Google+ First Impressions

When a friend of mine said he had Google+ invitations available, I asked for one.  Now I'm part of an elite group of early adopters.  What does that mean?  That means I'm on a brand spanking new social network with 9 friends.  That's way below critical mass.  You can hear the echo.  So, why pay attention?

What's Good

According to an article from the San Jose Mercury News, Google+'s main attraction so far has been the ability to follow Twitter-like feeds from some of Silicon Valley's greatest minds, like Mark Zuckerberg and Kevin Rose.  So, Google+ is Twitter, not Facebook?  The answer is no; it's new.  Clearly, some careful planning went into this product, and it's got the best elements from both Twitter and Facebook.  It also avoids the worst pitfals of the existing services, with innovative new features like Circles.  I wish Facebook had a feature like that (it doesn't).

As the Mercury News article points out, two weeks ago we would have laughed at the idea that Google could compete against Facebook.  In fact, some of us did.  People used to say the same thing about Internet Explorer's chances against the dominant Netscape Navigator.  Not to mention that, as I pointed out in my previous article, the network effect hasn't seemed terribly potent when it comes to social networking; see Friendster and MySpace.

Google+ seems to have learned lessons from them, too.  It is clean and simple to use; cleaner and simpler than Facebook, in fact.  That was originally one of the major advantages of Facebook over MySpace: MySpace was a hopelessly cluttered mess, and Facebook was simple and elegant.  Now, Facebook is an impenetrable soup of information; you'd have a better chance of simultaneously determining the location, speed, and direction of an electron.  I've written before about Facebook's tendency to move things around and confuse their own users.  I've written about this multiple times, because they keep doing it.

Of course, Google+ still has plenty of time to screw with its one beautiful design, not to mention the fact that it's still a closed beta so screwing with the product is basically part of the job right now.  But look at Gmail: it's barely changed in the past what, ten years?  It has added some pretty amazing features--you can make telephone calls and do video chat from your email, not to mention more mundane but useful features like calendar and document integration.  And yet, this sea of awesome functionality laps tamely around the edges of an interface that has basically not changed.  I don't know any other major tech company that's been able to resist the urge to fuck with their own interface for that length of time.

What's Wrong

The name of the game here is integration.  Having an elegant interface is nice, but that's not why Facebook dethroned MySpace.  Facebook did two things right: an open API, and apps.  The open API meant anyone could integrate with Facebook.  You don't have to create a new account, you don't have to juggle passwords, heck, you don't even have to type your name again!  Just click a single button and you can log on to my site, using your Facebook account.  That's an incredibly powerful feature.  It speaks volumes that MySpace has a "connect with Facebook" button on their home page.

Apps are an even brighter idea.  Never mind using your Facebook account on my site; use my site on your Facebook account!  The best example of this is Zynga, a company that literally grew up as a Facebook app, before branching out on its own.  Facebook is about much more than social networking, now; it's a way to pass the time.

And, of course, Facebook apps aren't just about wasting time.  I've personally created Facebook apps to help the official Nascar charity.  (The apps show up as tabs on the side of the Nascar FB page.)

So, that's two important ingredients that Google+ is missing: an open API, and apps.  The third missing ingredient also has to do with integration: integration with Google's own services.

I've talked before about how I drink eagerly from Google's well.  In addition to Gmail, I use Google Calendar, Google Voice, Google Docs, Google Maps, iGoogle, and Google Reader on a daily basis.  Other indispensible tools include Google Analytics, Google Webmaster Tools, Google Adwords, Google Adsense, Google Bookmarks, Feedburner, Google Translate, and Youtube (and not just for fun - Youtube is a business tool).  Not to mention my Android phone and Chrome web browser, neither of which I could live without.  I'd load Google Chrome OS on my laptop, if Google would let me.

So what's the problem here?  The problem is Google+ doesn't integrate with any of these things.  If someone sends me a message in Google+, it has to email me.  Gmail has boxes for calendar, documents, chat, and even telephone, but not Google+.  As discussed above, Google+ gives me front-row seats to news feeds from people like Mark Zuckerberg, but can't I already get that through Facebook itself?  Or Twitter?  Or an RSS feed?  I've got several dozen news feeds I already follow, using Google Reader, plus my Facebook friend feed.  Google+ wants to be the third feed I read every day.  Not going to happen.  Now, if my Google+ feed showed up in Google Reader?  Or even better--if my Google Reader showed up inside Google+?  That would be pretty awesome.

Google+ already integrates Picasa and chat, even video chat, which is cool, but it seems like they're merely playing catchup with Facebook.  Am I going to start double-tagging all my photos in Facebook AND Google+?  Not a chance.  I don't even like Picasa.  Unlike Facebook, Google already hosts a symphony of fantastic online tools, many of which would fit perfectly inside Google+.  (How about bringing back Google Wave, inside Google+?  How insanely awesome would that be?)

What does that show us?  It shows us that Google already gets the idea of integrating their existing services in Google+.  But what they've done so far belies a lack of vision.  Other companies, like Microsoft, have truly struggled with the idea of integrating different parts of the company.  But you never hear talk of fiefdom rivalries inside Google, the way you do with Microsoft or Apple.  So why isn't my Google Reader inside Google+?  Simply because they haven't thought of it.

Of course, that ignores the bigger picture of why there's no open API or apps.  Either Google+ doesn't get why Facebook defeated the competition, or they're intentionally forging out in a new direction.  In that case, they haven't come up with anything equally compelling.

Yet.

Bottom Line

This is the second time in as many weeks that I've reviewed a new product that builds on things I already love, but fails to be better.  Google's track record with new web services is spotty, with some pretty notable failures (such as Wave), and when it comes to social networking their record is downright abysmal.  But Google also has some stellar successes, and their public failures show something very important: Google is not afraid to try.  Google has worked very hard to maintain that startup vibe, even as they become one of the largest tech companies in the world.  I'm not about to write off Google+, but I'm certainly not about to write off Facebook either.  I look forward to seeing what happens next; it's going to be fun to watch.