Google Plus

[r.e.]

Ryde - just round the corner from Cowes!

There are some beautiful houses in Ryde. There's also a good butcher shop (only remember that it was on a steep, narrow street) from which we purchased a pheasant for Christmas a couple of years ago. Great fun searching for shotgun pellets

[Steve Smith]

There's also a good butcher shop (only remember that it was on a steep, narrow street)

I can't think of a butcher's shop on a steep, narrow street. However, being vegetarian, I don't visit them very often!!

I will have a think about this and see if I can work out where you mean.


Steve.

[brianam]

..., although it seems pretty clear to me that Google is essentially marketing Google+ via what amounts to a chain letter. If being "in" means that one can make 150 invites, that adds up fast.

Hah, that's funny. There were some published articles a couple years that 150 is about the mean number of genuine friends&family that one can keep track of in life, and on these social networks.
It's true many users do now have 500, or 1000 or more friends. But in all likelihood most are acquaintances, if they've even met at all.

Very shrewd count of invitations on Google's part. (as if Google being shrewd --possibly even "evil"?-- is any surprise.)

[r.e.]

I don't think it is already available for non-US residents.

Yes, it is available to non-U.S. residents. You need an invitation from someone who is already on Google+. There is also a link that someone posted earlier in this thread that may make an invitation unnecessary.

[QT Luong]

Yesterday G+ became available to everybody without requiring invites.

As far as a marketing venue, for photography, I am skeptical so far. I have a respectable number of "circlers" (if interested, check my stream at http://www.gplus.to/qtluong), however, I've noticed that the click-through rate is very low.

It could be because the demographic currently is mostly photographers. Some of the folks who make their living through photo education (eg Colby Brown) have reported some success, which makes sense, but it seems a lot of work/promotion/pandering is required to keep the audience engaged.

[Richard Mahoney]

As far as a marketing venue, for photography, I am skeptical so far. I have a respectable number of "circlers" (if interested, check my stream at http://www.gplus.to/qtluong), however, I've noticed that the click-through rate is very low.

I had a look around today when I should have been otherwise engaged. Curious, though the lack of functionality did surprise me a little. All clean and simple but it felt a limiting and restrictive. That said, I did put together a page or two with a brief overview of what I'm up to -- http://gplus.to/rmahoney -- though can't say I'll be wanting to allocate much time to `feeding' the beast.

Best regards,

Richard

[SamReeves]

Yesterday G+ became available to everybody without requiring invites.

Here we go, social network wars!

[Mike Anderson]

Never mind. Upgraded Chrome and it works now.

...http://www.gplus.to/qtluong...

...http://gplus.to/rmahoney...

Strangest thing - on the pages linked above, in Chrome (Mac) some of the photos don't show up (there's a blank space big enough to accomodate the photo). In Firefox they do show up and look fine. Back in Chrome, I do "Inspect element" on the blank space where the image is and the image magically appears.

Bug in google+ I bet.

...Mike

[r.e.]

Really interesting piece on The New Yorker web site today called "What Facebook Really Wants": http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...lly-wants.html

This morning, The Guardian ran "Google evangelist warns Facebook could be the next AOL or IBM": http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...book-vint-cerf The comment about Twitter struck me as especially interesting.

Meanwhile, Facebook, at its developer conference, made major announcements today, which I expect will be both widely covered and closely analyzed over the next few days. The Guardian, which ran today's story on Facebook/AOL/IBM, ran another story late today in which it said that it is one of Facebook's new partners: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...ertainment-hub

[Richard Mahoney]

I had a look around today when I should have been otherwise engaged. Curious, though the lack of functionality did surprise me a little. All clean and simple but it felt a limiting and restrictive. That said, I did put together a page or two with a brief overview of what I'm up to -- http://gplus.to/rmahoney -- though can't say I'll be wanting to allocate much time to `feeding' the beast.

Just a quick follow up ... It has been asked if it is likely that Google Plus would be privileged in Google search rankings. I'm sure we will never know for certain. What I can say though is that only a week or so after putting up what could only be described as a bare minimum of material my Google Plus pages are appearing well up the rankings. A simple search for `9780473177911' -- the ISBN of a catalogue I've recently published -- gives three Google Plus results in the first six pages, the first result appearing on the second page. Although this is pleasing, I'd say these results are definitely out of proportion with the extent and importance of the material I've provided. Although all of this is conjecture and granted one will never know for sure it does seem that setting up a page or two on Google Plus -- the work of only an hour or two -- is probably worth the effort. (Assuming Google search rankings matter to you at all.)


Kind regards,

Richard