[murz]

> Which would be great if checking a feed meant more than logging into your gmail.

If you read the actual announcement it would be clear that when they say "stream-actives", they are not including people logging into Gmail.

"Today Google+ is the fastest-growing network thingy ever. More than 500 million people have upgraded, 235 million are active across Google (+1'ing apps in Google Play, hanging out in Gmail, connecting with friends in Search...), and 135 million are active in just the stream."

Source: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/google-communities-an... (which is linked from the Wired article)

[makmanalp]

No offense, but that's a dumb measure of activity. None of those things actually requires engaging. I can +1 an app that I used once or do a google hangout because it's more convenient than skype. That doesn't mean I use google+. The activity feed part of the site is mainly crickets.

[murz]

I think you missed my point, which was that the Wired article is citing the number from the second half of that sentence: "and 135 million are active in just the stream." (not the first number, which includes people who just +1'd an app)

I don't think the statement in the blog post could be much clearer, you just have to read the whole sentence :)

[franze]

yeah, i watched an old reposted matt cutts video the other day on G+, proud to be part of the 135 000 000.

[erickhill]

Google PR: "Google today announced that it has 135 million active users checking their Google+ streams each month."

Facebook PR: "Oct 4, 2012 - More than one billion people are active on Facebook."

These are "reports" based on PR-based spin and "rounding up." That's all. If you were a manager at one of these companies, wouldn't you sell the same schtick?

[wilfra]

If you +1 things and use hangouts, 'using Google+' is exactly what you are doing...

You might only be at the bottom rung of MAU's with a tiny level of engagement, which if common would be easily identifiable by looking at other metrics. So it's possible they are purposely deceiving us with misleading metrics - but you are indeed a G+ user. Albeit, not a very valuable one.

[eungyu]

I am not in doubt about these statistics, but the perceived reality is far from what Google is trying to suggest. From my personal experience G+ is still a ghost town (as far as seeing activity from my friends).

[rjv]

I think the general consensus I'm getting is that Google+ isn't necessarily a place for you to connect with your friends. I use it primarily to connect with people I don't know that share common interests. I suspect many others do the same.

[creativityland]

Exactly. I see people with G+ profiles unknowingly making themselves available to the public through messaging. It's horrible.

[roel_v]

Because obviously your experience is a much more reliable indicator for the overall state of Google+ than, you know, Google's actual numbers rollseyes

[colin_jack]

Because obviously you'd trust Google's numbers promoting their own service rather than your own experience rollseyes

[eungyu]

I was stating my personal experience and how different it is from what the numbers suggest. I am sorry hear that you had to generalize on your own.

[dwj]

My own experience is the same. Our facebook page has over 2000 likes, our twitter feed has about 360 followers, but we only have 19 people following us on google+ (even though we've been on there for a year, post all the same things on google+ and promote our g+ page as much if not more than the others).

On a personal note none of my friends uses google+ (only my wife). They pretty much all use facebook.