Page: Google + in the impact of large and all other Google products

Google co-founder and CEO Larry page made it clear on Thursday has high expectations for the company for its new social-networking site Google +.

During a conference call the company's third quarter financial results page outlined significant implications he sees Google + on the company.

"Our ultimate goal is to transform the whole Google experience-so almost by chance nice easy, because we understand it immediately deliver what you want and can", he said.

"This means baking identity and Exchange in all of our products, so that we build a real relationship with our users." Exchange on the Web be like the release in real life over all your stuff. You better, more relevant search results and view must, "he added."

Although it clearly since its launch in June, that Google + is an important initiative on Google, latest comments leave no doubt page, which is a lot riding on the success of social-networking site.

"Think about it this way: last quarter, we delivered"Plus"and now we ship the part of Google," he said.

Of course, now comes the hard part: development Google + in a way that a critical mass of users to achieve and makes it a real contender on Facebook.

Although page much excitement on Thursday about the fact expressed, that Google + has topped now 40 million members, success is sure.

Finally, Facebook has more than 800 million members, and its growth shows no signs of slowing down down-- on the contrary. And since the launch of Google, Facebook has new and updated features have been aggressive.

Some industry observers have pointed out that Google + functions requires that a clear differentiation from Facebook, be it as unique functionality, which is enough to hundreds of millions of people to make the command prompt, forcing their preferred social network.

A Google engineer named Steve Yegge this week incorrectly publicly published a post in which some sharp criticism of Google +, called it matched much of "A knee-jerk reaction, a study in short term thinking", because it lacks a strong developer platform.

Data analytics company Chitika recently released results of a study which showed that Google + traffic has deflated, came after after a bit of social networking service from a limited beta on Sept. 20, and back please use had level always publicly available.

In short, the consensus appears that Google + risk runs the millions of people, at the end as a good social-networking site, but that come with Facebook's position in the market not close.

In this scenario would Google + lag behind the big vision, the page for it has painted on Thursday. Google would leave a lot of online data, which is for the Google search engine, from the growing threat of Facebook as advertising competitor, as a close partner of Microsoft, as well as the gatekeeper.

In the coming year, it will be interesting to see, Google, Google + to make the page the vast service sieht-- and that the company needs.

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Travel Info

Read More

TECHNOLOGY, Facebook and Spotify Drop the Other Shoe

Recently, Facebook announced a new music service that incorporates streaming music services with such partners as Spotify, Rhapsody, Mog, Rdio, iHeartRadio, and Slacker. The idea is that when Facebook members listen to music from one of these services, they can elect to share a constantly updating playlist of tracks they’re playing. Those “friends” who have access to the same music service can then also play this music simply by clicking on a link to the track.
I commented on what this might mean in "Facebook and the Future of Music". One vital piece of information missing at the time was that, in at least one case we now know of, Facebook membership is a requirement to belong to the service. That service is Spotify.
According to a Spotify representative: “New accounts require Facebook to log in and this is a worldwide initiative. To us, this is all about creating an amazing new world of music discovery. To make this as good and simple as it possibly can be, we’ve integrated Spotify login with Facebook login. By adopting Facebook’s login, we’ve created a simple and seamless social experience. Once a user is logged in they can control what to share to each of their networks from the preferences menu in Spotify.”
I’ve checked in with some of the other music services, and both Mog and Rhapsody tell me that while they’re participating in Facebook’s music service, they are not exclusive to it. You can have a Mog or Rhapsody account without also having a Facebook account. Each of these services additionally offer its own social networking service.
Putting aside the issue of whether this really is about “creating an amazing new world of music discovery” or the more likely matter of Spotify increasing its revenue thanks to better placement and a piece of the action, it very definitely puts Facebook in an important place in the music business. It’s now a significant music distributor and in the position to make demands of music companies as well as promote particular labels, artists, and publishers to millions of Facebook users.
Yes, I have Facebook issues
I’m not a fan of Facebook—I dropped my Facebook account more than a year ago thanks to what I considered the company’s pernicious privacy policies. So you’re forgiven for swallowing a grain of salt prior to believing, like me, that this isn’t a particularly good thing.
There’s a succinct phrase floating around the Internet that goes, “If you’re not paying for it, you’re the product.” This is how Google, Facebook, and other such services operate. You’re offered these services not because of the philanthropic tendencies of these companies but rather because you have something of value that they want—your personal information. This information gets churned with the information of countless other individuals and sold to advertisers, who use it to find ways to more efficiently market their stuff. This includes targeting individuals for particular products.
In order for this scheme to work, these forces must collect as much information about you as possible. And, in the case of Facebook, this means making it difficult for you to prevent that information from being shared. Time and again the company changes its policy settings—sometimes without your knowledge—so that more of your information is made available. If you’re aware of these changes you can attempt to change them back to more restrictive settings, but it’s not often easy to do that, as the settings are designed to be confusing. Additionally, most people either aren’t savvy enough to understand the implications of their inaction or are too busy to bother.
The company has made a habit of stepping too far over the privacy line, backing off when enough voices are raised, waiting for things to cool down, and then testing the waters again. These are not the acts of a company that values privacy but rather one that continues to push the limits of what its users and the law will allow.
Given this, do I really trust Facebook to be Simon Pure in regard to promoting music? Of course not. Nor does this do much for my faith in Spotify.
But it does make me think that Apple now has a significant opportunity.
Where Apple fits
As I said in last week’s piece, Apple has shown no signs of wanting to get into the subscription music business. The $25-a-year iTunes Match music service will allow you to wirelessly download music you own that can be found at the iTunes Store as well as upload music that isn’t in the iTunes Store, but there’s no option for streaming or downloading music you don’t own, as you can with Spotify, Rhapsody, Napster, Rdio, and Mog.
Suppose this streaming thing catches on—that Facebook demonstrates that people do like to swap playlists and immediately play and collect music recommended by their friends. How could Apple respond?
First, it could offer such a service without demanding your Internet life and soul in exchange. Rather than forcing you into a Web browser to listen to music streams, it could provide streams through iTunes, Apple TVs, and iOS devices. If you like the social experience, Apple could keep the name Ping, scrap the original service that went by that name, and make it an effective and enjoyable way to share music with your friends. Video streaming is also an option. And, like Facebook, it could launch the service and make it available to the millions of people who already have a relationship with the company in the form of an Apple ID.
But why trust Apple more than Facebook or Google or any other company? Of course there’s always the chance that Apple will go more heavily into the advertising business than its initial iAds foray so never say never but, unlike Facebook, advertising isn’t Apple’s reason for being. The company is doing quite well selling us tangible objects and apps—”real” things rather than enticements. This gives me hope.
I’m on record saying that I find music subscription a terrific way to listen to scads of music and I suspect that as people are exposed to it—from whatever service—they too will find the value in it. Once we’re over the hump of believing it’s sinful to “rent” music, I pray Apple’s there to provide a workable and trustworthy alternative to the Facebook trap. In the meantime, I’m dropping Spotify; sticking with Rhapsody, Napster, Mog, and Rdio; and keeping my fingers crossed that Apple has plans along these lines.

Read More