I suspect Google's strategy goes beyond this – it's more of the Google ecosystem…

By | January 2, 2012

I suspect Google's strategy goes beyond this – it's more of the Google ecosystem user lock-in than anything else. 'Sell your soul to Google' as Dilbert might put it. And centralized data scares me – not because it is necessarily bad, but because it's so easy to abuse.

Reshared post from +Denis Labelle

Why Google+ Has No Competition
it’s not in the same category as other social networks: it affects non-members
by +Irina Shamaeva

People who have Google+ presence
> results will be affected by their “social graphs” and especially by their circles.
People who search on Google but are not part of Google+
> will still be encountering Google+ – or +1, favored pages higher up in the results.

What this means for you
If you are looking for any type of business partners or clients, you must get on Google+ ASAP if you haven’t. Here’s your chance as a business owner, as a job candidate, as a hiring company, or as an expert. You can get way ahead of much larger companies and sites that are still investing in the “old-school” search engine optimization (SEO), of which you may have never worried about because of your business size or your budget.

Google+ Strategy
The people who can gift your sites with +1’s and include you and your pages in circles will help you get to the top in search. Therefore, you will benefit from providing great service, great content, and help in general to those who are visible online. In return, not only they will be finding you in their search results, but everyone else will, too.
More: http://technorati.com/blogging/article/why-google-plus-has-no-competition/

10 thoughts on “I suspect Google's strategy goes beyond this – it's more of the Google ecosystem…

  1. pablo chuken

    +Karsten Wegmeyer You are right, there are plenty of options to backup your different devices or online services. My approach goes in one direction: a simple platform that can offer all in one place. I'm a true Google fan, but I have been very disappointed with the offline options. Third party software is always limited, the functionality of native apps and the cloud integration is what really interests me. I have certainly tried many things and they worked out relatively ok, but they will never work as good as the native ecosystem, Google is doing the same, but it lacks hardware, and that's a fundamental factor that makes Apple products so reliable. +Sophie Wrobel I'm wondering if we are going to see different type of services, Apple seems to start participating more and more with all type of enterprises offering similar services like Google, but with beautiful and elegant hardware that backs up the entire ecosystem, those are (for me) the most tangible premises of the future. Google "ethereal concept" has to find its right way back to earth, and hardware is a vital step for that. +fan tai you have a point.

    Reply
  2. fan tai

    remember, when google plus first came out, and people were using pseudonyms, when they were blocked, there were reports that even some gmail accounts were blocked.

    Can you afford to have your picassa, gmail and other access blocked? If you were on an android phone, and now your smart phone is not so smart any more?

    Reply
  3. Sophie Wrobel

    +pablo chuken Some numbers for the key issues that companies have moving to the cloud, [Research group spim-off from TU Darmstadt]: "Als primäre Hindernisse für Cloud Computing wurden durch den XaaS Check Sicherheitsaspekte (23,7%), Vertraulichkeit von Daten und Information (19,8%) und mit je 11,9% rechtliche Aspekte und Compliance-Anforderungen bestätigt."

    Full report here: http://www.xaas-check.eu/download.php?cat=00_Willkommen&file=2010-XaaS-Check-Report.pdf

    Reply
  4. Sophie Wrobel

    +pablo chuken +Karsten Wegmeyer I think what users want is the freedom of open protocols and open formats (like Google offers), AND a convenient, usable way to do what they want to do (in the case of backups, like what Dropbox or Apple offers). Can we please have the best of both worlds?

    Reply
  5. Karsten Wegmeyer

    +pablo chuken i don't agree!! Dropbox i.E. is quite simple to use for files. I do have them synced on 2 PCs and my macbook. My Offline iCal and Adressbook of OS X goes well with my Android Smartphone where i do have easys drobpox access to my files.

    Never had such an easys process ( and no iTunes inbetween for just syncing some pics).

    The Tale of the bad fragmentation of Android is on that is told in the iOS Corner for calming the users there.

    iTunes and iOS is the best example why not to use any cloud! It is espacially Apple that closes down free access to any files. They are not only controlling content, they even controll File exchanges ( and do make money out of that)! iOS is not the solution, iOS is the negative Example!

