• cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    9 months ago

    The crazy thing is, they had a nascent social network going with Google Reader, populated by people who were engaged and interested in the content. And they threw it all away to chase a Facebook clone, which was doomed anyway.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      9 months ago

      They could’ve had basically Reddit if they added a way to have comments in Google reader. Then again, they would’ve never invested in moderation, so it probably would’ve turned into a shitheap.

      • cyd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        9 months ago

        they would’ve never invested in moderation, so it probably would’ve turned into a shitheap.

        i.e., basically Reddit!

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          9 months ago

          Reddit tricked their own users into doing the moderating, that was their great innovation.

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      Google+ could have been successful to a degree, in terms of features it was an improvement over Facebook in several ways. The problem was the invite only launch.

      The invite period worked for Gmail because it was still interoperable with other email services, and made getting a Gmail address seem exclusive and desirable. Making a walled garden social network invite only, however, just lead to it being empty. Most who did sign up looked around for a few minutes then went back to Facebook.

    • t0fr@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      They just seem to make wacky brain-dead decisions all the time and nobody really understands why they make the decisions they do.