Google+ claims 100 million 'active' users Google has claimed that it now has 100 million active monthly users of its social networking site that it continues to insist isn't actually a social network. Google+ has had 400 million signups since it launched in 2011, but only a quarter of that figure are apparently engaged regularly with it. Sadly, the company didn't …
Jesus, are you just being deliberately obtuse? The quote says "from the start of 2012". GMail had plenty of users before the start of 2012, only the new ones are silently co-opted into Google+. The article never stated "all gmail users", I made it perfectly clear I wasn't talking about "all gmail users". In the words of the T-shirt "I can explain it to you, I can't understand it for you"...
Instagram: Social network for sharing photos
Snapseed: Photo editing software with no social network
Google buying nik software is going do a grand total of bugger all for their social network. It might enhance the android photo editing features a whole lot, and it might enhance say picassa, but with zero people on the nik software social network it's not going to enhance google+ any.
Fail is for basically every news site who're reporting this as somehow equivalent to instagram or calling snapseed an instagram rival :)
an article written by someone that doesn't understand Google+ They sit there waiting for someone to add them to their circles... it's not going to happen. It's the equivalent of sitting in the corner of the schoolyard hoping someone wants to play with the boring kid...
You have to engage, join some circles.
My Google account was "upgraded" to use Google Plus without my consent. It just appeared one day. I was then locked out of it for not having a name "consistent with our terms of use" and locked out of it. Luckily, my gmail was still available. I have never used it as a result and suspect quite a few of those 400 million accounts are in the same boat.
...mainly because its the only social network not blocked at work (I suspect because otherwise the whole google.com domain would have to be blocked), but it's also home to a lot of techies, scientists and Linux distro maintainers, so the average IQ and S/N ratio is somewhat higher than FB and the like.
Also, although I would like to say it’s surprising that there was no mention of Nik Software’s other products, it’s sadly predictable that there wasn’t. I know the story was leading with something else but I think it might be of interest.
Nik has firmly placed itself in providing photo-editing plug-ins for Photoshop, Aperture and Lightroom for higher-end users – so what’s going to happen to those? It doesn’t sound like the kind of area that Google is interested in.
There have been just over 130 comments for users on Nik’s site (http://education.niksoftware.com/2012/09/17/google-acquires-nik-software/) about this news and it’s almost universally been criticised. Punters see this as heralding the end for products that they’ve spent time and money (I consider them excellent value, but they’re not on the budget end of things) into their workflows.
Personally, I suspect that as well as Google leaving a truck full of cash outside Nik’s HQ, a major factor in Nik’s decision was that the market for the plug-ins becoming increasingly niche.
Which I don't find on other social networks is that I meet people. FB is people I know already, and that's great, it's nice to keep in touch with them. Twitter seems to mostly be people I know retweeting stuff by people I don't (and don't want to).
G+ does really well at helping me to meet new people who share my interests - and lets me filter them on that interest - eg: I know a lot of cooking people on G+, but I only see their posts when I want to browse my 'foodies' circle. Same same for photography and the rest. Sometimes people start in a specialist circle and move into my general friends circles, sometimes not. Either way I've made more new friends on G+ in the last year than I ever have on FB/Twitter. Obviously other people's milage will vary.
Maybe they don't tell you how to keep your porn habits private because it's very very very easy not to make them public. For example, if you make a public post about your porn habits then they will be public, but if you DON'T make a public post about your porn habits then they will not be public. So, in case you're not clear on this, DON'T post on Google+ if you don't want to take part. It really is that simple.
El Reg's "mission creep" into tech journalism is invasive, unwanted and a failure. If you think that G+ integration with GMail is "mission creep" then you don't understand what G+ is about. That would be why you keep reporting it's a social network, I suppose.
Once a day but up to 5 times on the weekends. Uniforms are a favourite. D'oh!
i got Gmail because it is a easy way to sync contacts on my mobile phone, that is the only reason I got a Gmail account, i signed up before google started pushing people into having a google+ account.
I got a facebook account and that does me, never seen the need for a Google+ account.
I find that numeric claim rather hard to believe. I think that is in the same league with Romney's claim that 47% of the American voters are irredeemable victim-minded government-leeching supporters of President Obama.
Can't disprove the number, but I can address the topic of why I barely use Google+ and have no plans to do more with it. I'm pretty sure my use is sufficient for the google to claim that I'm an active user, but I have NOT communicated with anyone via Google+ in some months, and only about three times EVER. My current "activity" is to allow Google+ to upload pictures from my smartphone--and I increasingly regret my choice of Android. I'm still with Android basically because Apple and Microsoft are too evil for my tastes, and at least the increasingly evil Google doesn't control the Android infrastructure to the same degree.
For whatever it's worth, I didn't blame the google for going EVIL--until I found out that they have become leading lobbyist among high-tech companies. It's one thing to become evil because the rules of the game require large American companies to become more evil over time just to survive, but the lobbyists are the creators of those evil rules (of course mediated through the politicians who can be purchased most cheaply).
>My current "activity" is to allow Google+ to upload pictures from my smartphone--and I increasingly regret my choice of Android.
Then why do you have this functionality turned on? I remember installing the G+ app on my phone and it specifically asked me if I wanted auto upload turned on, seems a bit silly and a waste of data allowance if you have no plans of using it!
"...over 400,000,000 people have upgraded to Google+. It was only a year ago that we opened public sign-up, and we couldn’t have imagined that so many people would join in just 12 months..."
Google have moved on from press-ganging people into joining G+ via their Gmail accounts. For the past couple of months, I have been receiving emails to my Gmail email adresses, telling me what fun and larks I could be having, if only I signed up to Google+.
When I click on the "unsubscribe" link [dontcha just love having to "unsubscribe" from shite you never subscribed to in the first place!], I am taken to the G+ login/create profile page. So, in other words, the only way I can stop Google bombarding me with emails, telling me how great Google+ is, is to sign up for Google+.
The number 22 and the word "catch" spring to mind!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
