Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Social Networks Technology

Google+ Registers 25 Million Visitors 213

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the still-a-long-ways-to-go dept.
hypnosec writes "Google Inc.'s new social networking platform Google+ is one of the first to boast of more than 25 million users in less than one month of the launch. Market research firm comScore in its latest report has revealed that Google+, which was launched to masses in late June, has managed more than 25 million visitors in a month and is recording around a million unique visits every day." I've been using G+ for awhile now, but since the grandparents will never leave Facebook, I'm still stuck with 2 systems.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google+ Registers 25 Million Visitors

Comments Filter:
  • It is the only product to reach 25 million users while still be beta stage. Wait. Is gmail out of beta yet?
  • You can use "Start Google Plus" addon to chrome to allow you to view and interact with your Facebook and twitter stream in Google Plus, as well as post to those services when you post something to Google+.

    • by Octorian (14086)

      And as someone who often posts to Facebook/Twitter from places other than a desktop web browser (often Twitter first, with an FB app to pick it up), I find this a completely worthless solution. However, I have yet to hear of another option.

    • by fermion (181285)
      Which begs the question how many of these users are fake accounts created by Newt Gingrich's PR team.
  • by TyFoN (12980) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @11:14AM (#36973066)

    Do as I did, only post baby photos on g+ and lure with hangouts with the baby :)

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The Start Google+ [startgoogleplus.com] plugin links your g+ and Facebook accounts. What you post to g+ gets cross-posted to FaceBook, and it can integrate your FaceBook feed into your g+ stream. It's worked well for me so far.

    • Is anyone other than the anonymous coward familiar with this? Real or scam?

      • Real. I'm using it right now. The guy who wrote it is pretty good at keeping on top of bug-fixes and whatnot. There are extensions for chrome, ff, and I think Safari, but the chrome one is naturally the most up-to-date.

  • Still no profiles/google+ for us Apps folks.

    Seems somewhat wrong that paying customers get left in the lurch as often as we do.

    • by Aeiri (713218)
      It worked for me with a Google Apps account for the first week or two, then I got kicked off (not banned). I am really confused about that as the technology seem to work just fine.
    • by bberens (965711)
      Consider it like using the long term support version of Redhat or Ubuntu. The people willing to accept all the risk get the new whizbang features. Once the kinks have been ironed out you'll get it too.
    • by vlm (69642)

      Still no profiles/google+ for us Apps folks.

      Seems somewhat wrong that paying customers get left in the lurch as often as we do.

      You can keep us ipad and ipod touch users company. The app only installs on the iphone, although supposedly it works on anything you can ram it into.

      If you have osx 10.6 (which I do not) then you can install the iphone configurator utility and violently force it to install, at which point I've heard it works perfectly. If anyone has a suggestion that forces the G+ app onto an ipod touch or ipad, that doesn't require osx 10.6 or newer, then let me know.

    • by edmicman (830206)

      This. I "host" email on Google Apps accounts for friends and family. Granted it's the free version but all the same, they aren't able to create Google profiles attached to the hosted accounts. They can make account profiles separate from the Google Apps domain accounts, but then they'll have to manage multiple accounts and it's a mess. Multiple people have said when I've sent invites that they don't want to mess with creating a new one, especially if *eventually* Google will allow them to use it with th

  • Visitors != users (Score:5, Insightful)

    by VGPowerlord (621254) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @11:20AM (#36973150)

    This article seems to be confusing the number visitors with the number of registered users.

    The source they're citing says visitors.

    It's not much of a surprise that a new site by a popular brand would have a lot of people visiting their site in the first month.

    If they boasted that many registered accounts in that time, it'd be even more impressive but, guess what, they didn't.

    • by Baloroth (2370816)
      The source actually says both users and visitors. I remember G+ had 10 million registered users a few weeks ago, so it could be 25 million users, but its much more likely visitors. Yeah, the article writer is sloppy. Probably no idea what he is talking about.
    • Nope, it's 25 million registered users [washingtonpost.com] not just visitors. The visitor count sounds like it's quite significantly higher but I haven't seen any specific numbers.

    • Absolutely correct, visitors != users. TFA jumps back and forth between the two terms, but the visitors # has to be incorrect - if they have 25M visitors and 20M+ accounts, that means less than 5M other people in the whole world have visited G+ this month without an account. Clearly wrong. Hell I count for 5 visitors myself and 1 account, having accessed G+ from 5 different IP's. Ironic though - without FB, Twitter, and the like, G+ wouldn't have the medium to spread as fast as it is spreading.
      • Absolutely correct, visitors != users. TFA jumps back and forth between the two terms, but the visitors # has to be incorrect - if they have 25M visitors and 20M+ accounts, that means less than 5M other people in the whole world have visited G+ this month without an account. Clearly wrong. Hell I count for 5 visitors myself and 1 account, having accessed G+ from 5 different IP's. Ironic though - without FB, Twitter, and the like, G+ wouldn't have the medium to spread as fast as it is spreading.

        Except that comScore Media Matrix [comscore.com], the ultimate source for all this, measures the number of visitors to a site.

        So no, visitors is right, users is wrong.

