 |  |
 |  |
Maybe not. A Googler and I once discussed the reasons and incentives for anyone wanting to explore the proposed social aspects (in making at the time) of big G's service in the face of the Book of Faces. My views were as grim on the idea then as they are now - not that I don't wish rainbow laced, sunny glow around any and all of Google endevours. I do. The company deserves it. It's the best at what they do. Unfortunately Social Networking isn't one of them.
Consider my investment in Facebook. I've been a member since when it first launched in the UK, in 2005 (only for Oxford and Cambridge before growing to about 30 Universities in that year). So I've been on it for more than 6 years now. I have more than 5,000 photos, a number of meticulously engineered 'limited views' friends lists with varying levels of permissions complexity. If I were to draw a Venn diagram of these lists and map common permissions, restrictions etc, I'd probably be drawing for a rather long time. Speaking of Venn diagrams, is that where you got your idea for Circles, Mr. Google?
Returning to the point I was making - why would I want to move the assets that I've accumulated for the best part of the decade, re-engineer all my 'Circles', and click twice when I spot something on the WWW (one for an FB 'Like' and another for a G+)?
Personally, I feel Google needs to invest in what it does best - Search. The Bings of the world have failed to even compare so why risk a narrower gap by getting distracted by a non-core area?