    Reply
  6. pablo chuken

    That's one of the reasons why I think people are still thinking it twice before moving to the cloud. Google services are amazingly easy to use, but all of them are based on the Internet, contrary to Apple that offers "the best of both world"; the information can reside in a local hard disk and in the cloud, with Google, it is still not a simple process to have information in your own hardware and in the cloud. The fragmentation of its operative system (android) makes even more difficult the interaction between online and offline tasks. Apple has sorted out the integration between both circumstances, I certainly believe that our information should (at least) remain in our "local control", depending on one password and unfriendly backup options remains as an "inconvenient risk".

    Reply
  7. Karsten Wegmeyer

    well google backups are surely better then mine. Nevertheless i do have backups of important things.

    I share your dislike of the information interests of our governments. The governments will have to learn that more information does not mean more safety but unfree us. I am convinced that this is a fact. More information meens bigger cross-products and leads to less valuable and usable information.

    All governments will have to learn this trail. Not only the US. As far as my data are concerned i don't care whether FBI,NSA or german BKA will read or copy them. They are of no use ore interest to any of them. Data that are for my eyes ( or my family) only stay at home. Whenever you use a net, data are accessible in that net – and not only to you! Maybe this is normal to me as i startet using Computers lon before Internet came to Europe. I do not put all information into "the net", but the information i do put in is mostly public accesible and surely not confidential.

    Reply
  8. Sophie Wrobel

    +Karsten Wegmeyer I think the question is not, 'do you think Google will abuse their power of being a single point of failure?' Rather the question is, 'how sorry would you be if, for whatever reason, Google deleted your data (intentionally or non-intentionally)?' If the answer latter question is one that you are not comfortable with, perhaps it is appropriate to consider a local backup or an online content mirror – depending on how accessible you want the data to be.

    And one which perhaps less people are interested in at the moment, 'Do you feel comfortable having your data on a US-based cloud subject to US laws above EU laws?' Depending on how the US proceeds in it's attempt to become a police state, that question may become more critical to people who may, from time to time, have non-US-aligned opinions.

    Reply
  9. Karsten Wegmeyer

    Well Google-noia seems to become the new desease of the 201x ! Google is quite straight forward in what they do. That is the most important difference to i.e. facebook&co.

    Google offers a bunch of products to use for free. It's the search engine, its maps, translation, docs, videos and it ends up in google+

    Well the people at Google do make ther money on that! So how could they when they offer their services for free? They are doing marketing and i guess they are the best markting performer worldwide by now.

    So users get som cost-free Tools knowing that their usage will be taken to make money with. It's a symbiotic behaviour. Such mechanisms do work until both lifeforms accept and tolerate the other. In other words as long as google communicates what they do and as long as they follow their "don't be evil" slogan users will accept that.

    iOS-Users often argue that they do pay for there smartphone ecosystem and therefore are free from such marketing mechanisms. That in fact is not true. Apple does just the same, but they make up more bills out of that. One for the Os/The System, one bill for the monopol Shop (iTunes), one for advertising etc.

    Google seems to be more honest and straightforward if you do compare.

    So up to today i do not see any reason for a Google-noia. You are right it is easy for them to miss-use the data. But it will be their own funeral once they do so. People will move on to other companies quite quick!

    Having doubts on Clouds as a such is a general question. Clouds are a hype (again) and not the answer to any problem and not just any information is best stored in a cloud. People will learn that, just before the next hype starts. Cloud usage will then return back to normal, there had been cloud usage before 2011!

    And indeed a cloud is a single point of failure. As data are gone when Internet is gone. If your copy is on the web too, well you have to wait. But Infrastructures on Google or Amazon are much better than our home-RAIDs. So hosting some Data in a Cloud is only a temporary single point of failure. If that is not acceptable, the cloud is not your solution.

    Reply
  10. Nils Hitze

    single point of failure is ALWAYS bad – that's why i still port G+ Entries to my Blog on MY Server under MY Domain

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.