at last, the internet giants has turned rivals, as Google finalized arrangement for their new Google+ social networking site. what do you think about the competition between both

Google+ will probably be another failed product, like the current google+1. Why do I say so? Facebook is a brand. Like Coke, it is tough to beat a brand.

Will Google+ take away some of the market? Sure but I still don't think that will be enough to make Facebook feel threatened.

Google? Forget, they will hit facebook hard. I just pray facebook will still be there for us to use.

it looks good though. has different features lyk Circles, Hangouts & Sparks.

Google is currently the world most trafficked website and saying that they will not pull a sizable amount of facebook users is totally unacceptable.

Google is the owner of youtube, the third most trafficked website in the world, if google integrates Google+ with Gmail, Youtube, Google Search and their other products, facebook will definitely be in trouble and could even threaten their next year IPO offering.

The catch is usually a seamless way of dragging all current users of google products into the Google+ social media. You can probably view your mails, videos directly from youtube or even search the web within your Google+ account. Also inviting friends to join is easier as your email contact list is synced directly with your account.

Call me lazy and old school and out of touch but I am tired of maintaining too many profiles and login credentials. That is why I stick to the same thing for years. I only visit facebook when I get a friend request and only use it to stay in touch with secondary school mates.

I wonder how many people are like me. By the way, as of yesterday, Google health has failed and it looks like the new google+1 product will fail as well.

No doubt, google's heavy traffic will help with publicity but there is no guarantee they will pose a risk to facebook. Myspace could not. And mind you, this is not the first time Google is trying the social network business. Google Buzz failed.

Again ask yourself, is there really a need to upload my details one more place apart from facebook? I think you will find this feeling echoed accross the net.

Is there any new thing Google+ has that facebook is not already offering? Is it really necessary re-inventing the wheel?

Google should have stepped into the game long long ago instead of waiting till now to play catchup.

According to GOOGLE:
"Circles" groups your friends together

Google Circles are groups of friends you organize by topic: Friends, Family, College Buddies, Roommates, etc.

From your Circles page you drag and drop your contacts into each of these groups, which makes it easier to share what you want with them.

" this implies we have better privacy in Google+ since information can be controlled and can only be seen by people of particular circle, sincerely, it will be competitive"

From Google+
Hangouts lets you video chat with all your buddies


Hangouts are virtual rooms where you can video chat with people in your circles. For example, if you're not busy, you can start a talk with your pals.

So, basically, it's just video chat.

does Facebook possess this?

I'm not a pessimist, but Google+ project will probably fail. The reason is quite simple.

The unserious facebook users are there because it is "FACEBOOK". . . not because of the features on it.

The serious minded users, most of them, believe Facebook has done enough as a distraction and security risk and they can't see themselves taking that further with Google+


BUT THE MAIN POINT IS

If I move to Google+, Do I want to move my friends with me or I wait till all or at least, most of my friends move to Google+?? It's ridiculous.

Facebook has sailed that ship.

Even MySpace knows that. It has just been sold.

What's the link for the google + thing.I have tried googling it and couldnt get the link.

Google+ has a lot going for it because it's owned by google which is the mirror to the world wide web.Google+ also has some features that facebook does not have. I sha pity for lazy facebook who instead of adding new features they were busy changing the layout. Google is here to colonize the internet and colonize they will.

In a world, where we have had MySpace go from $590 million to $35 million in market value in 3 years, it is very possible for Google to compete Facebook; experience, innovation and access to market. Never say never in social media

Nigerians don't like to leave old things. They lack quick adaptation even when it becomes obvious that what the hang onto is outdated.

Google+ would not work in Nigeria, but everywhere else in the world.

For the records: GOOGLE RULES!!!!!

It depends on individual, but google is popular, people will want to feel how the social network will be built. If google can add more interesting things to that of facebook, believe me, Google will beat Facebook. By God's grace, I will on Google.

Google is going to be fun!!!!
I can count the number of times I've checked my
facebook account for the past 3years
Google+ is for sure going to get me rolling!!!

You need an INVITE, to be able to use Google Plus, YET. So, if you're not important you cannot use it.

BTW, I have an invite.

I strongly believe that FB will still hold the lead reason being that consumer loyalty is more of "cult like". With a lot of friends on facebook and the facebook like cult attitude am sure google will have a lot of stunt to pull for them to take over the market.

I maybe wrong but I think controlling what people view on your profile using Google+ might be a minus for google. The fun with FB is the ease of filliping through people photo and profile without difficult. If most people would admit, am I certain everyone does that. Imagine u trying to look through a friend's profile and being denied access due to categorization; where is the fun then!!

Its good to categorize.

Example

Category Family

Status Update - I just got back from church.

Category Friends

Status Update - Out wanklng with the guys.
Status Update - My boss is such an ldiot!

Category Work

Status Update - I've been up all night trying to complete this project!


--------------------------------------------------------------

But on facebook, everyone sees your status update!

@woodwork
You mean the same way myspace and hi5 were so cult-like that people left it to join another cult called facebook. Cult pass cult. I need to get initiated into this cult that a subsidiary of the biggest internet cult.

prodam:

From Google+
Hangouts lets you video chat with all your buddies


Hangouts are virtual rooms where you can video chat with people in your circles. For example, if you're not busy, you can start a talk with your pals.

