

Google+ Comes Up Short - mvs
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/07/google_comes_up_short.html

======
cooperadymas
The author essentially didn't find Google+ very interesting because he didn't
have anyone to follow yet. This is to be expected at any early age social
network. Sure, it's a chicken-and-egg problem, but if any company in the world
has the power to solve that it's Google.

At the end, he states that:

"This is Google's first big attempt at playing catch-up. The problem with
catch-up is that you risk trying to solve problems that already have
solutions. True innovation comes from identifying and solving the unsolved
problems. At the moment, there, Google appears to have come up short."

My take on 'innovation' is that it's more than solving unsolved problems.
Defining a new solution to a problem with an existing solution can also be
innovation. This is what Google has historically been really good at.

Search existed years before Google, but Google search was innovative - it was
(and is) a better solution than others on the market. Email was around even
longer, but GMail arguably innovated that field. Chrome is only a few years
old, but has gained a near 20% market share in an area that Microsoft has
dominated for a decade.

The problem of mass transportation was 'solved' before airplanes came to be.

Google+ may not make it. Even if it ultimately fails, I think Facebook will
come out the other side a better product. They have had very little motivation
to improve their product for quite some time now because there was no serious
competition. If nothing else, Google is good at forcing stagnant competitors
into motion.

