Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

YouTube finally forces creation of google+ A/C to comment

<< < (4/15) > >>

tomos:
Here's the original - with comments still enabled, and a few more views than the other one ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4

Stoic Joker:
Here's the original - with comments still enabled, and a few more views than the other one ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTq8TrA3hb4-tomos (November 14, 2013, 06:30 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks tomos!

IainB:
...So where you're using Google, it's because, in one way or another, you believe they've got a superior product.
______________________
-CWuestefeld (November 14, 2013, 04:15 PM)
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure that's necessarily a true/provable statement - e.g., in my case, it wouldn't be.
It's presumably based on the assumption of consumer choice and ease of switchability.
However, there are likely to be cases where, at the time one started using a Google product/service, Google might have been the only provider of such a  product/service of its type, so there would have been no option/alternative - until maybe later, that is. If that is what happened, then one might currently be stuck using said Google product/service - e.g., waiting to migrate to some better option that might be currently available but which one feels one cannot access due to lock-in or time/effort invested in the said Google product/service.
Banks, which are always p#ssing off their customers by milking them through the use of usury and of extortionate practices, have a whole marketing strategy that relies on this - it's called "customer inertia"; "The devil you know" for example.

There's a thing called "Brand Loyalty" that they teach in Marketing 101. It's a combination of two concepts:
(a) "Brand".
(b) emotional bias/loyalty/attachment to a specific brand.

I would suggest that Google could have managed to offend/p#ss off so many users by now (especially post SnowdenGate) that there could probably be minimal or no brand loyalty amongst the greater majority of them.
The product/service might be regarded/used as just a utility now, and there are others/alternatives out there - and utilities don't engender brand loyalty.
Microsoft arguably led the way in this offending - e.g., I wonder how many people recall that admitting to having a "hotmail" address could often be something of a social embarrassment? No wonder the "hotmail" brand has been quietly expunged. A lot, if not most people would probably have regarded it with distaste at one time or another and probably would not have touched it with a bargepole.

wraith808:
So where you're using Google, it's because, in one way or another, you believe they've got a superior product.
-CWuestefeld (November 14, 2013, 04:15 PM)
--- End quote ---

Wrong answer.

At one time gmail was superior.  Now, not so much.  But when all of your data is with a service, it's hard to change.  Especially when its compatible with work, because they've bought into the google platform.  Youtube?  It wasn't google... now it is.  Same with several other services.

Basically, google has done a lot of what Microsoft did.  They were just more subtle and were able to ride the anti-microsoft side of the wave.

TaoPhoenix:
-wraith808 (November 14, 2013, 08:37 PM)
--- End quote ---
At one time gmail was superior.  Now, not so much. 
...
[/quote]

Going all Weakest Link here...

"Is gmail superior? Maybe not. But it's the Votes that count"

That's the devastating news of 2014.

I've been using Yahoo Mail for a decade. Sure, it's had a couple hacks. But as an Anti-Google thing for a decade, not bad for a "newbie"! I won't discuss any superiority of anything. It's terrible. Only LAST WEEK did Melissa Mayer (new head of Yahoo) roll out the first new changes in three years. But it's Not-Google.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page