[zargath]

I never understood why Google tried to create a "closed social network inside the web", when Google (almost) is the web.

The technology behind Google+ seems nice tho ( so was Wave ), very snappy but that is probably because of lack of users. I like some of the communities there, but it seems to die slowly.

At the same time, a lot of people never gave G+ a chance, because they felt Google already had too much power. It felt like giving Google the "missing link". At least, that is my experience.

[nathcd]

> I never understood why Google tried to create a "closed social network inside the web", when Google (almost) is the web.

Agreed. I really wish Google would make all G+ feeds into RSS feeds, and add the ability to subscribe to any RSS feeds in the G+ stream/circles. This would effectively make G+ into an RSS feed reader, with the ability to very simply publish one's own feed. I'm sure not many would switch to using G+ as a feed reader in the near-term after they shut down Google Reader, but it would be a small first step to begin tearing down the giant walls around social networks.

[aikah]

I never gave G+ a chance in retaliation of the closing of greader. I'm a pissed off user, and since Google has 0 notion of user satisfaction, I'm glad G+ is a failure."Free services" providers should not underestimate the fact that pissing off users will have a negative effects on potential new "free services". Who trusts Google with any service lasting on the long run ? I certainly don't. Why should I invest in something that will be gone soon? because I know in my guts G+ WILL be retired.

[hga]

Unless Wikipedia is lying, Google+ launched almost 2 years before the announcement of Google Reader's imminent shutdown.

[EarthLaunch]

In closed beta at first.

During those years, they let Reader languish, it was treated as a dead project, then finally shut down. So it felt like a continuous series of events.

[hga]

Hmmm, I found this http://www.thewire.com/technology/2011/10/how-survive-switch... which talks about Google ending the Reader social features as of the end of October 2011, sort of in favor of Google+ but that wasn't done well/thought out; I can't figure out if it was out of private beta by then.

So the narrative of at minimum neglecting Google Reader in favor of the not a substitute of Google+ would seem to be correct.

[EarthLaunch]

Nice find!

And yeah, at the time there was discussion about how they should have kept reader and somehow rolled it and its users into G+. Reader was their only organically successful social sharing product.

[aikah]

Sure, but I surely didn't want to try that G+ afterwards anyway.

[Perdition]

> At the same time, a lot of people never gave G+ a chance, because they felt Google already had too much power. It felt like giving Google the "missing link". At least, that is my experience.

That is how I felt. Once Google started doing things like trying to force people to link their YouTube and Gmail accounts I got off the bandwagon (I now not only don't login to YouTube I block YouTube from setting cookies altogether).