "new" contacts
management which gmail gives. It appears it tries to "combine" the email
addresses you have to the same "person" entry not even allowing you to have
two entries for the two addresses, no, _they_ know the addresses belong to the
same person and they won't let you. And all that combined with Plus. I hope
that gets fixed.

------
onedev
I'm so happy right now....and I don't even comment on YouTube. Quite
irrational but hey, it is what it is.

------
imellyse
Well, this is a right step.

But I put question mark on the startegist of Google products they initiate
step and move backward again and again.

Google is only alive due to Google search engine it self. It's my opinion.

Otherwise the way Google introduce things and all the time they are facing
negative feedback on their new products.

Buzz, Orkut, Google Glass (not that much penetrate in market)

Hope Google will get some awesome minds now.

------
rlu
great so can I login with my youtube account now? I don't think I ever
migrated it to a Google account (despite being asked to like a million times -
would always say "later") and now I have no idea how to login to it.

------
ori_b
In other words: "Same as before, but you can opt out of the G+ feed."

------
rasz_pl
cool story bro, but I still cant comment, clicking on text box pops up "what
name do you want for your shiny new G+ profile?"

------
ytdht
Maybe the government should split Youtube from Google and then Google+ would
not be an issue... (maybe other services should stand on their own also)

------
eecks
Finally!!

------
daxfohl
git checkout master

git merge --no-ff plus

------
thachmai
Goodbye Google+. We hardly knew you.

