– Yes
– No
– Whaat?
Google+ is still alive
and Google acquires Polar to give it some boost
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/15440/20140912/google-is-still-alive-and-google-acquires-polar-to-give-it-some-boost.htm
Google acquired online poll startup company Polar to boost Google+. Despite its struggles, Google+ remains very valuable to Google.
Comments
Yes +Jeff Sullivan
Was encouraged by this news despite Google removing the app from the App Store.
_yes
What is G+ "struggling" with? +Jeff Sullivan +Euro Maestro
+Malthus John
A vision.
So, did that article hint that 2014 might be the end of g+?
I'm not following you +Malthus John , did anyone say G= was "struggling with" anything? I found it curious that news of a poll feature was made public without the feature being activated, so my manual poll was meant to be ironic.
This acquirement is not to add polls to Google+. They hire the talent to improve the design of Google+ app
I thought that Google was awash with resumes submitted +Rafa Ramírez. Also having to pay a premium to buy a company and it's intellectual property, just to hire some engineers, doesn't seem to make logical sense unless you want the functionality / patents associated with the app.
I haven't seen any rumors like that at all lately +Tony S. In the past every few months someone would get attention by writing a "Google+ is dead" or "Google+ is a ghost town" article, which prompted "Google+ is still alive" response articles. Apparently some of those "dead" articles created enough stir that some new articles start by reminding readers (who might not have seen the rebuttal articles) that Google+ is alive.
Google+ Is Very Much Alive!
https://plus.google.com/101423092138897438495/posts/aykwjPcg8qX
FriendFeed is still "alive" as well though.
+Jeff Sullivan I was thinking of using the existing G+ functionality to publish surveys: in the main post, phrase your question and just tell people to plus one either comment #1 or #2 which are the survey question responses.
Yes
The details are sketchy but it sounded more like google was buying the developers and not care about the product they made. They didn't say anything about adding polar to g+.
I think +Rafa Ramírez has a point, with Google buying the team for the staff. Even though I'm sure Google gets tons and tons of resumes from very talented developers, buying smaller tech companies to incorporate their staff seems to be a common thing in the modern tech business world. Plus, it also takes a popular product away from other potential buyers/competitors like Facebook. I kind of compare it to the Yankees and Red Sox thing. They go after top players and pay top dollar not necessarily because they need that player, but just so the other team doesn't get a chance to sign them.
All in all, interaction on G+ has slowed down over the past year. But I think that's true of other networks too so I like to believe that folks are simply choosing to live life and go on adventures instead of staying plugged in and connected all the time. Which is a good thing I think. He he.
"I like to believe that folks are simply choosing to live life and go on adventures instead of staying plugged in and connected all the time"
(+Mark Esguerra says, connected…) 🙂
What's your next adventure Mark?
I disagree / don't think that any 'vision' is even necessary for 'social media'. It's just a stepping stone, and the destination does not fundamentally include the traditional corporate business model. +Euro Maestro
In other words, the final destination will not be controlled by a single entity, nor even a monopoly of similar ones (as we have now).
+Jeff Sullivan He he. Well, it's looking like I'll be chasing some Fall colors in Japan. But before that I'm hoping to get a couple of days from work to make my way up North to your neck of the woods. If I can get that time to make the drive, I'll be giving you a call my friend.
+Jeff Sullivan – yes, in the sub-heading of the article you linked, and in it as well.
It is only innuendo and hyperbole, and thinly veiled FB cheerleaderism .
G+ is great because it isn't Facebook.
Ah, I had missed the text in the caption of the G+ logo +Malthus John. I tend to read over much of what's said about G+. Google finds it valuable to learn more about us, so G+ will continue. That's good enough for me.
The rest is pretty standard background rhetoric. FB doesn't need cheerleaders, and we've probably heard just about everything detractors can say as well. The site isn't not particularly kind to photos, and recent heavier filtering seems to bias the site towards chatters and away from photographers, making alternative (including G+) seem attractive. It all changes from month to month, year to year, so I don't get too hung up on any site's current state. Whatever it is, it'll be different next quarter.
+Mark Esguerra Sounds good. I'm counting on you to take some photos in Japan that make me insanely jealous! No pressure.
I'll be trying my best to get images that will lure you to Japan +Jeff Sullivan! The Japan landscape is begging to be shot by you. He he.
g+ is good enough, but still could use some improvements, like using left and right whitespace. It is funny to use it on fullHD monitors