Google+: I've Seen This Before

I'm pretty fortunate. In fact, I'm doubly fortunate.

Not only was I invited to Google+ when the only way to get in was to have a Googler personally recommend you, I was invited twice. How's that for bragging rights? When everyone was begging for these invites, I had two.

But enough of me bragging about my random luck that has absolutely nothing to do with my own skill or worthiness. I've seen a lot of people comparing Buzz and Google+. Or comparing Facebook and Google+. The general consensus seems to be "I've seen this before."

Well no shit.

Google+ isn't radically new like Wave was... which is probably for the best. Instead, it takes a bunch of things we're already used to (photo sharing, update streams, tagging friends) and puts a Google spin on them (I, personally, love Sparks—Google's way of making it convenient to introduce new content into your stream).

What I find interesting (and mildly amusing) is the comparisons that people are making. I've said that Buzz is to Twitter as Google+ is to Facebook. But that is really missing the point. There are two names missing from that analogy that should be there: Jaiku and Orkut. Jaiku was Google's first attempt at a Twitter clone—to be perfectly accurate, it wasn't Google's; they bought it. Orkut was Google's first stab at a Facebook clone. As Jason points out below, I was mistaken. Orkut was Google's first stab at a Friendster clone after Friendster refused to sell to them. Facebook, as it turns out, was an iteration on Friendster (see The Facebook Effect, page 86: "'We were really worried we would be another Friendster,' recalls Dustin Moskovitz"). Which, all-in-all, I think serves my point more than it hurts it, but in the spirit of absolute accuracy, I've amended the post. Good catch, Jason.

You've never heard of either of these, and if you have, you don't use them. And that's why they aren't being placed in the analogies. That's why they aren't being mentioned at all.

It's important to remember, though, that Google believes in iteration. I don't think that just means iteration on a single product; I think that means iteration on their entire approach to a market segment.

I don't know if Google+ is going to catch hold. I don't know if it will go the way of Buzz, or go the way of GMail. I hope it works. It's too early to tell, though, despite "insane demand". What I do know is that social is important to Google. And as a company with nearly bottomless pockets, Google has all the time and cash it needs to iterate through product after product, learning as they go. Is Google+ the end of their quest for social? Only time will tell. If it's not, are they going to give up? I doubt it.

So yes, you've seen this before. And rest assured, if it fails you'll see it again. But failing to see what Google has learned as it has iterated over social products is failing to see Google for what it is: constantly improving, slowly but surely.

Remembering Why I Write Software

I've worked on 2cloud for almost a year now. Since its inception, it has been used by tens of thousands of people, covered by dozens of publications large and small, and entered the lexicon of Android development. My professional career has been advanced by it and my personal network of friends has been augmented by some truly wonderful people I would not have met, were it not for the exposure this application received.

In all that time, however, I was never really cognizant of the software itself. I understood its function, I understood why it was cool, but I didn't think of it as useful. Part of this is the reason I started developing it: I started working on it for the sake of working on it. I wanted to learn Android development. I wanted to learn how to write a Chrome extension. I didn't have some pressing problem that this app would solve, no target use-case for it. I just wanted to learn something, and it seemed like a fun exercise. When people asked me why it was better than just emailing themselves a link, all I could think of was "it's a little more convenient."

Yesterday, somebody showed me why it was useful, and that is something I'm grateful for.

I had decided that people who donate will receive hand-written notes, thanking them for helping keep the server online. I was having a bad day, and I wanted to focus on the good in the world, instead of all of the things I hate about it. Writing letters to people who were kind, people who validated everything I believe in, made me feel better. I duly wrote and emailed out three of these notes to our latest round of good Samaritans. One went to an individual I'll call Sam.

Last night, Sam wrote back to me. In his email, he explained that he works shifts and has a young son, and so didn't get much time at his computer. By using the application, he could "speed browse" during his breaks, send the links to his machine, and have them waiting when he got a moment to sit down. He got some time to keep apace with the world, but still had time with his son. Because of this, Sam said 2cloud was "one of, if not the, best apps on [his] phone."

It was the perfect ending to a bad day. I remembered why I believe in open source software so much. I remember why I work on 2cloud whenever I can. I remembered that people found value in my work, and some of them weren't afraid of saying so, with money or words.

If you write software, I highly encourage you to communicate with your users on a personal level. Ignoring all the benefits it will provide your user experience, it will give you the most pure appreciation for your job that you can get in our line of work. As much as possible, get to know your users; some of them may be scum, but putting up with them is absolutely worth getting to know the gems.