Gmail users getting Google+ account by default now

[Skel]

That's one way of getting users.. how much does it populate for you?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57...gle-too/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

 

[RavenSEAL]

Oh noes, Google has my info!

 

[Insomniator]

Does anyone use google+ anymore? It was a thing for like... 2 days tops.

 

[WelshBloke]

TBH Google really needs to rebrand and aggregate a crap ton of its services.

Youtube should be Google Video, picassa should be Google image, etc. And they should all use the same Google log in and a similar UI.

I was just setting up my wife's phone to upload to youtube and it involved way too many log ins to set up. I'd be happy with Google+ if it pulled all Googles services together under one name (like it does with picassa).

 

[cheezy321]

Google is turning to crap these days.

They are forcing us to use google+. This product will go the way of google buzz, google health, hotpot, etc.

Google is now a follower in every industry. They don't have anything original to bring to the table.

They have gotten more and more pathetic. They aren't even original or visionary anymore. It all started with android.

 

[WelshBloke]

Google is turning to crap these days.

They are forcing us to use google+. This product will go the way of google buzz, google health, hotpot, etc.

Google is now a follower in the industry. They dont have anything original to bring to the table.

They have gotten more and more pathetic. They aren't even original or visionary anymore. It all started with android.

No they arent. In what way are they forcing you to use it?

Your Android hate is blinding you.

Google has a ton of really good services, they are just scattered all over the place. If they can offer all those services under one roof it would be awesome.

 

[cheezy321]

No they arent. In what way are they forcing you to use it?

Your Android hate is blinding you.

Google has a ton of really good services, they are just scattered all over the place. If they can offer all those services under one roof it would be awesome.

Did you listen to their earnings report yesterday? They are skewing their statistics to make google+ sound like its a success. It isn't.

Read this: http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/19/google-plus-vanity-metrics/

Google does have a ton of really good services. I use gmail daily. I use google docs daily. They are great services. Are they original? Hell no.

Google+ will never be a good product because nobody I know uses it. Therefore I will never become active on it. But they still insist on shoving it down my throat.

 

[WelshBloke]

Did you listen to their earnings report yesterday? They are skewing their statistics to make google+ sound like its a success. It isn't.

Read this: http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/19/google-plus-vanity-metrics/

Google does have a ton of really good services. I use gmail daily. I use google docs daily. They are great services. Are they original? Hell no.

Google+ will never be a good product because nobody I know uses it. Therefore I will never become active on it. But they still insist on shoving it down my throat.

What the hell does any of that have to do with them forcing you to use it?

 

[Mike Gayner]

They are forcing us to use google+.

Holy shit really? Do they have your family tied up somewhere?

 

[destrekor]

TBH Google really needs to rebrand and aggregate a crap ton of its services.

Youtube should be Google Video, picassa should be Google image, etc. And they should all use the same Google log in and a similar UI.

I was just setting up my wife's phone to upload to youtube and it involved way too many log ins to set up. I'd be happy with Google+ if it pulled all Googles services together under one name (like it does with picassa).

Sooner or later, it will be entirely Google+, or at least seemingly centrally-integrated though probably just from within Google+ itself. Google+ will be advertised on the various Google-owned unique identities, but otherwise they will continue to function in a standalone manner with their brand intact, aside from a Google/Google+ bar.
From within, it will probably feature all that content fed inside the Google+ experience, with a different look and possibly named [brand]+ i.e. Youtube+.

 

[Vic Vega]

Sort of how they forced YouTube users to have a Google account.

Fvck you, Google.

 

[cheezy321]

Holy shit really? Do they have your family tied up somewhere?

Holy shit really? Did you read the article. When you sign up for gmail, you sign up for a google+ account. You are automatically counted as a 'user' of the service.

Google is using their natural monopoly to shove their new products down your throat. Isn't this the same thing microsoft got in trouble with (concerning internet explorer?). I guess its ok when google does it.

 

[WelshBloke]

Holy shit really? Did you read the article. When you sign up for gmail, you sign up for a google+ account. You are automatically counted as a 'user' of the service.

Google is using their natural monopoly to shove their new products down your throat. Isn't this the same thing microsoft got in trouble with (concerning internet explorer?). I guess its ok when google does it.

Wow, way to get worked up over nothing.

You. Don't. Have. To. Use. It.

 

[Red Squirrel]

TBH Google really needs to rebrand and aggregate a crap ton of its services.

Youtube should be Google Video, picassa should be Google image, etc. And they should all use the same Google log in and a similar UI.

I was just setting up my wife's phone to upload to youtube and it involved way too many log ins to set up. I'd be happy with Google+ if it pulled all Googles services together under one name (like it does with picassa).

Yeah I agree. What's the point of having two of the same type of service anyway? Guess that's what happens when a company buys another company, and they don't plan it out well enough.

My company was bought out a couple times, we have to enter our time in like 3 different systems, it's retarded how big companies can be so disorganized.

 

[Skel]

Holy shit really? Did you read the article. When you sign up for gmail, you sign up for a google+ account. You are automatically counted as a 'user' of the service.

Google is using their natural monopoly to shove their new products down your throat. Isn't this the same thing microsoft got in trouble with (concerning internet explorer?). I guess its ok when google does it.

It’s shady when it comes to accounting of the service and reporting its popularity, but nothing like what MS was doing. My only concern would be how much is Google populating the service? If it starts pulling any more info than my Gmail handle I wouldn’t be comfortable with it, but that’s me.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

Actually, I was an early member to Gmail, and I have no memory of giving them any personal information. Since Google+ requires personal information, this conflicts with giving Gmail account holders G+ accounts if I continue to not provide personal information.

 

[destrekor]

Actually, I was an early member to Gmail, and I have no memory of giving them any personal information. Since Google+ requires personal information, this conflicts with giving Gmail account holders G+ accounts if I continue to not provide personal information.

It sounds like this is only for people who create new Gmail users.

Also, I wonder if it will automatically happen if you make a public profile in Google.

That's the big thing: I think, when I last made an account, a public profile still wasn't the default, may not have been an option. I'm not really sure, but I know my secondary accounts are not tied at all.
You can probably disable the Google+ bonus by declining a public profile.

Mind you, the public profile thing is separate but the first line for your personal information. This is in the Google Account Settings, or whatever it's called.

 

[Mike Gayner]

Google is using their natural monopoly to shove their new products down your throat. Isn't this the same thing microsoft got in trouble with (concerning internet explorer?). I guess its ok when google does it.

I love how people throw around the word "monopoly" without knowing what it means. What exactly does Google have a monopoly over? I also love how you use the term "natural monopoly" which has a specific definition in economics that is completely unrelated to what you're babbling about.

 

[Printer Bandit]

http://9to5google.com/

 

[JJChicken]

I love how people throw around the word "monopoly" without knowing what it means. What exactly does Google have a monopoly over? I also love how you use the term "natural monopoly" which has a specific definition in economics that is completely unrelated to what you're babbling about.

They have a monopoly over the search engine market.

 

[Gothgar]

http://9to5google.com/

Unlikely

 

[Locut0s]

They have a monopoly over the search engine market.

http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2108991/August-2011-Search-Engine-Share-from-comScore-Hitwise

65% is hardly a monopoly.

 

[Mike Gayner]

They have a monopoly over the search engine market.

Aah, no. Google have about 80% market share in the US. That's far from a monopoly - having one company with a majority share is not a monopoly. Go back to school and don't return until you've learned some basic economics.

BTW there are parts of the world where Google is a minority player. Think about that for a few minutes.

 

[FoBoT]

 

[Kwatt]

They can make me fill in blanks...but they can not make me tell the truth.



.