[EDIT: I should probably consider this Part 2 in my Brevity series!]
I really have tried to like Google+. And there are things about it that work well – adding people to Circles and having these groups in separate streams is excellent. However, I suspect the vast majority of users will simply have a work stream and a friends/family stream and maybe a celebrity or sources stream and that’s about it. I can also see a value for the Hangout function in business contexts, but I seriously doubt that people want video meetups for groups of friends they see everyday or fairly regularly, so I think the nomenclature is actually a disincentive to use the function. And even disconnected families are unlikely to adopt Google+ just for video conferencing. (And I use video Skype calls to my family at least weekly so I really know what I’m talking about here.)
But other than the interface for adding people to circles and the video conferencing module, I’m really not enjoying Google+ at all. Ironically for a company based on a search engine, the search facility is one of the worst I’ve ever experienced, the subject tracking facility ‘Sparks’ is dreadful, the notification system is appalling, and the fact that you have to be in G+ to actually post anything is irritatingly stupid. I’m gobsmacked that app developers have so far only focused on accessing content, and posting to twitter and facebook from within G+ rather than working out how to post to G+ using existing messaging clients (such as Tweetdeck, Seesmic, Hootsuite, etc), and I’m dismayed that pro-G+ advocates just don’t seem to see the limitations of the interaction design, with content streams ordered by most recent comments, rather than chronologically.
But most of all, the thing that has been made most clear by Google+ is the need for messaging and news systems to be brief. G+ enables long form posts with long comments. Sure, this means you can explore an issue in more detail, but because most posts are long, the amount of scrolling you have to do to access new information sources is just unusable. The great thing about twitter has always been that you can skim a huge amount of content very quickly, particularly in applications such as Hootsuite, Tweetdeck and Seesmic. Then you can hone in on people or content that catches your eye and explore further through links and comments as appropriate. G+ really only allows about 30 posts in your stream and you have to scroll a long, long way before you get to see any more.
And it all comes down to brevity of posts. Interestingly, this brevity is actually available in Facebook even though FB allows longer posts than on twitter. There is a cap on the number of characters you can use in FB posts, as a means of ensuring that your streams are not too clogged up, and that you are actually generating an update, not a blog post. But brevity is essential for the effective operation of a news stream. Long form posts, lumped in with short form content is actually a poor user experience. And long form comments are awkward to follow and respond to effectively, using G+’s unthreaded comment facility. Lack of brevity in both posts and comments actually reduces usability and increases likelihood of time wastage in the platform. Instead of being a news and information filter, Google+ has been optimised as a time sink.
Perhaps Google sees G+ is being something of a blogging platform. If they do, it’s incredibly poorly designed. RSS feed readers are still the easiest way to index and access blog posts and to research and respond to ideas. The news stream format is just utterly inappropriate for long form content and it doesn’t index well for search – making the search facility even less usable (if that’s even possible).
I suspect that Google+ (like Wave and Buzz) has suffered from a classic problem – trying to be too many things to too many people. And they’re not alone. All the recent additions to Facebook functionality could actually weaken, rather than strengthen their position in the marketplace. But I am certain that brevity of information posting and browsing is essential to the appeal of social networking applications. And on that issue alone, I’m afraid to say G+ fails, and fails profoundly.
Brave and clear observations.
As it is it takes up a lot of extra time. Doubtless when fully live I will be able to add a stream to Hootsuite rather than make a separate visit. Circles are better than a global ‘Friends’ (which I could rattle on about!) but I would like to be able to change their sequence so I can move people along as I meet the IRL or work with them. And other things will follow. I do like the Google+ team’s way of engaging with user feedback.
But the sprawling posts do not encourage me to read – they daunt me. And, unless some journalistic skills are deployed, the invitation to commit the time is not there.
My year on Twitter has tended to make me, and others, more succinct. I don’t want Google+ to unravel that.
A couple of things:
it’s beta, don’t judge it on its current functionality. Many of the things you criticise aren’t locked down or likely to remain in the current form. Users will help craft it.
Just because something isn’t for you dosen’t mean people won’t use it, especially different demographics. You like skype, good, others will prefer hangouts, or something else. one size doesn’t and shouldn’t fit all.
its only been out a couple of weeks, give developers a chance to do things beyond quick tricks.
it’s not twitter.
@mac… I acknowledge freely that the final experience of G+ isn’t ‘locked down’, but I doubt very much whether the news stream experience will alter. This may be a beta, but what is available to several million users now is pretty much what you’re going to get. Certainly, APIs will be released which will allow external clients such as Tweetdeck, Seesmic, Hootsuite, etc to develop an interface for posts to be sent to G+, but the main problem – that posts and comments are too long for the news stream format – are likely to remain.
And yes, thanks, I realise it’s not twitter. The fact that it isn’t twitter, which suits the news format, is precisely why the G+ news stream doesn’t work. That’s my point.
“Instead of being a news and information filter, Google+ has been optimised as a time sink.”
Well, yeah, that’s the whole point. Social networking sites make money in proportion to the time spent there. Unless you actually stop using Google+, there’s no incentive to change.