  • for the days when there was one unified "system." perish the thought of a competitive marketing plow to which one must yoke themselves in order to appear tech savvy and interactive.
    • Depends on what they mean by 'system'. The best way to encourage competing implementations is to have a standard protocol. Gmail is very popular, but would have been completely impossible in a world where AOL or Compuserve Mail was the standard. The existence of SMTP made it possible for hotmail and gmail to exist, and for people who don't want to opt into either to run their own servers. Similarly, lots of my friends like Google Talk. I run my own XMPP server. But because they're both using the same
  • Really digging it so far... Just now sure how you can compare membership rates. College kid starting a site and letting it grow through exclusivity vs the internet's biggest presence sliding over users from their other services. Don't get me wrong, they are interesting metrics... just not that comparable in my mind.
  • Probably not in the short-term, the more (quantity) of popular competative networks there are the fewer TOTAL users to go between them- there may be. Part of facebook's draw was it's near-monopoly on "that type" of social network. Right now, "everyone" is on facebook- so the "pressure" to join facebook and be like the rest of the unwashed masses for some may be higher. The more people migrate and move to Google- the less pressure for those same people to join facebook. Since not "everyone" is on google-
  • I have both a Facebook account and G+ account, and more often than not I still use Facebook for the majority of my online interactions with friends and family. Most of my G+ circles are technical people (no family members, old school friends, or tech-illiterate friends yet).

    Facebook has Friends Lists, which are pretty much the same as Google Circles. All Facebook has to do is make it more streamlined and easy to share posts only with certain Lists. The functionality is already there, but you have to click a

    • by vlm (69642)

      Most of my G+ circles are technical people (no family members, old school friends, or tech-illiterate friends yet).

      Same here... G+ circles would be a killer feature if there were any meatspace friends, family members, or coworkers on G+. Seems entirely populated by two groups:
      1) Techies
      2) Tech journalists

      That's about the only two circles you actually can use on G+.

      Also, you want a weird stat? I have observed G+ is about 50% atheist / agnostic / unaligned / lawful neutral or whatever you want to call it, and I only know of one evangelical christian on G+ out of about a hundred in my circles..

      • by geekoid (135745)

        Anecdote:
        I have people all over the spectrum in my circles. housewives, techies, geeks, executives, baseball team, pretty much every area of life.

  • so far it's a friendfeed/twitter clone

    privacy controls are still better on facebook. a lot easier to control access to my profile info on facebook. G+ needs to have a way to exclude circles from viewing some profile info

    facebook is meant for friends. G+ seems to be the TV/celebrity model where you "follow" the internet oprah's and comment about everything they post.

  • by SydShamino (547793) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @11:43AM (#36973484)

    Has Google fixed the policy to ban an account Google-wide if the G+ account is closed? I've had an invite but haven't joined as I don't want my other Google products (blog, photo depot) to be at risk if some jerk(s) or computer bug decides my real name isn't real enough.

    This seemed to make a big buzz a week or so back, then just die off, so I'm not sure if they fixed it or if, like most other social networking stuff, everyone just decided to live with the nasty policies.

  • I don't plan on using it, but I registered a few accounts preemptively. I've got a few people in the world with the same name and when other search for it, I don't want them confusing the other person with me. I can use the Google+ accounts to link to my preferred on-line presence.

    • by geekoid (135745)

      You're an ass.

      I don't use it, but I'll be damn if someone else with the same name can use it.

      • by cain (14472)

        I'm going to get sucked in eventually anyway (other people posting photos of me, etc). Might as well stake my claim so I can better control it once it happens. Best offense is a good defense, &c.

  • by John Hasler (414242) on Wednesday August 03, 2011 @11:51AM (#36973556) Homepage

    So much for Facebook. It's dead. It's for "old people".

    • by dn15 (735502)

      So much for Facebook. It's dead. It's for "old people".

      Just like email...

    • by shreak (248275)

      Facebook is for "Old" and "Young". Google+ won't allow you to sign up if you're under 18.

      That might be an artifact of "beta".

  • by Tei (520358)

    Don't count me there, please. I deleted my profile as soon his policis about anonymity where public.

  • Does this statistic count the signups of "fake" names that were banned?

  • This shows that there is a huge market for a better social network.

    The problem with Google building it is their sole interest lies in selling all the data. I really don't want my social network owned by the biggest marketing company in the world.

    Could someone here please build a new social network that respects privacy? I would move in a heartbeat.

    • This shows there was huge curiosity. I created a Google+ account to see what was there, but have no intention of moving from Facebook where everyone already is. Google+ has a slick interface, but no real deep improvement to where my entire circle of "normal" friends would ever go there. A social network is a natural monopoly. That's going to be a tough nut for Google to crack. (And Facebook's privacy features are fine, if people bother to use them).
  • I Google Minused because they said they were pretty sure my boss wasn't smart enough to elude circle security, so I should probably associate everything I post and say with my legal and professional name and after all what could go wrong why not?

    Also, because I was afeared that some of the stories about people outed for being nicknamed and ended up with lock-outs to their entire suite of Googlies were slightly true. If using my nick on Google+ meant jeopardising access to my control dealies for my Blog*spot

  • A field trial is not a launch.

    I try to sign up and I get a page that says:

    Google+ is in limited Field Trial Right now, we're testing with a small number of people, but it won't be long before the Google+ project is ready for everyone. Leave us your email address and we'll make sure you're the first to know when we're ready to invite more people.

    So unless that's just Google's way of trying to tell me, "We here at Google don't really like you" etc....

    They haven't actually launched yet, and when they

COMPASS [for the CDC-6000 series] is the sort of assembler one expects from a corporation whose president codes in octal. -- J.N. Gray

Working...