|
|
|
| Google rolls out Web 2.0 interface |
|
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
 |
{"name":"Oops%20kid.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/5\/35a13f9062a3744b19ddd2d8410a1193.jpg","w":375,"h":500,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/5\/35a13f9062a3744b19ddd2d8410a1193"} --- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
 |
Or just learn French. That's what I did. |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
 |
Polly voo fransay? They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
MiquelFire
Member #3,110
January 2003
 |
An old co-worker actually has a + account, so at least one person I know is there. --- |
|
Goalie Ca
Member #2,579
July 2002
 |
Le best bug evarrrr {"name":"604440","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/e\/be48909aa16d128b37457486cc87e032.gif","w":301,"h":301,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/e\/be48909aa16d128b37457486cc87e032"} ------------- |
|
gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
 |
They're seriously going by invites again? They didn't learn from Orkut? -- |
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
 |
Invites worked well enough for GMail. --- |
|
gnolam
Member #2,030
March 2002
|
Yes, but Gmail simply plugged into an existing structure: if you wanted to communicate with someone else, they didn't need a Gmail account - they just needed an e-mail account. No need to worry about the network effect. Nowadays, they might have enough hype to draw people in regardless, but it's still a shitty tactic to kick-start a social networking system. -- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
I agree with gnolam. I think it's a major buzz-kill to join and not have anybody to connect with... Of course early adopters are likely to be nerds without friends, so maybe it is irrelevant. Now the major (and only real) difference between Google+ and Facebook is that you can follow anybody. So I suppose, even if you don't connect with anybody as a friend, you could still use it to follow people like you might with Twitter. That is, even if you don't use the service yourself, you may use it to keep tabs on other people who do. I do think Google+ has a major advantage in that it has been able to learn from Facebook and Twitter and start something slimmer that works better. But I don't know if that will be enough for it to catch on. Especially because the longer Google+ is around, the more Google will complicate it to the point where it is just as spammy and messed up as any other social networking site. |
|
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
 |
{"name":"comic.php","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/4\/e\/4ef8441de20bd5162eae3f5535086c70.gif","w":700,"h":485,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/4\/e\/4ef8441de20bd5162eae3f5535086c70"} -- |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
I'm tired of duckduckgo already. <sigh> They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
 |
Google+ is extremely beta right now. They are even having trouble keeping up with what little traffic they already have. I wouldn't expect much from Google+ for quite a while. -- |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
 |
I've setup my search as duckduckgo, but I have some concerns. If I search a location, it doesn't give me a map. It doesn't give me weather information. It sometimes lists a huge number of unrelated "related" stuff at the top. Sometimes it's really cool, because I like random things with insignificant shared associations, but sometimes it's bulky and annoying. Example: Search for "Firebug". Image search is also something I use daily. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Dizzy Egg
Member #10,824
March 2009
 |
Google rocks. Simple.
---------------------------------------------------- |
|
GullRaDriel
Member #3,861
September 2003
 |
Matthew said: Or just learn French. That's what I did. You're now ready for a 'Côte du Rhône' stage at my house ;-) "Code is like shit - it only smells if it is not yours" |
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
|
Quote: Example: Search for "Firebug" [duckduckgo.com]. What's the problem? The first few hits are:
I'd call that bull's eye. On Google, the first 5 results are all about the mozilla plugin; of the first 10 results, only three are not about the plugin. Dizzy Egg said: Google rocks. Simple. I've spent the better part of this work day wading through the Google AdWords API, and my appreciation for Google as a company has suffered considerably. --- |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
|
It wasn't a reference to the results being poor, it was the unrelated information in the "meaning" block, where it guesses the meaning of your query. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
 |
Duckduckgo said: Get results for different meanings of Firebug: [Dictionary] Firebug, a common insect of the family Pyrrhocoridae. arson, fire-based vandalism Firebug (computer game) - Firebug was a computer game by MUSE Software for the Apple II computer. Firebug (web development), an extension for Mozilla Firefox To me, it looks like it worked very well. I'm not sure what you are complaining about. If you are simply saying that the information box shouldn't exist, I suggest you turn it off by going to the settings screen. ----------- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
I searched for piza and it returned results for pizza. The UI is so distracting. There's more than one thing to click on. Time for a new search engine. Quote: How do I improve my rankings? Hahahaha... |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
|
Karadoc ~~ said: I'm not sure what you are complaining about The gist of the post was that it tells me lots of irrelevant things at the top, but it fails at showing me relevant things that are actually useful. Ie. Maps, images, or results weighted by the amount of data available on the percievable internet rather than an attempt at "pidgeon holed" algorithms. Of course, I'm comparing it to Google, which really isn't fair at all. Again, this isn't a shot at the results. So far those are good. It's the extra stuff, which disabling doesn't always improve (albeit, you're right, sometimes it does). There is a lack of integrative features. I may have made up a new word in this post. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
 |
I'm trying to upload a profile picture to Google+, but it keeps getting resized to tiny for no reason.
|
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
It looks huge to me. |
|
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
I figured out the problem. Now I just need to figure out why my profile picture isn't showing up when I make comments.
|
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
Google+ appears to have a very aggressive and arbitrary cache. And it's buggy. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Gotta love pre-beta software \o/ -- |
|
|
|