So, basically, it's just video chat.

does Facebook possess this?

Facebook is about to launch Video Chat in conjunction with Skype!
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/rumor-facebook-to-launch-skype-video-chat-this-wednesday/1877

i_want_to:

Google is currently the world most trafficked website and saying that they will not pull a sizable amount of facebook users is totally unacceptable.

Google is the owner of youtube, the third most trafficked website in the world, if google integrates Google+ with Gmail, Youtube, Google Search and their other products, facebook will definitely be in trouble and could even threaten their next year IPO offering.

The catch is usually a seamless way of dragging all current users of google products into the Google+ social media. You can probably view your mails, videos directly from youtube or even search the web within your Google+ account. Also inviting friends to join is easier as your email contact list is synced directly with your account.

Hmm. . . ^^ my thoughts exactly.
I do feel that a large percentage of those with a Facebook account would restrain from migrating to another social networking site to keep in contact with their friends,families,e.t.c. because FB already offers everything they would want and more. Also,the commitment and stress associated with managing several networking accounts (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Zynga,e.t.c) might deter other non-Google account holders from jumping ship. However,i do feel the although the Google+ project would be a huge hit ,due to the large amount of Google account holders and due to the fact that Google likes to integrate it's product (YouTube, iGoogle, G-mail, e.t.c) features into one another,thereby enabling the Google+ media site (according to past and current trends) to boast a host of features, functions and what-not!. . .  it still would not be able to dethrone FB as the most utilized social networking site. My two cents

Hello House, 1st and foremost i will like to inquire how many brand consultants or professionals are in the house? 'cus they will be the ones to understand what i am about to write.


In Branding their are rules to be obeyed for a business to be successful over a long(er) period of time. things such as the brand name, heterogeneus, brand category, colour, simplicity and a whole lot more.

Now to google +, i will give you a few reasons why it wont last the test of time;

RULE OF NAME
They failed in the area of giving a new product in a new category the same name as its mother brand. That product of theirs would have been more successful assuming they had given it a new name entirely i.e; youtube, gmail e.t.c  once two brands from the same "mother brand/company" with similar categories bear the same (or very similar names) one is most likely to fail which usually is the later or former brand. examples are Diet Coke, Indomie onions, fanta lemon/fanta apple, LG mobile, Blue band light spread, and so many others.

RULE OF 1ST
It is almost impossible being a second or 3rd in a category and you expect to take over the category (except of course the 1st slips and get it all wrong) Examples of 1st in category's who have been dominating over decades and even centurys include Cocacola (vs pepsi), Nokia (vs other mobile phones), Indomie noodles (vs other noodles), peak milk (vs other milk brands), macdonalds (vs other burger joints), e.t.c

What google should have done was to try and create an entirely different category in the mind of its intended customers like they did for youtube (strictly for videos), google 9strictly search engine), gmail (strictly e.mail). Knowing fully well the category of Social Networking sites were saturated they should have thought deeper by creating a different  category entirely.


We are very open for brand advice and consulting to fellow young entrepreneurs to enable them avoid some terrible brand errors.

niromsolutions@yahoo.com

@bouzymill - When you you moved into facebppk, did you move with your friends? or did you not either get invitation from any of them or you invite them yourself?

Or probably make up your own friends there?

Just think before writing

I have seen the google + page, its dry, guess that has to do with the software been tested,
google has a couple products that hasnt panned out.

google buzz, google +1

I dont see them competing with facebook, coz it like some kinda global ID now
anyways letz watch.

IMO google is a search engine

not happening. i aint moving my 100 plus contacts with me to a new site. this can only work with the adventurous under 16s

I pray they close facebook finally

Hello House, 1st and foremost i will like to inquire how many brand consultants or professionals are in the house? 'cus they will be the ones to understand what i am about to write.


In Branding their are rules to be obeyed for a business to be successful over a long(er) period of time. things such as the brand name, heterogeneus, brand category, colour, simplicity and a whole lot more.

Now to google +, i will give you a few reasons why it wont last the test of time;

RULE OF NAME
They failed in the area of giving a new product in a new category the same name as its mother brand. That product of theirs would have been more successful assuming they had given it a new name entirely i.e; youtube, gmail e.t.c once two brands from the same "mother brand/company" with similar categories bear the same (or very similar names) one is most likely to fail which usually is the later or former brand. examples are Diet Coke, Indomie onions, fanta lemon/fanta apple, LG mobile, Blue band light spread, and so many others.

RULE OF 1ST
It is almost impossible being a second or 3rd in a category and you expect to take over the category (except of course the 1st slips and get it all wrong) Examples of 1st in category's who have been dominating over decades and even centurys include Cocacola (vs pepsi), Nokia (vs other mobile phones), Indomie noodles (vs other noodles), peak milk (vs other milk brands), macdonalds (vs other burger joints), e.t.c

What google should have done was to try and create an entirely different category in the mind of its intended customers like they did for youtube (strictly for videos), google 9strictly search engine), gmail (strictly e.mail). Knowing fully well the category of Social Networking sites were saturated they should have thought deeper by creating a different category entirely.


We are very open for brand advice and consulting to fellow young entrepreneurs to enable them avoid some terrible brand errors.

niromsolutions (at) yahoo (dotcom