Skip to main content

How Google SHOULD Have Rolled Out Buzz

As much as I've tried to convince everyone I know not to use Google Buzz, I can't pull myself away. I'm too curious about stuff like this.

But beyond the bone-headed privacy issues behind Buzz, it's just not a very good product. It's hard to know if it was rushed or just ill-conceived, but it was too much all at once with too few options. Here's how they should have done it:

Start With Statuses ONLY
Forget rolling in Reader, Picasa and Twitter: start only with the Twitter-like ability to post messages, with the ability to pull in your gchat status and the ability to comment or like.

Yes, the web world would have yawned big at another Twitter clone. But this would have been the slow growth that Google needed for Buzz. It would have made the noise much quieter at first without that unread count going completely crazy, and the messages being sent to your inbox when you got a new comment would have been perfectly manageable.

Most importantly, it would have eased the average users into the experience. Yes, those of us highly active on Twitter would have shrugged it off, but it would have been usable and interesting, and would have been much less likely to freak people out when they first got a vomit of information thrown into their Gmail. Which is why most people I know turned it off almost immediately.

Get The Privacy Right The First Time
Even with the flurry of long articles, the problem with Google Buzz's privacy is very simple: you don't have control of your own privacy. Instead, you rely on the people you're following to be private, which is impossible to do.

With the rollout as simple as status messages, the privacy setting could have been made much simpler: Public or Private? If you choose private, then EVERYTHING is private. Your comments don't appear to anyone except the people you allow to follow you, your name doesn't appear in any lists of followers even if the person you're following has thrown privacy to the wind, and your profile page is completely private.

Roll In Services Slowly & With Full, Clear Options
One of the most frustrating things with Buzz is that it hasn't incorporated in Reader. It only feeds it in, so I see the same shared articles twice.

There's no reason for this. Reader, Picasa and Blogger are Google products, and they shouldn't be something that can feed into Buzz until it was fully imlemented. If I see and article shared by someone from Reader, it should be marked as read in Reader as well. If I use the FriendConnect Follow feature on someone's blog, it should put it in Buzz, Reader and Blogspot BUT it should mark it as read whichever service I read it in.

Likewise with Twitter. As far as I can tell, it's just feed in tweets, but it should be fully integrated with the Twitter API. Anything you can do in Brizzly and Hootsuite should be possible in Buzz.

Finally...
I really think that the privacy problems came because Google was trying to recreate FreindFeed, a service that is highly confusing to average internet users. If they had kept things simple from the beginning, I think the world--geeks included, however grudgingly--would have embraced the product. Instead, it's stoked distrust in a company that relies heavily on people's trust to achieve their goals, something they could have avoided with a clear, slow rollout.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Some scattered thoughts on the money of digital music

If you haven't already read Digital Audio Insider's interview with Camper Van Beethoven's Jonathan Segal ¹, it's a must read for anyone with even a slight interest in digital music and the money of the industry. Segal has tons of thoughts on just about every aspect of digital music, but best of all, he brings in these thoughts as someone whose initial music industry experience was in the days of purely-physical media, when "pirating" meant copying something onto a blank tape. My main takeway is general and obvious but an important reminder: we are in a transition time for music, and what it will become is anyone's guess. I think Segal's take on merchandise and live performances taking the place as artist's primary source of income as "asinine" is too harsh to be true, but I do think that we're in such a state of transition that any shot at predicting artistic income in the future is completely in the dark. Such predictions are really ...

Why Google+'s Circles doesn't fix anything

One of the biggest advantages of social media-style communication is the ability for your audience to choose itself rather than for you to assume interests and choose the audience yourself, likely leaving out people that would be interested. Anyone who's started a blog knows the surprise in finding that the people who read it religiously are the people you never would have thought would be interested, while many of those people that you thought would read every word never look at it. Likewise with Facebook, where many of the people I interact with are old friends from the past who have turned out to be surprisingly funny and interesting, whereas closer friends are never to be heard from. The flip side of this is email, where every "To" box requires you to decide who your audience is. That's all fine and well when you just need to get through to one person, but when sending information to larger groups, how do you know you're not leaving out the people who...