Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Google+
nosh:
40hz:
@nosh - that is one bloody evil trick to pull on your G+ circles. ;D
Ages ago while still in my "business suit days," the guys in my department did something similar to one of our more cordially despised 'toady' co-workers.
Somebody called the WSJ and took them up on a promo they were running to get 13 weeks of the paper for free.
When they ordered it for this dweeb, the person who called made sure to speak like a pompous ass (with hopes the name would be remembered) - and also get the name of the service rep who took the order.
Next, one of the other conspirators had his GF (Darcy) call the dweeb at work using the name of the person at the WSJ, and tell him the WSJ had selected him to receive a lifetime free subscription to the paper in acknowledgement of him being a very respected writer within his industry. (Note: This same dweeb had written a buzzword-laden pop "management" book which he had vanity published the year before.)
This guy was so full of himself that he swallowed the setup call hook, line, and sinker - despite the fact that loud rock music was playing in the background when she called him! (We knew this because she taped the conversation. It was a big comedy hit at several parties listening to him trying to impress Darcy while simultaneously trying to get hired at the WSJ.)
Things went swimmingly for 13 weeks with him telling anyone who would listen about this professional "acknowledgement" he had received.
Then the first bill arrived at the start of week 14...
The ensuing calls back and forth we're hysterical to listen to. (He had a habit of talking loudly on the phone in his cubicle.) He was confused because he got a bill. The WSJ was confused because - while there was a person working in the phone circulation department with the name he had been given - she no longer worked there. And while it is true that the paper did give out complimentary subscriptions to industry bigwigs from time to time, nobody there had apparently ever heard of him.
Most people would have given up at that point. But not him! The phone calls went on for a wek before the WSJ told him to stop calling them. That's when he began writing letters to them instead. Letters he would sometimes share with us to get our "take" on how they sounded. One was 14 pages long...
Having realized, by now, that this guy was insane, there was some discussion of having GF Darcy (who he didn't know) call him back to let him know it was just a practical joke before he went totally off the deep end.
Fortunately (or unfortunately as the case may be) the dweeb resigned (i.e. was canned) about a week later after senior management and internal audit detected several "questionable entries" in some inventory accounts he was responsible for reconciling.
So it goes. :)
nosh:
I have a really hard time following how Google links all their services and which bits of info from one service get fed to one or more of the others.
I review the "view data stored with this account" section from time to time. Have to give the devil its due for having this under account settings. On my last visit I learned that I had "subscribed" to some Arabic language forum... (not much use to me coz I can't say/follow anything beyond "How are you?" and "Thank you" in that language - there's only a limited no. of posts one can make with those two phrases before being permabanned on a forum, methinks ;)) and that I had claimed ownership (confirmation pending) on a notorious music piracy site based in the UK that was recently shut down. There's too much voodoo going on for my liking and I feel foolish for browsing for as long as I have while being signed into my Google account simply to make a few things more convenient.
I had clicked a +1 button somewhere (I could swear I was signed out at the time) and a few days later I log into another Google account of mine and could see the link I'd +1'd. There was no seeking out on my part what ppl. had +1'd, Google just let me have that info., no questions asked, coz the accounts are "linked". No clue what constitutes a linked account either.
With FB, I know they're a**holes but their a**holery is limited mostly within their network. With Google being as ubiquitous as they are, the sky's the limit.
@40Hz - that was hilarious! Esp. loved the 14 page letter bit! ;D
Proximo:
I enjoy using G+ and think it's a much better solution than Facebook. G+ takes the best of Facebook, Linkedin and Twitter, under one easy to use UI.
Facebook added lots of features as an after though of their original intent. G+ takes their web applications that are designed for specific content and adds them to G+, so you get a much better experience. Gmail, Calendar, Photo's, Video's, etc. All of these technologies already existed on their own, so they are designed to work great. Now you add them all to G+ and you have a much better experience than Facebook.
Facebook forces people to join in order to communicate with them. G+ does not. I can post something on G+ and add anyone with an email. If they have a G+ account, they can choose to add me to their circles or not and we can still communicate. If you don't have G+ and choose not to get an account, we can still communicate. This is much better than the walled garden of Facebook.
G+ allows me to send the post or articles I want to share to specific circle of people. So I don't bore my non gaming friends with the latest review of a game or bother my gamer friends with my new camera gear that my photo friends would be interested in. I can decide to post something to multiple circles such as Family and Friends if it's something I want a broader audience to see. I can also post things Public like Twitter, if I wanted to share something with the world.
People can follow me and I can follow them like Twitter, but they will be in my "Following" circle. I never have to worry about posting something to the wrong people with G+.
G+ allows me to take all my data with me with a click of a button and I can completely delete my account and all my data from Google's servers with a click of a button. Try that with Facebook.
Everyone is trying to make money from our data and habits, but if I had to trust a company with this information, I would trust Google much more than Facebook.
Circles, Hangout, Sparks, Huddle and more great features coming. FINALLY, a competitor to Facebook that will be a game changer. G+ will make Facebook and Twitter better, so in the end, we all win. I already use all Google services, so G+ is a perfect fit for me. Just because you prefer one from the other, does not mean you can't keep both. I will keep my Facebook for some time, but will do less and less there with G+ taking center stage as my social platform.
Just my thoughts on G+
zridling:
FINALLY, a competitor to Facebook that will be a game changer. G+ will make Facebook and Twitter better, so in the end, we all win.-Proximo (July 19, 2011, 09:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
So true throughout the history of tech, e.g., compare IE6 with IE9. But in the Web 2.0/cloud space, companies rise and fall faster than ever. If G+ is ascendant, it will continue the evolution from many before it. Anyone remember MySpace? Oooo, that's gotta hurt, and a Rupert Murdoch mistake at that.
________________________________________
Something else I'd love to see on G+ is a mere avatar of your self under another name/ID just for the purpose of signing onto a forum or site merely to leave a comment.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version